Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2019-05-28
Meridian City Council Pre-Council Meeting Agenda – May 28, 2019 Page 1 of 1 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. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AMENDED SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 5:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton X Ty Palmer X Treg Bernt __X___ Genesis Milam __X__ Luke Cavener X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda - Adopted 3. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(a) To consider hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, wherein the respective qualities of individuals are to be evaluated in order to fill a particular vacancy or need, (1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency, (1)(d): To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Code, (1)(f) To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated, and (1)(j) To consider labor contract matters authorized under section 74-206A (1)(a) and (b) In to Executive Session 5:02 PM Out of Executive Session 6:01 PM Meeting Adjourned at 6:01 PM Meridian City Council Special Meeting May 28, 2019 The Meridian City Council special meeting was called to order at 5:02 pm on Tuesday, May 28, 2019 by Mayor, Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Anne Little Roberts, Ty Palmer, Treg Bernt, Genesis Milam, Luke Cavener, Joe Borton and Mayor de Weerd Staff Present: Chis Johnson and Bill Nary Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton X Ty Palmer X Treg Bernt __X__ Genesis Milam __X__ Luke Cavener X M a y o r T a m m y d e W e e r d Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Borton: I move we Adopt the Agenda Cavener: Second De Weerd: It has been moved and second to Adopt the Agenda as published. All those in favor. ALL AYES MOTION CARRIED Item 3. Executive Session Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(a) To Consider hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, wherein the respective qualities of the individual are to be evaluated in order to fill a particular vacancy or need, (1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency, (1)(d): To Consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Code, (1)(f): To Communicate with legal counsel for the Public Agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated, and (1)(j): To Consider labor contract matters authorized under section 74- 206A(1)(a) and (b). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 11, 2019 – Page 4 of 396 Borton: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 74- 206(1)(a), (1)(c), (1)(d),(1)(f), (1)(j) and 74-206A(1)(a) and (b). Cavener: Second. De Weerd: It has been moved and seconded to go into Executive Session. All those in favor ALL AYES MOTION CARRIED. Into Executive Session at 5:02 pm Out of Executive Session at 6:01 pm Borton: I move we adjourn the Executive Session. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: It has been moved and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor ALL AYES MOTION CARRIED. Borton: Move to adjourn. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: A motion and a second to adjourn. All in favor ALL AYES MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:01 pm (AUDIO ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: — IEC) AUGvs Tammy de oma° z 01y,>r w �EI IDAN''— IOAHO ATTEST: — r, ��a .. C Jon Ci �. , E IDIA DAHO CITY COUNCIL PRE -COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 3 Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(c): To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency, (1)(d): To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Code, (1)(f) To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated, and (1)0) To consider labor contract matters authorized under section 74-206A (1)(a) and (b) Meeting Notes: C�v�- LX'(?cUVAX Se Ss'��n '61Q �m CITY COUNCIL AMENDED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 6:00 PM (Called to Order 6:01 PM) 1. Roll-Call Attendance X Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton X Ty Palmer X Treg Bernt X Genesis Milam X Luke Cavener X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Community Invocation by Larry Woodard of Ten Mile Christian Church 4. Adoption of Agenda – Adopted as Noted 5. Announcements 6. Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 M inutes Maximum) Signing up prior to the start of the meeting is required. This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials regarding matters of general interest or concern of public matters and is not specific to an active land use/development application. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented under this public comment section, other than the City Council may request that the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for a more detailed discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to further assist you in resolving the matter following the meeting. 7. Consent Agenda [Action Item] – Approved as Noted A. Approve Minutes of May 14, 2019 City Council Workshop Meeting - B. Final Plat Continued from May 21, 2019 for Keep Subdivision (H- 2019-0053) by Jarron Langston, Located at the SW Corner of S. Eagle Rd and E. Lake Hazel Rd. – Moved to Item 8-A C. Final Plat for Lost Rapids (H-2019-0056) by GFI - Meridian Investments II, LLC, Located at the SW corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-26 and N. Ten Mile Rd. D. Development Agreement for Villasport (H-2018-0121) with Sadie Creek Commons, LLC (Owner/Developer) located at the Southwest corner of E. Ustick Rd., and N. Eagle Rd. – Vacated from the agenda E. Public Works: Recycled Water User Agreement between the City of Meridian and Extra Space Storage F. Finance Department: April 2019 City Financial Report G. AP Invoices for Payment - 05/29/19 - $1,633,526.54 8. Items Moved From The Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Final Plat Continued from May 21, 2019 for Keep Subdivision (H- 2019-0053) by Jarron Langston, Located at the SW Corner of S. Eagle Rd and E. Lake Hazel Rd. - Approved 9. Community Items/Presentations A. Youth Scholarship Awards Presentation 10. Action Items Public Hearings for Land Use Applications follow this process: Once the Public Hearing is opened, City staff will present their report. Following the report, the applicant is allowed up to 15 minutes to present their application. Members of the public are allowed up to 3 minutes each to address council regarding the application. If a person is representing a large group such as a Homeowner's Association, indicated by a show of hands, they may be allowed up to 10 minutes. Following all public testimony, the applicant is then allowed 10 additional minutes to respond to comments. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional testimony will be received. The City Council may move to continue the item for additional information or vote to approve or deny the item with or without changes as presented. The Mayor is not a member of the City Council and pursuant to Idaho Code does not vote on public hearing items, unless to break a tie vote. A. Public Hearing for Wagner Farms (H-2019-0035) by PD Larson & Co., Located 3240 W. Chinden Blvd. – Approved 1. Request: An Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation on 2.46 acres of land from Low Density Residential to Commercial; and 2. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 2.46 acres of land from the RUT (Rural to Urban Transit) zoning district to a C-C (Community Business) zoning district for future addition of a convenience store and fuel sales facility to the existing farmers market B. Final Plat Modification for Olivetree at Spurwing (H-2019-0055) by Spurwing Limited Partnership, Located at the NE corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-26 and N. Ten Mile Rd. – Continued to June 11, 2019 C. Public Hearing for Bainbridge Southeast (H-2019-0042) by Brighton Investments, LLC, Located on the West side of N. Ten Mile Rd., Approximately 1/2 mile South of W. Chinden Blvd./SH- 20/26 – Approved 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat Consisting of 21 Building Lots and 7 Common lots on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 Zoning District D. Public Hearing for Gander Creek (H-2019-0013) by Trilogy Development, Inc., Located at the SW corner of N. M cDermott Rd. and W. McMillan Rd. – Approved 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R- 8 zoning district; and 2. Request: Gander Creek North Preliminary Plat consisting of 156 building lots and 29 common lots on 51.46 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; and 3. Request: Gander Creek South Preliminary Plat consisting of 256 building lots and 36 common lots on 65.64 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district E. Appeal of Purchasing Manager's Denial of Protest of 2019 Request for Proposals (MYR-1921-11034) by Perkins Coie on behalf of Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime – Continued to June 11, 2019 11. Department Reports A. Legal: Budget Amendment for FY19 in the Amount of $1,100 for Dairy Days Parade (Action Item) – Approved B. Parks and Recreation Department: FY2019 Net-Zero Budget Amendment for Volunteer Ambassador Utility Vehicle Batteries (Action Item) – Vacated from Agenda 12. Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 19-1828: Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3- 1(B), Regarding the Definition of Vehicle Immobilization – Approved B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 19- 1827: An Ordinance To Amend The Municipal Code Of The City Of Meridian, County Of Ada, State Of Idaho, Amending Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 12(E)(2), Meridian City Code, Known As The Meridian Impact Fee Ordinance Fee Schedule; To Provide For An Amendment To The Police, Fire, And Parks And Recreation Impact Fee Schedules; And Providing An Effective Date. – Second Reading. Public Hearing and Third Reading scheduled for June 4, 2019 13. Future Meeting Topics Meeting Adjourned at 9:16 PM All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or the public hearing should contact the City Clerk's Office at 208-888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council May 28, 2019. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 28, 2019, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Ty Palmer, Genesis Milam, Anne Little Roberts and Treg Bernt. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Warren Stewart, Sonya Allen, Stephanie Leonard, Berle Stokes, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X__ Anne Little Roberts X _ _Joe Borton X__ Ty Palmer X__ Treg Bernt __X___Genesis Milam __X___Lucas Cavener __X__ Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: I will now call the regular City Council meeting to order and ask our city clerk to start with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in a pledge to our flag. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Larry Woodard of Ten Mile Christian Church De Weerd: Item 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Larry Woodard with the Ten Mile Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Larry, it's awesome to see you. Woodard: Good to see you again. Let's pray. As we begin this summer we have gone through a wet period and the people of Meridian are really ready for some warm weather. We thank you, Lord, for the rain and pray that the remainder of the year and a good time in this city. To have 60 new people show up in Meridian in each day is mind boggling and, yet, we are building and continuing at a record pace. You certainly have shone brightly on us and we thank you. We ask for your blessing on this Council and the Mayor tonight. You certainly have watched over them and like this Council our church at Ten Mile is experiencing rapid growth also. This year we intend to add a gym and a number of classrooms. That town is literally exploding with growth. Growth brings its own problems and as this Council wrestles with growth on a daily basis I asked that they continue to be wise in their decisions, as they have been in the past. To have the growth of the past two Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 54 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 2 of 60 years and yet have so few issues is a compliment to this group of public officials. Growth means that some jobs are hectic. I ask that you guide those staff members who see their workload growing daily. One example is our police force. They have done a great job. We thank you for the police and the firemen and emergency service personnel who serve our community so well, but how about the city hall staff. We know that this record growth increases their daily workload. We thank you for their hard work. Our Mayor is retiring and we are going to miss her. May she enjoy her children like any good parent. Be with this Council tonight as they address some new matters. May they be wise and courteous in their decision making, in Jesus' name, amen. De Weerd: Larry, thank you for letting us be part of your report to God. Always enjoy that. Woodard: Okay. Item 4: Adoption of Agenda De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 4, Adoption of the Agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: We have a few changes to the published agenda. On the Consent, Item 7-B, as in boy, will be moved to Item 8-A. Item 7-D, as in dog, will be vacated. It's going to be addressed at a future Council meeting. Item 10-B, when we get there, the applicant will be requesting a continuance, so it will stay on for now and we will address it when we get there. And, then, finally Item 11 -B, as in boy, that item is going to be removed from the agenda and we will re-address it on June 11. So, with those changes I move we adopt the amended agenda. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. And, Mr. Borton, I have Item 11 -B needs to be vacated. Borton: Correct. De Weerd: 7-B, it's been asked to be pulled off and 10-B is going to ask for a continuance. What did I miss? Oh, 11-B. Borton: Correct, Madam Mayor. And, then, 7-D will be removed. It's not going to eight. It's just being removed from this agenda. It's going to come back at a future meeting. De Weerd: Okay. That's what I was missing. Thank you. I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as read. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 55 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 3 of 60 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Announcements De Weerd: Item 5, under Announcements, we do have a couple of things coming up. We have a retirement open house for one of our firefighters, Greg Ordene, on Friday, the 31st from 1:00 to 3:00 at Fire Station One. Patriot Thunder is celebrating their tenth annual ride. This ride is -- is to honor our military and the funds that are raised help a number of the family organizations that help veterans and their families. So , please, join us at High Desert Harley at 9:30 this Sunday. Next week kicks off new meeting times with the work sessions that start at 4:30. Regular City Council meetings continue to start at 6:00. And, finally, we also have budget workshops that start next Wednesday at 1:00 o'clock and Thursday, the 6th, at 8:00 a.m. That extra half day is needed. So, with that is there anything to be added? Item 6: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum) De Weerd: Okay. Item 6. Mr. Clerk, is there anyone signed up under Item 6? Johnson: Madam Mayor, you do have three signups. First is Tyler Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor, Members of Council -- De Weerd: Hi, Tyler. Rountree: Surprise. De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: So, I will make this quick. I'm here tonight -- we had a piece of legislation that you guys supported the beginning of the year, Senate Bill 1028, PTSI legislation. It's huge. Your moves were huge in that and your support was huge. We often don't take the time to publicly thank you, so we are here tonight to publicly thank you. So, if you guys will grab those and come forward. On behalf of my 70 memb ers and the 90 members from the Police Employee Association, thank you for your support with Senate Bill 1028 and the PTSI legislation this year. De Weerd: Well, thank you for joining us. Thank you for that surprise and Tyler found -- he kind of hit the wall when we said you want to be on an agenda? Why? So, I see that you found a way to do it regardless. Thank you. And -- and I will tell you, it was with a great pleasure that we played a role. This has been high on our list of priorities and concerns about our public safety personnel and what they face day in and day out and the mental health aspect and the ability to seek help and to know it's okay is paramount. So, thank you. We appreciate that. It was not necessary, but thank you so much. Okay. Any -- you said three. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 56 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 4 of 60 Johnson: Yes. Next is Susan Karnes. De Weerd: Well, Susan, that's a hard one to follow. Karnes: I was just going to start off by saying that. De Weerd: Well, thank you for being here. Karnes: I come empty handed. Bernt: No plaques from the Southern Rim Coalition. Karnes: I'm going to go back to the drawing board. My name is Susan Karnes and I live at 5556 South Graphite Way here in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Karnes: And I was going to be joined up by some other people who were going to come up and stand with me, because I'm not alone in coming to speak to you this evening. I come to respectfully request in support of Denise LaFever's suggestion last week that e- signatures be included in public testimony for the public record and I wanted to expand on that a bit with some background and context, because I think we need some clarity. I think there is a little bit of confusion on this. When e-signatures were first introduced the members of the Southern Rim Coalition were thrilled. We have a lot of young members with big families. They are busy. As you well know, the meetings run late and so it was received with great applause that it could increase our participation in the public process. So, several months ago I e-mailed C.Jay Coles and I asked if a line could be added to the e-signature sign-in sheet where our members could say Meridian Southern Rim Coalition or people from the north side could say whatever group they were with, so you would know if I came up and requested ten minutes that there was a block behind me that maybe couldn't make time in their busy schedule to attend and I got really an unexpected reply and basically -- let's see if I can actually work a PC -- hold on. Sorry people out in the audience. I'm trying to click on this. I'm trying to click down here. I'm going to let Sally Reynolds, the tech queen, do this. Basically what he said is they are not entered in and read aloud whether they are stating opposition or favor, because the sign-in sheets are not a petition. De Weerd: I think, though, Susan, what it did say is it was entered into the public record, so that information was available to City Council. Karnes: So, what happened is in several hearings we had dozens of people sign in , but there was no note of that in -- by the city clerk or in a staff report to Council. So, we would have dozens and dozens of people sign in. I can recall during a P&Z meeting over a controversial topic that staff did report to the commissioners that 114 people had signed in online. So, we have stopped asking people to sign in , because we did not feel that it was being read aloud or we hadn't seen it read aloud and we thought we are not going to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 57 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 5 of 60 ask people to sign in. And, then, of course, during the May 7th public hearing on an application there were five people read into the public record. So , it just -- it seemed a little bit confusing and so we would ask, A, that clearly the e-signatures be a part of the public record and read into the public record and that we have a little more clarity on the process. De Weerd: Thank you. Karnes: Thank you. De Weerd: And we will respond to both you and your group and Denise. We haven't had a chance to sit down and talk about it, but we will do that this week and -- and get back with you. Karnes: Okay. And I want to give kudos to the police department a nd the ordinance officers. They are on top of it in our neighborhood. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. I'm sure Lieutenant Stokes will take that back with him. And Mr. Clerk. Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Sally Reynolds. De Weerd: Good evening, Sally. If you will, please, state your name for the record. Reynolds: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of City Council. My name is Sally Reynolds. I reside at 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian, Idaho, and I will just echo one other thing that Susan Karnes said. I think it is important to hear those things read aloud and whether they are for or against , because while it is in the public record, the City Council doesn't hear that before they render their decision on the verdict and so, you know, however that plays a part in the decision -- in some applications maybe it won't play a big part in your decision and some others maybe it will. So, I think it's important to hear how many people took time out of their day to sign in and actua lly take a stance on the issue. But with that said I'm here to address a different topic. So, I would like to talk about interagency cooperation between West Ada School District and the city. So, time and time again we hear from residents in neighborhood meetings -- and I'm sure you know P&Z hearings and City Council meetings about concerns about overcrowding and while I understand that the city does not have control over the schools , the land use decisions may -- do have a major impact on enrollment numbers. I would like to propose that the city explore the possibility of creating a standardized form to be included with every application. It could include any list of schools capacity, current enrollment and how an application may affect those numbers. So , I believe this interagency cooperation would provide the city with a more complete picture of how the application affects schools. When I worked as a real estate agent one of the driving factors of finding a new home is does it have good schools and I believe that by having this data in front of you when you make these decisions the City Council can make prudent land use decisions, while acknowledging the constraints of the school district and thereby maintain a quality Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 58 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 6 of 60 education for Meridian children and also sustainable property values for the residents in Meridian. One other topic that I would like to see perhaps taken under advisement is also the timing and the stringent requirements of having all of the agency comments and all of the data given to city staff before the city -- before the staff report is ready. I have followed quite a few applications through the process and while I know that that's really hard, because you're working with a lot of different agencies, I think that it shouldn't be rushed just for the sake of time, that we really should have all of those comments and data available before the staff writes their report, which they can, then, give to P&Z and they can, then, make an informed decision to the Council on approval or denial. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Sally. No further sign-ups? Johnson: That was all the sign-ins. De Weerd: Thank you. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I don't have questions, but I guess is it appropriate just to let Mrs. Reynolds know that the staff -- the packet that council receives typically has that information already provided to us by the school district, so we know what schools that development will be impacted and what enrollment numbers are from the school district in there. So , we have that information when it's provided by the district . I know we have an application before us tonight that doesn't include that information, but it's fairly typical that the school district does provide that to us and we do have it in our packets. It's typically on the first or second page. De Weerd: Thank you. And, yes, I was going to ask if our clerk could send a copy of one of our staff reports that shows the agency comments and -- and school district reports to the Council that's part of their consideration. Item 7: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of May 14, 2019 City Council Workshop Meeting C. Final Plat for Lost Rapids (H-2019-0056) by GFI - Meridian Investments II, LLC, Located at the SW corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-26 and N. Ten Mile Rd. D. Development Agreement for Villasport (H-2018-0121) with Sadie Creek Commons, LLC (Owner/Developer) located at the Southwest corner of E. Ustick Rd., and N. Eagle Rd. – Vacated from the agenda Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 59 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 7 of 60 E. Public Works: Recycled Water User Agreement between the City of Meridian and Extra Space Storage F. Finance Department: April 2019 City Financial Report G. AP Invoices for Payment - 05/29/19 - $1,633,526.54 De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 is our Consent Agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: The Consent Agenda, as amended, I move that we approve and for the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Final Plat Continued from May 21, 2019 for Keep Subdivision (H-2019-0053) by Jarron Langston, Located at the SW Corner of S. Eagle Rd and E. Lake Hazel Rd. De Weerd: Item 7-B was moved from the Consent Agenda to under Item 8 and so I imagine -- Sonya, do you have information on this? Allen: Well, I do, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. De Weerd: Well -- Allen: Thank you. The applicant had originally submitted a response in agreement with the staff report, but they noticed something today that they decided they weren't in agreement with. So, I will just go over that with you real quick here. So , the applicant is not in agreement with Condition A-4-F in Section 6, which requires the street frontage of Lot 4, Block 1, and that is this lot right here with the red text on it to be widened to a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 60 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 8 of 60 minimum of 80 feet, measured as a cord measurement in accord with UDC Table 11 -2A- 4 for the R-2 zoning district. The measurement is currently 69.86 feet. The UDC does allow properties with street frontages on cul-de-sacs or at approximately a 90 degree angle to be a minimum of 30 feet measured in the cord measurement. However, the frontage of this lot does not meet the requirements for a reduced frontage. The applicant I believe would like to address you on this condition. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Green: My name is Richard Green and I'm with Stanley -- Stanley Custom -- De Weerd: Can you pull the microphone up. Green: Oh. Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Green: Okay. What we are having a problem with is getting those 80 foot on those lots. There is no provisions in the city codes for a curve, other than if it's 90 degrees you can go down to 30 feet and so kind of due to ACHD's requirement on this subdivision that we get rid of the access to Lake Hazel, we had to put it in down below and they gave us a variance on the distance from the intersection of Lake Hazel onto Eagle Road. The church is directly south of this and so we are kind of stuck with what we got and the road goes in pretty steep, so those lot frontages almost have to remain like that or -- or get rid of a lot and, then, there is pretty good size lots anyway. So, we are asking that Council approve the final plat as is and -- De Weerd: So, was -- you didn't understand that that needed to be corrected as part of the plat? Green: No. De Weerd: Mr. Nary, perhaps you can share with Council if -- what their options are if they have any. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so what I heard from Planning is basically their requirement for this final plat is a UDC condition that has to be complied with. De Weerd: Exactly. Nary: And there isn't an alternative that we can grant at this juncture to relieve you of that responsibility. So, I don't -- they can't approve your final plat if that's the case and that's -- if that's -- then you will have to redo it. Whether it would, then, be in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat I don't know. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 61 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 9 of 60 Green: Well -- excuse me. Well, the street is almost at a 90 -- it's a 67 degrees and in the provisions for cul-de-sacs and -- and we could go ahead and put a 30 foot flag lot in there, which we don't want to do. We would just like to leave it like it is and -- and stay with the requirements that we have without needing that 80 foot of frontage and -- and, then, there is also a -- you know, conflicting about the 80 foot of coverage. You're talking about cord length versus -- versus the arch length. Well, you go a cord length across there and it will take both those lots. Nary: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I -- it sounds to me like there is not an agreement to approve this final plat, so -- we cannot waive the requirements that you would prefer not to do. That -- that doesn't work that way. So, it sounds like you still need to work this out with staff to get a final plat that is substantially in compliance with what was approved, because that's where we are -- it appears we don't have an agreement. De Weerd: So, I guess at this point staff can't break the UDC rules and neither can Council. Green: Yeah. The only thing is there is no provisions for lots on a curve. They are all for a cul-de-sac or -- that's it and we have some other lots on there that don't meet the requirement, but we have a 90 degree angle in the road. So, I mean, you know, they are almost the same thing. So, I just wanted to ask for a waiver of that or -- 80 foot frontage or -- De Weerd: I believe you heard from staff and from our city attorney that we can't give you a waiver on that. I guess what Council can do is continue this and -- and see if you can meet with staff to see what -- it doesn't sound like there is options either, but maybe you can take it back to the drawing board and see what you can do. Green: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. So, Council, this plat is not in front of you to approve, because it's not compliant. If you would like to continue it to see if the applicant can work with staff on bringing it into compliance, I would certainly entertain a motion. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I had previously disclosed this is a project that our firm had done some work on. I don't know anything about this particular request, but I will continue to abstain. I have not viewed or participated at all, so I will continue that practice and abstain from this motion of consideration. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 62 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 10 of 60 Cavener: Question for staff. Sonya, this is a unique situation. If Council were to continue it two weeks -- seems like enough time or would you like more time? Less time? Allen: Madam Mayor, Council, excuse me, I was having a side conversation. Tw o weeks to continue for what reason? Cavener: Well, it sounds like in the conversation -- sorry, Madam Mayor. Conversation between the Mayor and the applicant was to maybe give him an opportunity to have further conversations with you in light of the information he's learned tonight, so -- De Weerd: I guess if -- if we continued it two weeks to see if the applicant can work with you to bring their final plat into compliance and, then, bring it back to Council. Allen: Madam Mayor, currently it's a condition of approval that they comply with the UDC standard. I can't change that. De Weerd: No, I -- no one's asking you to change it. Allen: I'm not sure what -- De Weerd: It just gives the applicant an opportunity to bring it into compliance. Allen: Okay. Or can do that as well per the condition prior to signature on the plat. I'm happy to work with the applicant, I just -- my hands are fairly tied with the -- with the code requirement. De Weerd: We are not asking you to change the code or to be lenient. We are asking you to follow the code and we are asking the applicant to bring that into compliance. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: So, my understanding is we can approve it with the condition and , then, he can make the fix without having to come back before us or not fix it -- Allen: That's pretty standard. That's why I wasn't understanding, Madam Mayor. Am I missing something? Normally -- normally the conditions of approval, they just make the changes to the plat when they submit the plat back in for signature. De Weerd: Yes. But usually we don't know it's not in compliance when we are asked to approve a final plat. Council, if they were to make a motion to continue it -- probably does want to make sure that it is in compliance before they take that kind of action. But it sounds like you have two choices, Council. Palmer: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 63 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 11 of 60 De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: So, it's not a public hearing; right? It's just -- De Weerd: It's 7-B. Palmer: It's called 8-A now; right? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Palmer: I move that we approve Item 8-A, H-2019-0053 and include the condition that we have been discussing. Staff's condition. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the final Plat for H-2019-0053 to adhere to all staff conditions. Any discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, yea; Cavener, nay; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: Okay. The ayes have it. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: So, the final plan was approved, sir, but that does need to meet our -- our UDC. Item 9: Community Items/Presentations A. Youth Scholarship Awards Presentation De Weerd: Okay. Under 9-A -- Council, I'm going to move to the podium so I can present our youth scholarship awards. Okay. No guarantees I will not get emotional. I know all four of our awardees and three of them I have had the privilege to work with and so when I know these students it's really hard for me not to feel motherly. So , I am going -- and just for the record, each scholarship award is funded through the sponsorships of the State of the City. Our State of the City sponsors have been very generous and they have been funding these youth members and their desire to move on with their higher education and the qualifications for the scholarship are a little bit different than just academics, it's those that have given back to our community, that have been leaders and that have left their legacy already on the community in which they live in. So , I will ask Jacob Chambers to come forward and I do have information on each of our awardees and at the end they will be presented with an envelope. In this envelope is something you, then, have to fill out and we will send the check to your institution of choice. So, Jacob is graduating from Meridian High School. This Eagle Scout has devoted his time Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 64 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 12 of 60 to giving back to our community. Jacob has used his platform to educate fellow teens on the danger of distracted driving, bullying, and drugs. He has also spent countless hours working to -- and this is really what touched me about Jacob is he wants to educate , to recruit and he was fundraising for Be The Match. This was very close to his heart and it was one -- it was your Eagle Scout project, if I remember correctly, connecting bone marrow donors to those in need. Through student council, Boy Scouts of America, and the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council, Jacob has built a great foundation of leadership. This is a skill that will serve him well as he embarks into the world of politics. I thought I taught you better than that. Jacob plans to attend the College of Idaho this fall where he will double major in history -- and he loves history. You can learn so much from this young man if you travel with him, which I had the opportunity to. He could tell you something about almost everything he saw. So, double major in history and political science. One of his life goals is to travel the world, taking in the many cultures, which he hopes to document in a book of recipes, stories, and pictures. Jacob, we have no doubt that you will have many amazing adventures ahead of you and that you will make the best of all of those, whether you go on to own your own history museum or come back to Meridian as maybe mayor someday, I know that your future holds great promise and we just want you to come back. So, we wish you great success as you go out and you spread your wings, but remember where home is and we know you will. Chambers: I would like to thank Madam Mayor and the wonderful City Council members that have guided me on my journey, not only through high school, but throughout my entire life. You have been such an inspiration and have showed up to many of MYAC's events and have always been there to mentor and guide me and I especially want to thank Councilman Cavener and Councilman Bernt for all of the support they have given me throughout the years and I want to thank all of you for showing up tonight and thank you to the City of Meridian. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Our next teen is Logan Denen. Logan is a veteran dancer at the Dance Arts Academy and a member of the guitar club and a percussionist at the Renaissance Concert Band. Logan has immersed himself in the arts. He has also mastered the art of community service. Logan danced his way into our hearts in 2015 when he joined the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council. We got to know him even better during his internship with the Mayor's office last year. Logan has dedicated -- he is a devoted, dedicated and active member of his church where he has spent many hours working with children. He has been arranging music and lending a hand where he is needed. He lives by his personal motto: Kindness above all else. This young man is a leader and he leads with kindness and loyalty and care. He exemplifies his work as a community kindness movement ambassador. Upon graduation from Renaissance High School Logan plans to attend Pacific Lutheran University with his best friend Ramon? Oh, it's your guitar. Denen: Oh, yes. De Weerd: That's his best friend. It doesn't talk back. Logan is seeking a degree in sociology, with a focus on criminology and he hopes one day to work for the FBI as a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 65 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 13 of 60 criminal profiler. Logan has an innate ability to connect with people around him. This skill will serve you well in college and in life and I wish you great success. Again, we expect that you will come home and continue your care, your ability to spread love and kindness to all those around you. Denen: Thank you, Madam Mayor and City Council, for granting me this award. I want to thank my family who came out here tonight. There are many of them. And it's -- it really means a lot for me for them to all be there. I want to say thank you to Jacob and Jared for supporting me in the Mayor's Advisory Council. Without them I wouldn't be here. So, thank you for all the people who have got me to where I am now. De Weerd: And, you know, we saw some of that heart during our -- our participatory budgeting project where Logan really honored his grandfather and so that heart will serve you well. Our next teen to recognize is Jared Gonzales. So, Jared has been a youth council member for four years and I have gotten to know him quite well and I am very honored to be offering this scholarship to Jared. You wouldn't think that a student that's achieving a 4.0 each year of high school would have much extra time to do anything but study, but Jared has proven you can do it all. Jared has been a member of the student council at Meridian Technical Charter High School for all four years of his high school career. Two of those he served as the student council president. Leading by example Jared has served the student council with exemplary leadership. He has led by example. He has spearheaded and participated in many community service projects, like Rake Up Meridian and Adopt A Highway clean up. He has spent his free time volunteering at and raising money for the Meridian Food Bank and the Idaho Humane Society. In his four years as a member of the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council Jared has over 400 hours of community service. I am certain that Jared's service will not end at graduation. Instead it will be felt 4,500 miles away in New York City. He has set his sights on Columbia University where he will study commuter -- commuter -- computer and, then, we hope he commutes -- Computer Engineering. Jared is truly the full package, with both brains and heart. Jared will remember -- we hope you remember how great Meridian is and the fingerprint of compassion, but occasional research -- which I mentioned last week -- and that you will come home after you got an education. We want you to start your own tech company here and we will give it a fast track. So, there you have it. Thank you and congratulations. Gonzales: I would like to say thank you, of course, to Mayor Tammy and the City Council, not only for this award, but supporting Meridian and MYAC. It's been a big help. It's been a big impact in not only my life, but my family's life. My dad was involved with it. On the planning side my brother, my cousin, a couple of my other cousins, so it's kind of a family thing and there is a lot of big impacts that Meridian has made. Thank you to City Council and Mayor and everybody in Meridian. So, thank you. De Weerd: And our -- last teen that we have a scholarship for is Emma Shiflet. If Emma will make her way up. So, Emma was not on our youth council, but Emma was one of those -- the enemy on the city -- the Chambers softball team. She was their secret weapon, because they could never beat us, so they had to pull some real quick ones and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 66 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 14 of 60 -- and Emma was their secret weapon. But Emma was also in the Mayor's CEO Book Club as well. So, Emma and I go back, as you can see, a long way, because my book club was third to fifth graders. It's been a little while, huh, Emma? Emma not only hit home runs on the softball field, but also in academics as well. Graduated from Rocky Mountain High School, Emma has a 4.1 GPA. This is an incredible accomplishment, especially when combined with Key Club , French Club, National Honor Society, softball, youth group and, of course, when she could, the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council. The importance of service and giving back was something that Emma learned from her parents at a very young age. Whether it's a small act of kindness to create a ripple effect or a huge wave, Emma has had her hand in many projects here in Meridian. Emma has assembled comfort kits for children displaced from their homes by child protection services and helped to paint and clean the Boys and Girls Club. She has wove blankets for premature infants and the list goes on. Idaho State Univers ity will gain a selfless, driven and brilliant young woman this fall. As she attends the university honors program, Emma will study communication science and disorder, with an emphasis in pre-speech pathology, but as we saw indicated in her 4.1 GPA, Emma is a bit of an overachiever. She plans to secure her bachelor's degree in three years before earning her master's in speech pathology. Of course, her -- her servant's heart already has plans for a nonprofit entity to serve children and families in need of specialized care. Emma, I am not the least bit surprised that you have chosen a path that will continue to connect you with your community. I can't wait to see where life takes you and I'm certain that you will be rich in both success and service and I'm honored to present this award to you. Shiflet: Thank you to the Mayor and the City Council for this scholarship, not only for the scholarship, but thanks for all you do for our community and for the example you set. Thank you. De Weerd: As the families leave I just want to thank them for lending their -- their children and their talents to help us create a premier community and I really don't think that we could create a premier community without some of our most precious citizen involvement and your kids really have exemplified why we continue to gain national attention, much to everyone's chagrin, but their efforts make Meridian a better place. So, thank you to our teens that were honored tonight and to the families that inspire and support them. We appreciate that. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Real quick. I'm a firm believer that credit when credit's due and I just want to commend you and your staff for this program. This is something that has been your vision, you have driven and grown and our community has benefited tremendously. The investment in our youth and -- and that -- all they have given to our community. So, thank you for doing this and as a -- as a Council Member, as a cheerleader for community, as a taxpayer, this is a win across the board and it's all been driven by you and your office. I'm forever appreciative. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 67 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 15 of 60 De Weerd: Thank you. And -- thank you. Certainly it's -- it's my office staff. I just try and stay out of their way, because they got things to get done and you can see that they have done a lot. So, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cavener. Thank you. I was going to say something like, well, you got a scholarship, so you have to spend the whole evening with us, but I won't do that. Item 10: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Wagner Farms (H-2019-0035) by PD Larson & Co., Located 3240 W. Chinden Blvd. 1. Request: An Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation on 2.46 acres of land from Low Density Residential to Commercial; and 2. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 2.46 acres of land from the RUT (Rural to Urban Transit) zoning district to a C-C (Community Business) zoning district for future addition of a convenience store and fuel sales facility to the existing farmers market De Weerd: Okay. We have reached Action Items. Item No. 10. The first item is a public hearing for H-2019-0035. If this is your first time at City Council our process is that our staff gives a presentation on the application that's in f ront of City Council for their decision. Then the applicant will make a presentation. They have 15 minutes to present their application and, then, we open it for public testimony. Public testimony is limited to three minutes and on the computer screen that will be in front of you at the podium there is a timer that shows you how much time is on there. When the buzzer buzzes I will ask you to summarize if you have not already wrapped up your remarks. The applicant, then, has the final comment to present any information that -- that was brought up through public testimony, answer any questions from -- that were raised or Council questions as well. At that point Council will be asked to consider all of the information in front of them. We do have a public record. We have minutes from Planning and Zoning. We have all agency comments. That is all public record that this Council has had an opportunity to review prior to this evening. So, that is the process and at this time, as I have opened the public hearing, I will ask for staff comments at this time. Leonard: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The first land use application before you this evening is for Wagner Farms Comprehensive Plan map amendment and annexation of 2.46 acres of land, currently zoned RUT in Ada county, located at 3240 West Chinden Boulevard or State Highway 20-26. To the north is a single family residential subdivision currently zoned RUT in Ada county. To the south is West Chinden Boulevard, State Highway 20-26 and future commercial, Costco, zoned C-G. To the east is a common lot and a Meridian sub here that is zoned R-8 and the Spurwing golf course zoned RUT in Ada county. To the west is a common lot located in an Ada Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 68 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 16 of 60 county sub, zoned RUT. The applicant is requesting to change the future land use map to this parcel from low density residential to commercial to allow for the existing produce market to expand and to add a convenienc e -- a convenience store with a fuel station. Contingent upon approval of that request the applicant requests to annex the subject parcel with a C-C zoning designation. As of note, the applicant and staff did have discussions regarding the current Comprehensive Plan update that's going -- been ongoing for a while and the applicant's request to change land use on this parcel prior to application submittal. The applicant chose to request a map amendment, rather than process a land use change request with a comp plan update. Although staff has been trying to limit the number of Comprehensive Plan map amendment applications with the current Comprehensive -- Comprehensive Plan update that's going on, staff and Commission are supporting the subject request because the proposed commercial land use is consistent with existing land uses and will complement the area. Wagner Farms has been in operation since 1982 in this location and was considering moving to another site to expand its operations. They were overwhelmed with requests from surrounding residents and customers to keep the business open and have since decided to stay in their current -- or the current location and pursue growing there. A petition with over 450 signatures in support of Wagner Farms remaining in its current location was submitted with this application. The applicant is proposing one full access point via West Chinden Boulevard and has coordinated with ITD and the property owner to the east to align that entrance with Ten Mile to the south. A 35 foot landscape buffer is required along Chinden. The applicant is proposing to construct a portion of the city's ten foot multi-use pathway adjacent to Chinden Boulevard here. The project has been conditioned to require a micro pathway to the residential subdivision to the west here to increase pedestrian connectivity. Proposed hours of operation for the market, convenience store and fuel station are 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Fuel pumps are not proposed to be operational outside of those hours. A 25 foot landscape buffer is required to the residential use to the nor th. The applicant also plans to install a six or eight foot masonry wall adjacent to that use to mitigate any activity related to the proposed use on the site. The concept plan generally complies with city code. However, a thorough review of the site and elevations for the building will be reviewed at the certificate of zoning compliance and design review application. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the facility. It will maintain a country barn feel and will help maintain the historic area -- or character of the area. The Commission is recommending approval of the application. Testifying in favor were Becky McKay and Mike Wardle. In opposition was Denise LaFever. Becky McKay, Mike Wardle and Denise LaFever all testified during the hearing. No written testimony was received . The issues discussed during the public hearing were a deceleration lane and future expansion of Chinden Boulevard with the Costco development to the south and the change from low density residential to commercial outside of the current Comprehensive Plan update. Key issues of discussion by Commission were the deceleration lane, the amount of anticipated traffic, and ITD requirements, as well as the micro pathway requirements that were originally suggested to the east and, then, to the west. The Commission did modify condition 8.C to strike the requirement to extend the micropath to the east. Written testimony was received from Becky McKay, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the Commission's recommendation to Council. With that staff will stand for any questions. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 69 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 17 of 60 De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Is the applicant here? Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. McKay: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Becky McKay with Engineering Solutions. Business address 1029 North Rosario in Meridian. I'm here this evening representing Paul Larson and Rod and Deb Wagner on this application that's before you. The subject property, as Stephanie indicated, is located along the State Highway 20-26 or Chinden Boulevard. The property is 2.2 acres. You can see it here. There are two homes on the property, a barn and a shop. Deb and Rod Wagner have operated since the early 1980s for, what, 35 years a produce and vegetable barn. It's been a staple of the north Meridian community for many many years. To the west of us is the West Wing Subdivision. Their common lot and irrigation pond is located adjoining the boundary. To the east of us is the Spurwing golf course. As far as services, we stubbed Meridian sewer and Suez water to the Wagner property from the Olive Tree at Spurwing patio homes that I did for Jock Hewitt. So, services are located right here on the eastern boundary. To the south is the proposed Costco facility, along with its other commercial uses and, then, you have a subdivision to -- to the southeast. The property is currently zoned low density residential, which I always thought was peculiar considering that it was more of a commercial use and on a major state highway and at the intersection of Ten Mile and so in my meetings with staff we talked about potentially revising that comp plan land use map and the staff had indicated to me that there was a process that was going on and -- and they said -- but, you know, what you're requesting makes sense and I said, well, even if you're -- if you're running your Comprehensive Plan land use map changes through, would it be objectionable if I submitted a map amendment, if it's consistent with what you're proposing and -- and the staff kind of indicated, no, we -- we wouldn't see a problem with that, because we do feel that -- that low density residential on 2.2 acres located at a major intersection of a state highway isn't appropriate. This is kind of a blow up. You can see the golf course and the greens that are to the east of us and here is the -- the pond. So, we kind of came up with a site plan and we did a neighborhood meeting. We had almost -- I think 20 -- about -- approximately 20 residents that showed up. Very curious about what -- what we were proposing and we said, you know, what we want is a neighborhood market, something different, not your average normal convenience store, but something that will have the produce and the vegetables and the homemade baked goods and the homemade ice cream and all of those functions -- more like a neighborhood market. We are not trying to compete with Costco and their facility, but to create something expanding beyond what's out there now. So, we met with ITD. We met with ACHD. It was determined that a traffic study wasn't warranted on the project. They did have us do a turn lane analysis, which we submitted to the staff, to ACHD, and to ITD and based on the numbers the project doesn't warrant a turn lane as it doesn't generate enough -- enough traffic. ITD asked us to preserve 30 additional feet beyond the 40 feet that's existing right of way and in addition to the 30 feet, they said we would like a 30 foot easement. They said, you know, it would be for possibly drainage or whatever, but we would like you to preserve that and so I talked to the staff, because this is designated for a ten foot multi-use pathway along the Chinden corridor and the staff said, you know, as long as we could get our trees for our buffering -- meet their buffering requirements along the state highway, then, we will be fine. So, we added an additional Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 70 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 18 of 60 eight and a half feet beyond that ITD easement, so that we could go ahead and put those street trees and meet that buffering requirement and ITD indicated that we could get a permit for turf and shrubs, but no trees and, then, they would allow that ten foot multi-use pathway to be located within the -- at the edge of their easement. On the north side is the only single family dwelling that we imp act. Mr. Wagner has met with that property owner. He indicated at our neighborhood meeting -- all I want is a six to eight foot masonry wall, whatever height the City of Meridian will allow and, then, we have 25 feet of landscape buffer as required by the ordinance. We have 20 feet of landscape buffer to the west, but this is a common lot for the subdivision and their pond and, then, we have a ten foot buffer. We were going to ask for alternative compliance, because we are next to the golf course. One of the primary issues that we dealt with was the approach to the property. Mr. Wagner, when the Walmart went in at Ten Mile and McMillan, one of their mitigation requirements was expansion of this Chinden intersection at Ten Mile, installation of a signal, and so Mr. Wagner -- they -- they told him your driveway is not compliant, are you willing to move your driveway. So, he agreed to relocate his driveway. Right now he has two approaches to the property, one along the western boundary and one over here on the eastern boundary. When we met with ITD and discussed this particular development, ITD said we want you to align with the -- the outside westbound turn lane from Ten Mile, because there will be two dual turn lanes. It's already built for it, but it's stripped just one and so people can come straight into this site via the signal or they can go westbound and, then, Mr. Wagner also has a signal for his outbound lane. So, we went to Jock Hewitt, because this is the boundary for the subject prope rty and Jock Hewitt said I will grant you an access easement. I don't have a problem with it. Draw up the paperwork, the exhibit, the description. Staff has made that a condition of approval, so has ITD, that we provide the easement, so that we can perfectly align our access with that intersection. One of the things that came out in the neighborhood meeting was initially the -- the fuel canopy was located out in the front and the neighbors really came up with a great idea and they said , you know, if you could incorporate the canopy into your structure and not have it as that focal point out along the state highway, that would be so much better and so we -- we did change that and we incorporated that canopy into the facility and it is on the east side. They said, please, don't put it on the west side by us, put it on the east side next to the golf course. We have three pumps right here. So, they can have -- you can have up to six cars. This what you see here -- there is a door that opens, so people can call in or e-mail their order for produce and come under the canopy and, then, their produce can be brought out to them and according to my discussions with the Wagners they have a considerable number of elderly customers that have a difficulty getting out of their car, so they hand carry their -- their veggies and fruits up to them. Mr. Larson went to his architect and he said , you know, there is, obviously, an agricultural use and a history to this property and I want you to come up with a design that preserves that agricultural character of what the Wagner s have built for 35 years. I think he's done it. They have done an excellent job. It's -- it looks like a neighborhood market. It fits with the old agricultural history. When the Wagners first started here there was no Spurwing golf course, there was no West Wing Subdivision, there was no Costco coming in, they were the only ones out there and it was ag all the way around them and everything kind of grew up and as the Wagners indicated to me, they came to a crossroad that our business can't expand, we got this little bitty Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 71 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 19 of 60 barn that's very very old, because I go to the Wagners and get fruits and veggies. They have the best watermelons. And they said, you know, we just can't expand, we can't meet the demand, we don't have enough parking and -- and we need to do something. So, this partnership that -- that they have created with -- with Paul has, obviously, came to fruition and created something that is unique, something that can say this is Meridian, this is -- this is part of our history and you can see there is ample parking along the front, along the rear. We have good circulation. This is a sign that -- that's out in front of the Wagners and has been for many many years. Here is a site plan as you can see, but we feel that -- that this particular project is allowing a business that currently employs 25 people to expand, to add additional services to this area. Like I said , Costco will have their own fuel facility, but this will meet the neighborhood needs. It's going to capture traffic as it goes down Chinden and they anticipate having local meats, local baked goods, all kinds of local jellies, specialty items that you would not find at say a Jackson's or a Maverick. I left my boards with the elevations and the site plan with the Wagners last summer, so they could show their customers what they were thinking, because they wanted to know, you know, will -- will our customer support this. The overwhelming response was we love it. We think this is awesome for you to expand , to stay at this location, to keep serving our community is perfect. And Deb Wagner got 450 signatures in support of the application that's before you. Now, in my 30 years of planning I have never had an application that had 450 signatures in support of it. Maybe 450 opposed, but not supporting it. So, they have quite the customer base. The e-mails and calls and they have approximately 500 customers per day and so this is just kind of an expansion of an existing use and we are excited to be here. Your staff -- I would like to thank Stephanie and Caleb and Bill who worked with us throughout this process to -- to make this site plan and these elevations what you see tonight. It was definitely a group effort and I think that this is a grand use for this property, because what it's designated doesn't make sense and so this commercial designation and rezone to C-C that we are requesting I think is reasonable based on the state highway, that it's at an arterial intersection, and we have gone -- we have worked months and months to get to this point. It hasn't been an easy process. We have put our -- our permit into ITD. It's being reviewed by Erica Bowen at this time and she asked some questions about it, which I e-mailed her this morning to answer her questions, but the key thing is to keep these businesses in Meridian and -- and I love -- I love doing that. Whenever I can help an existing business expand, find a new site, it's fulfilling and -- and it's just a pleasure to work with these people. They have been very kind and very supportive. They are here this evening and I hope that the Council can support this and if you have any questions I would be glad to answer them. De Weerd: Thank you, Becky. Council, any questions for Becky at this point? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: A couple of quick ones. First, hats off to you and, wow, that design is fantastic. McKay: I think it is, too. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 72 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 20 of 60 Borton: I seem to recall way back -- it might have been 12, 13 years ago, this northern approach was an emergency access to -- what got approved, those townhomes? McKay: Olive Tree at Spurwing patio homes. Borton: Yes. McKay: Yes, sir. Borton: So, is there anything about this design that jeopardizes that emergency access? McKay: No. Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, what we ended up doing is we did get a permit for an emergency vehicle access and, then, we ended up -- the Andersons did not want us to cross that fairway with an emergency vehicle access, so they allowed us to construct an emergency vehicle access to the north up to the public street that goes from Spurwing into Spurwing Greens and it's also your sewer access road. So, it acts as a dual sewer access road, emergency vehicle access road, and that was constructed two weeks ago. Borton: Got it. Perfect. Thank you. Madam Mayor, one other question. The pathway that you referenced on the south, is that adjacent -- adjacent to the easement that ITD wants preserved or is it within the easement? You talked about it perhaps being drainage and -- McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, that ten foot pathway is at the very edge of the 30 foot easement adjacent to where we are going to install our trees and -- and landscaping. Borton: So, outside the easement itself or just -- McKay: At the very -- at the northern -- or the northern edge and ITD has said that they will allow that ten foot pathway within that easement. They are comfortable with that. Borton: So, I only ask because you had referenced easement perhaps being for drainage use -- usage. Is there any likelihood or risk that -- that the pathway would be subject to drainage? McKay: No. The -- what ITD assured me -- I did meet with Amy Revis, the District Three engineer, about this particular project and she said that they definitely anticipate needing 30 additional feet of right of way that you see right here and the 30 foot easement was just in the event that they may need some drainage area. However, she said the ten foot pathway would be fine. It would not inhibit them from utilizing their drainage or -- or compromise the pathway and, then, the staff has asked for a pedestrian path to the west and we have agreed that we will put it there, but I don't have any control over that West Wing homeowners association. We kind of had a debate at the neighborhood meeting. They said we would like to be -- have the ability to walk over and get our veggies and our Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 73 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 21 of 60 fruits, but we don't know if we want the Spurwing Greens people walking through our neighborhood and -- and across our private lot, because of liability, to get to the facility. So, we will put it there, but I don't control what they will allow me to do. They may put a gate there, so only they can get in. I don't know. But any pedestrian access, obviously, will help the site and so even if this just serves the West Wing neighborhood, we still have the ten foot multi-use pathway and their pond is right here, so when ITD does expand Chinden to five lanes, I would assume that they will have to deal with the West Wind -- or West Wing neighborhood association on that common lot and, then, that ten foot pathway would be part of that project. So, yeah, we do -- we do the best we can. Borton: Okay. Makes sense. Thanks, Becky. Council, a ny other questions of the applicant? Okay. McKay: Thank you. Borton: Mr. Clerk. Johnson: There were no sign-ups. Borton: That speeds that up. Is there anyone here in the audience who hasn't signed up? Denise, come on forward if you would like to provide some testimony. Welcome. Thanks for being here tonight. LaFever: Hi. My name is Denise LaFever. I'm at 6706 North Salvia Way and I would like to start by saying at the neighborhood meeting there were several of us, including myself, that object to the fuel pumps. We love the public market. We like the design. We welcome them having the convenience store and the public market. We are opposed to the fuel pumps themselves. There is 30 gas pumps that have been approved at Costcos. Over at McMillan and Ten Mile the Jacksons has got gas right there. You have gas down at Fred Meyers and that's just a lot of gas within the area. This is a small service provider that puts the homes in the area at risk and I did talk to Bill and Bill did state that there was an issue with -- a concern that they would be able to make any money off the fuel given the volume and they don't need a turn lane. This right here, the current use is residential and agricultural, in which the Wagners live on the property, raised their grandkids, dogs are freely running around. We love the property. It's great to visit . Once again, we only oppose the fuel pumps. Given -- given the intensity of the use with the fuel pumps and the way that -- with the Wagner Farm public area, we would like to see a left-hand turn and a right-hand turn. This isn't unusual. The actual gas station that's at Middleton and Chinden has a right-hand turn into their property. If you look at another state facility that would be similar as a convenience store and a gas area , you would go up to Horseshoe Bend, the gas station up there also has a right-hand turn. Fred Meyers has a right-hand turn. Brighton, who has a convenience store that was just approved , has a right-hand turn. We would like to see your right-hand turn in there. Yes, they are going to expand the area, but by literally not putting right-hand turns in that backs up the traffic when people are trying to get by. So, that basically renders one lane not usable when people are trying to turn to get in there. So, basically, overall, the actual produce and everything, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 74 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 22 of 60 we love it, we welcome it. There is a lot of other uses they could do with that. We just are not -- we are not fond or in approval with the actual gas pumps. It's just -- it just puts us at too much risk. What happens if the operator doesn't maintain it? You have got an irrigation pond right there. You have got all those houses right next to it. So, we do have some very valid concerns about that and, especially, with 30 plus gas pumps right across the way. There is really not the need. So, that's all I have to say. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Denise, a question. Thanks for being here each week. The other day somebody was talking about citizens who participate and I said we have got a citizen who comes that I know her address by heart. So, I really appreciate you coming and participating. I think you're a great voice for our citizens and represent that part of community really well. I was surprised to hear the comments about the fuel pumps and I'm hoping that you can help me un derstand that a little bit more. Is it just you're fearful that the -- the current standards for placing fuel pumps underground aren't up to par and that they will fail? Is it -- I'm trying to understand that. LaFever: It's the fact that we already have so many fuel pumps with 30 going at Costcos, Jacksons, Fred Meyers. There is already so many fuel areas in -- in the area. We are concerned that there is a holding pond next door and you have got estate properties there. You know, we are very concerned about that and that puts a risk with having a fuel station right next to those housing. What happens if something happens there? So, you know, there is some concerns. Cavener: Madam Mayor. I guess I'm just -- I'm -- I'm failing to articulate what those concerns are. Just that there is too many? LaFever: There is too many fuel pumps already in the area. Costco has 30 right across the street. You know, like I said, we welcome the market, it's a beautiful market, it's a beautiful design. The Wagners have done a great job. We love visiting there. The fruit and the produce is great. Even all the other additional little homemade things that they put in there are fantastic, you know. So, there -- there is a lot of other things they could do. They could do a Farm to Market restaurant. There is a lot of other uses they could couple in there that would be better to serve the neighbors, so -- De Weerd: Any other questions for Denise? Johnson: Madam Mayor, there were no sign-ins. De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? Okay. Would the applicant like to make any final remarks? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 75 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 23 of 60 McKay: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Becky McKay. One, as far as the operation of this facility, it's 6:00 to 11:00 p.m. They will turn the pumps off at night, so they are not available. Costco may have 30 pumps, but it's a whole different atmosphere. The six pumps that we have, which are just, basically, three units with two pumps on each side, they are going to offer to put gas in their car. So, they will have an attendant -- Cavener: Full service. McKay: Full Service. Yes. Unlike what you can find at Costco. Right now Mr. Wagner currently has two above ground tank -- gas tanks, which he says is not -- that -- that often that people come in and they are like, oh, I'm out of gas, could I get some gas from you and he will gas them up. So, this -- you know, they are the above ground. Obviously there are very stringent rules on subsurface. Dual lined. Dual walled tanks. I did the Jacksons at Middleton and State Highway 20-26. Got all the entitlements at the city of Caldwell. That's a store that -- it's high volume and it's at Middleton and 20-26. It warranted that turn lane based on the number of pumps, based on the size of the store. This is not a Jacksons. This is not a Maverick. It's -- it's a community neighborhood market that offers services that no one else offers. We can't put in a turn lane unless we meet the warrant. We had a traffic engineer do the analysis. ACHD evaluated it. ITD has evaluated it and said it just doesn't warrant it. We are at a signalized intersection. Unlike a lot of C stores where they are located at an intersection, but their approaches are beyond the intersection. So, they are conflicting. There may be 440, 330, right-in, right-out or 660, full access, like at the Jacksons at Middleton and 20-26. This has a light to go in. People will have a light to get out. It's a unique situation. It's the perfect situation for a C store and market, in my opinion, because people will be -- it will be easy for them to get in and get out and they are not conflicting with that traffic flow. But this is something unique, something we haven't seen and -- and I think it's going to benefit Meridian and benefit the neighbors and they're loving it. That's the first negative comment that -- that I have heard concerning the fuel. Like I said, their -- they will be offering to fuel vehicles up for people. They will have an attendant. They will be running out produce and fruits and it will -- I'm excited. I can't wait to go there. De Weerd: Thank you, Becky. McKay: So, I ask you support this. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, any questions for Becky? Any further information needed from staff? Stephanie, anything else you need to add? Leonard: I don't really have anything further to add -- sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of Council, I don't have anything further to add. Just I guess the note on the comp plan update that we have been doing, the way that that kind of works is we spoke with them, we basically encouraged that they either do it with our update or they could proceed with the comp plan map amendment application as they did. It's not necessarily something that we would have changed on our own or that we may have supported with the update , Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 76 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 24 of 60 but it's totally depending on what the project is and how it's going to interact with the neighborhoods around it and in this case this project does support several of our comp plan objectives and goals, so that's generally why staff and Commission was supportive of the project, so -- De Weerd: Thank you. Leonard: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I move that we close the public hearing for Wagner Farms, H-2019-0035. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I move that we approve Wagner Farms, application of H-2019-0035. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: A couple of quick comments. I echo Council Member Borton's thoughts about the design on this. It just looks awesome and with each application you reserve judgment, you look at the packet and the testimony before we render a decision. I know that there is different members of our Council who get excited about these big scale employers that are choosing Meridian. To be candid, this is one that I have been really really excited about. This is Meridian and to also hear that this is going to have full service gas -- as silly as it sounds, I -- one of my first jobs was a full service fuel attendant and you don't realize what the need there is for something like that in our community. There are so Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 77 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 25 of 60 many elderly and senior citizens and those of us that just don't like to get out of our cars when it's rainy, that I just think that's going to be just a hot commodity. So, I appreciate the -- the testimonial about the fuel piece. Ultimately I -- I trust the standards to install these fuel systems underground and don't have concerns that they are not going to be maintained. If there is anything you can say about the Wagners, they have been maintaining their land above par for a long time and I feel real confident they are going to be able to do that as well. So, I'm supportive of the motion. I'm excited for this. Thanks for staying with us in Meridian. We have grown up all around you and I'm really excited to see this next step for you all. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Madam Mayor, I echo the comments of Council Member Cavener. I mean there is nothing better that when local business fuels our economic development and there is something to be said about local business who care and it's , honestly, not about the bottom line, you know, it's so -- it's so prevalent when -- you know, when these national companies come in and they do business and we are grateful for those -- those folks, but when it doesn't seem right they leave and leave a gap in what we do and I think what fuels our economic development are those who passionately care about the ci ty that we live in and there is nothing better that promotes that than a local business. So, I appreciate the Wagners and the partners and investing -- continuing to invest in our community. It's a big deal. Thank you so much. I'm definitely in approval of this -- of this application. It's a big deal. De Weerd: Any other comments? I guess I, too, would say congratulations on this. I appreciate that the gas pumps did move and that -- that they are not next to the neighbors and -- and I had heard from a group about C stores and -- and they are a group that's -- that talk on behalf of the locally owned and -- and what great community partners they are and this -- this just emphasizes exactly what I heard during this presentation in terms of both locally owned, really do care. They are an important part of a community and you can see that in the thoughtful design is -- that has been pointed out, but -- and the attempt to bring the gas into a different -- different design that -- that makes it feel like it's part of it and it makes it feel like it's part of that customer orientation that -- that Wagner Farms wants to -- to be known for and is known for. So, just adding my voice to the others. I'm usually not a fan of Comprehensive Plan changes, in particular as we are going through a major update, this is less than five acres, it -- it fits and it's what was envisioned when we first came out with our -- our conference plan that we are closing out now is that neighborhood service component and a feel to that -- that -- that neighbor orientation. So, thank you. And thank staff for -- for working with them on that. If there is nothing further, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 78 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 26 of 60 De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: So, the whole first hour of this meeting I was like almost crying and I'm like finally we get to land use, because nobody's going to make me cry and it's happening in land use. So, I -- just a challenge to the next applicant, you know, it's pretty easy at this point to push my buttons and make me cry, but -- B. Final Plat Modification for Olivetree at Spurwing (H-2019-0055) by Spurwing Limited Partnership, Located at the NE corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-26 and N. Ten Mile Rd. De Weerd: Isn't it fun when a C store can make a city council cry. That's pretty amazing. Okay. Item 10-B is -- is a final plat for H-2019-0055. This applicant has requested a continuance. Sonya, do you -- do want to make any comment on the basis of that continuance? Allen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant is here. That's also Ms. McKay. If you would like her to speak to the request. But just in short they are asking to be continued to the June 11th meeting in order for her client to address some of the conditions in the staff report. De Weerd: Becky, do you want to make a comment on the basis of the request for continuance on Item 10-B? McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. Yes, we received the staff report. I was unable to get ahold of my client until today and he said that he needed some time to review the staff report. Staff had some recommended conditions of approval and, then, staff wanted us to take some photographs of the white delineating stakes out at Spurwing to bring back to the Council. So, we are respectfully requesting that that be deferred until June 11th. I have a hearing June 4th at the Star City Council. So, I can't be in two places at one time. I have tried it and it's really stressful. De Weerd: June 11th is a workshop. McKay: Oh, is it? De Weerd: Oh, no. Right. It's not. McKay: It's not. Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 79 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 27 of 60 De Weerd: We just changed the format. McKay: So, we respectfully request a deferral to June 11th. For me to meet with my client, get pictures to the staff, so we can come back before you with the appropriate information. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Just tickled that we have got four land use Tuesdays. So, June 11th seems totally appropriate and it is with great pleasure that I move that we continue Item 10-B, H- 2019-055 to June 11th. Bernt: Second. De Weerd: That was an enthusiastic motion and a less enthusiastic second and I'm feeling it, too, because usually that second Tuesday evening sometimes -- sometimes rarely -- gave us an opportunity to have a Tuesday night off , but -- I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. Public Hearing for Bainbridge Southeast (H-2019-0042) by Brighton Investments, LLC, Located on the West side of N. Ten Mile Rd., Approximately 1/2 mile South of W. Chinden Blvd./SH20/26 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat Consisting of 21 Building Lots and 7 Common lots on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 Zoning District De Weerd: Item 10-C is a public hearing for H-2019-0042. I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a -- Bernt: Madam Mayor? Excuse me. I don't meant to interrupt. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 80 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 28 of 60 De Weerd: I'm sorry. Bernt: I'm sorry, Sonya. De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Like last week I have business interests involved in Bainbridge with -- with multiple clients and so I'm going to have to step away and recuse myself from this portion of the application. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Allen: All righty. The next application before you is a request for a preliminary plat. This site consists of 5.25 acres of land. It's zoned R-8 and is located on the west side of North Ten Mile Road, approximately a half mile south of West Chinden Boulevard. This property was previously annexed and included in the preliminary plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight units per acre. A new preliminary pla t is proposed consisting of 21 single family residential building lots and one common lot on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. The plat has been revised since the original submittal, which is on the upper left there, to the revised version there on your right. The revised plat reflects a stub street to the out parcel from North Fairbourne Avenue, rather than from the south Via Lake Rapid Street to alleviate the long cul-de-sac length. So, if you look right here where my pointer is, that's where the stub is now. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space and one site amenity is required to be provided based on the area of the site. The applicant is proposing 13.14 percent or .69 of an acre of qualified open space consisting of parkways along internal local streets, a common area in excess of 50 feet by 100 feet in area and half of the street buffer along Ten Mile Road. The applicant is requesting the extra amenities provided with the larger Bainbridge Subdivision consisting of a second community swimming pool and playground in phase nine abutting the sight to the west, are allowed to count as site amenities. The -- for this development. The Commission also recommend -- recommended that the applicant provide a beach or -- excuse me -- bench or a seating area in the common area in this development as an amenity. This subdivision will be included in the homeowners association for the larger Bainbridge Subdivision and will have access to the same common area and site amenities. A 20 foot wide gravity irrigation easement exists along the southern boundary of the site within the adjacent proposed building lots and that's called out here on the revised plan. The Council previously approved this easement to be located within adjacent building lots, rather than in a common lot. The applicant is requesting Council extend that approval to the proposed plat. Concept building elevations were submitted for the proposed single family residential dwellings as shown, consistent with those constructed in previous phases of Bainbridge Subdivision. The Commission is recommending approval of the subject preliminary plat. Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation, testified in favor of the application. No one testified in opposition or commented and there was no written testimony submitted. The only issue of discussion by the Commission was the provision of a site amenity in the common area near the cul - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 81 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 29 of 60 de-sac. The Commission did add a requirement for the provision of a site amenity, such as a bench or seating area in the common area in Lot 10, Block 32, and the only outstanding issue for Council tonight is the request for a waiver to the UDC 11-3A-6D to allow an existing 20 foot wide irrigation easement along the southern boundary of the side, as I previously mentioned, to be located within adjacent building lots as previously approved with the preliminary plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. There has been no written testimony submitted since the Commission hearing. Staff will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions? Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Question for fire if possible. Joe, on the -- in the staff report it talks about that the project doesn't meet the access width for a turnaround. How problematic is that? How problematic is it for the people that move there? Bongiorno: Madam Mayor and City Council, I was just about to ask Sonya that same question, because I have not seen this plan yet. I am assuming it's got a 48 foot in diameter -- or radius cul-de-sac on it, because the original, as you see on the left there, did not meet the turnaround requirements. So, I'm assuming Mike will take care of that when he comes up and talks. De Weerd: Okay. Hi, Jon. Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Wardle: Good evening, Madam Mayor. For the record Jon Wardle, 2929 West Navigator in Meridian. 83642. We are -- we did make a revision to the plan with a cul-de-sac instead of the -- well, we affectionately called it as a Snoopy turnaround and it will meet the requirement to satisfy the fire department. So, this -- this change does address that. We are in agreement with the staff report that's in front of you and we are willing to make that change to the plan as shown in the revised drawing here that will allow a public street access to the out parcel, which belongs to the Johnsons and we are also asking for your consideration and approval, the continuation of the 20 foot easement in the rear of those lots. Those lots are deeper, as we have done along that entire boundary, and we discussed several weeks ago in a different part of Bainbridge, so that those can be accommodated with that access for the irrigation easement on our southern boundary. This will be part of the Bainbridge project. It's part of the same HOA. It's within the same annexation and rezone process that came before you several years ago. As we just worked our way through the project and this is the last five acres, we needed to address the change of lots added here or there and because of that and that's why the preliminary plat is in front of you tonight to make this in compliance with the original plan. So, I would stand for any questions you might have tonight. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 82 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 30 of 60 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Real quick, Mike, if I heard it right, the P&Z -- or, excuse me, the staff recommendation on adding a bench to the green area, you would -- your request is in lieu of that to account for the other amenities, the second pool, et cetera, that are available to this -- these people in -- Wardle: Madam Mayor, Council Member Borton, no, we actually will do that. We will add the bench and that -- well, the P&Z requested in addition to the other amenities that we have in the rest of Bainbridge. So, we are not asking you to remove those, we will go ahead and do that. That's not a problem. Borton: Got you. Madam Mayor, one -- it's a request. I don't know how you address it here on the irrigation easement within the property. We are hearing that, you know, more and more and I understand this might be a continuation , but I don't have the answer to what's the best way to -- to really overtly inform the homeowners and each subsequent homeowner of that commitment to the back portion of their property. I know it's in the recorded documents, right, but it would be nice -- you know, we consider a waiver on this, we customarily wouldn't grant, right. There is a reason we don't want it in the back lot, but to at least, you know, kind of articulate that extra effort to -- almost like a separate signatory upon the property transfer that acknowledges that to the homeowners, just so it's not a problem down the road. Wardle: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, it's a good question and what we have done as this has gone through other parts of Bainbridge is we -- when we sell these lots to the builders we have been highlighting this. It is a disclosure item that we give to them. We also have -- have addressed it through some small placards that show -- what we have been doing is putting the fence line in that would go over that easement area to begin with. We are required to put a fence in there. So, instead of just leaving that to the homeowner, we have been putting that first 20 feet of fence in so it goes across the easement, so there is not a problem with them putting a fence in the middle of that pipe as well. So, we have been trying to address it as we have gone through. I know this isn't ideal. It wasn't a situation that we had anticipated when Bainbridge went forward, because the project itself was supposed to have a common lot, as were we, and that was removed and so we have just been dealing with the easement and as we have gone along here. So, I understand the concern and we have been trying to inform both builders and hoping that that's going down the row with their homeowners as well. Borton: Madam Mayor? I will make an ask if you want to volunteer for -- on this. You know, as we consider these down the road, if you -- if you thought of -- you know, if the Council is going to consider this concept of an irrigation easement being within the property line, here is kind of maybe three or four things any applicant should provide to the city to answer that concern. Maybe some co nsistent -- you know, if you did these couple three things. You have suggested some of them, but -- you don't have to answer Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 83 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 31 of 60 right now, but it would be nice to have staff help future applicants to say, you know, if you're going to make this request for a waiver here is three elements that the city might like to see to help alleviate that concern. That's kind of a homework assignment perhaps, but just so we don't lose sight of the discussion . You have got good ideas, but I would like to consistently apply them, too. Wardle: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, will do. Borton: Thanks. Wardle: Thank you. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam Milam: Jon -- so, just to give you a little background, I appreciate you bringing that up, because this happened to me and I didn't know there was an easement until I tried to put a swimming pool in my backyard and I had already paid for part of it. Anyway, it turned into a big deal and the answer to me was, well, it was in your -- it was in your documents when you bought the house and, you know, the truth is I would say -- I would not say nobody, but almost nobody reads every word of every document that they are handed at a title company. So, if there is a way to warn people of it -- like you said, highlight it or put marks on the property or something and just really -- it really would be helpful. I learned my lesson. Not really, because I bought my house since then and I didn't read all the paperwork. De Weerd: Any other questions for our applicant? Thank you, Jon. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk, is there anyone signed up to testify? Johnson: Madam Mayor, no one signed in in advance. De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to provide testimony on this item? Okay. Council? Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we close the public hearing on item 10-C. Little Roberts: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 84 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 32 of 60 De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on 10-C. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve H-2019-0042 and to include all staff and applicant testimony. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: Have a motion and a second to approve Item H-2019-0042. Any discussion from Council? Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Just making sure for the maker of the motion and the second. Does that includes the waiver of UDC 11-3A-6D? Milam: Yes. Little Roberts: Second concurs. De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, ye a; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, absent. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. D. Public Hearing for Gander Creek (H-2019-0013) by Trilogy Development, Inc., Located at the SW corner of N. McDermott Rd. and W. McMillan Rd. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 85 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 33 of 60 2. Request: Gander Creek North Preliminary Plat consisting of 156 building lots and 29 common lots on 51.46 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; and 3. Request: Gander Creek South Preliminary Plat consisting of 256 building lots and 36 common lots on 65.64 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district De Weerd: If someone can grab Mr. Bernt. Okay. Item 10-D is a public hearing for H- 2019-0013. I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Madam Mayor. The next applications before you are a request for annexation and zoning and two preliminary plat applications, one for Gander Creek North and one for Gander Creek South. This overall site consists of 117.1 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at the southwest corner of West McMillan Road and North McDermott Road. Back in 2015 an application for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat under the name of Copper Brook Subdivision was denied on the northern portion of this site due to Council's finding that it was not in the best interest of the city to annex the property at that time. Since that time the property to the south, the Owyhee High School site, was annexed and the developers came back with the earlier portion of the site, as well as a larger area to the south. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this site is medium density residential, which is three to eight units per acre. This development application was submitted and went to the Planning and Zoning Commission under one preliminary plat application. Since that time it's been bifurcated into two separate preliminary pla ts due to the site being bisected by the Five Mile Creek, which is owned by the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and not the adjacent landowner as is typical. Therefore, they -- they are required to do two separate preliminary plats on these. The overall number and configuration of building lots and common lots has not changed. The staff report was updated accordingly. Annexation and zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district is requested consistent with the medium density residential future land use map designation for the site. The preliminary plat for the northern portion of the development consists of 156 building lots and 29 common lots on 51.46 acres of land. The southern portion of the development consists of 245 building lots and 36 common lots for an overall total of 401 building lots and 65 common lots. The overall subdivision is proposed to develop in nine phases , as shown on the phasing plan on the right, which staff recommends is allowed to develop as one project, instead of two. So, again, the line through the site here is the Five Mile Creek. The portion north is Gander Creek North, the portion south is Gander Creek South. I'm showing you this overall landscape plan just for ease of looking at it a little better. The minimum lot size for the overall development is 4 ,000 square feet, with an average lot size of 6,002 square feet. Five different sizes of lots are proposed 4,000, 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 and 8,000 square feet lots for the development of traditional front - loaded lots and rear-loaded alley lots. A lot size rendering was submitted as shown that demonstrates the variety of lots proposed within the development. There are two existing structures, one on the north and one on the south, that are within the future right of way area that are proposed. Excuse me . Only one of those is proposed to remain as soon Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 86 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 34 of 60 as the right of way acquisition occurs for State Highway 16 and/or the construction of State Highway 16 commences and that is the residence that's right here at the corner of McMillan and McDermott. The other residence is further to the south and it will be removed with development. One access is proposed via McMillan Road and two accesses are proposed via McCrossen Avenue, the proposed mid mile collector street. A crossing over the Five Mile Creek is proposed at the quarter mile and that is right there. State Highway 16 is proposed to be extended along the eastern boundar y of the site within 300 feet of land designated for future right of way. ITD has hired Jacobs Design, who is recommending a modified selected alternative for the design and construction of State Highway 16, which has changed since the submittal of this application. One of the major changes from the previous design approved with the environmental document is that the highway is now elevated over McMillan Road, instead of McMillan going over the highway. The potential impacts to this development could be more development area along McMillan Road, resulting from a lesser amount of right of way for the slope easement needed for an overpass over McMillan Road and different noise impacts to the residential properties from the elevation of the state highway. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the west boundary of the site within the buffer along the McCrossen from the south boundary to the north boundary of the Five Mile Creek continuing to the east to the quarter mile and, then, north through the development and a proposed park to McMillan Road. So, it's the blue line right here that you see and, then, it just comes right up to McMillan here. Each preliminary plat complies with the minimum ten percent qualified open space and site amenity standards. The northern area contains 12.11 percent or 6.23 acres of qualified open space and the southern area contains 10.5 percent or 6.89 acres of qualified open space. Site amenities consist of a swimming pool with a playground, picnic shelter and half basketball court in the 2.11 acre park at the entry of the development from McMillan Road in the northern portion of the development. Another playground and picnic area in the 2.64 acre park at the entry of the development from McCrossen Avenue in the southern portion of the development. A picnic shelter in the one acre park also in the southern portion of development. A long segment of the city's multi-use pathway system along the west boundary of the southern portion of the development running along the north side of the Five Mile Creek to North Glasford Way and north to McMillan Road and many internal pedestrian pathways in excess of UDC standards. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single family residential detached homes from Presidio and Biltmore builders . The Commission did recommend approval of this application. Madam Mayor, would you like me to go through the summary of the Commission hearing? It's quite lengthy. I can or I assume you have reviewed it in your staff report as well. De Weerd: Council -- if they have any questions about that I will invite them to ask. Allen: Thank you. And, then, I will just go over the written testimony. There was only one letter of testimony received from Bob Taunton, the applicant's representative, and he is requesting the following changes to the staff report -- and I will just go through those real quick. You should also have a copy. Condition A.1.G and A.1.H, the deletion of parcel number S0432110500, as the home on that parcel will be removed and will not remain until the extension of State Highway 16, like the other one, that's the one I mentioned Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 87 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 35 of 60 earlier. The one at the corner is planning to remain until State Highway 16 is extended and staff is okay with this change. Second ly, condition A.2.H amends the condition to reflect the rename of West Middle Creek Drive to West Plateau Creek Street. Staff is okay with that change as well. Condition A.3.E, delete the condition requiring fencing to be installed on the southern side of the pathway along the Five Mile Creek per Tim Warren, Parks Department, e-mail stating the drain is not classified as live water, therefore, fencing shouldn't be required. Staff is not recommending approval of this change as the UDC doesn't require fencing only if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the director that the waterway serves as -- or will be improved as part of the development to be a water amenity as defined by the code. So, therefore, staff doesn't recommend removing this requirement and condition A.3.J, the applicant requests clarification of the requirement for noise abatement adjacent to future State Highway 16. The Commission's motion required a 12 foot berm. It was staff's understanding a fence or wall wasn't required. The Commission in their motion specifically said a 12 foot tall berm. Staff was a little unclear if that was their intention, though, or if it was just the height of the overall berm and wall. So, this is a diagram of what the applicant was proposing originally and they were just meeting -- it was a -- I believe it was a four foot tall berm with a six foot tall concrete noise abatement wall on top and that does meet the UDC standards, but the Commission did feel that a higher berm was necessary in this case. So, if you could, please, consider that in your recommendation. And one other item. The applicant -- let me see here. Let me go back to the -- some outstanding issues for Council I wanted to cover as well. The plan for McMillan Road crossing State Highway 16, as I -- as I mentioned, may shift from an overpass to State Highway 16 actually going over McMillan Road. This scenario would likely result in a lesser amount of right of way needed along McMillan, which might enable the out parcel to possibly redevelop in the future with buildable lots and that is this little one right here where my pointer is. In this scenario an access to a local street should be provided with this development to that parcel as required by the UDC. This could be accomplished by the provision of a common driveway through Lot 36, Block 9, which is the common lot right here. Second, the applicant requests Council approval of a waiver for the existing home located at the southwest corner of McMillan and McDermott to not be required to hook up to city water and sewer service, since it will be removed with the extension of State Highway 16. Then, lastly, the applicant is requesting Council approval of a waiver to the block length standards as noted in Condition A.2.H due to the site being constrained by site conditions that include an abutting arterial street or highway and a large waterway, the Five Mile Creek, and I believe the applicant has a couple slides for you on that in their presentation. That's all staff has at this time. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions at this point? Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: What would be staff's recommendation in regard to the wall -- the berm. Would you prefer it to be as presented or what the Commission recommended? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 88 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 36 of 60 Allen: Commissioner Bernt, Madam Mayor, Council, staff doesn't necessarily have an opinion on that. I think a 12 foot tall berm would be sufficient . But, you know, it's -- staff is not a noise engineer or a sound engineer I should say. I really don't know what the effects of the highway and where it ends up being . It's kind of an unknown factor at this point how it's going to be constructed, if it's going to be at grade or elevated and in what areas. You know, the sound will have different effects. De Weerd: Any other questions? Would the applicant's representative like to come forward? Taunton: Mayor de Weerd, Members of the Council, my name is Bob Taunton. I'm representing the applicant. My address is 2724 South Palmatier Way in Boise. So, we are pleased to be here tonight and I want to thank staff for the great presentation. It's one of the best ones that I encounter as I meet with other -- other agencies. Very thorough. We have enjoyed working with staff and we certainly appreciate their recommendation for approval. I will try not to be duplicating what Sonya has said, but -- are you going to move the slides? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Well, my problem is I'm left handed and I always mess it up. Okay. Okay. So, we have to go back up. There we go. Thank you very much. So, Sonya has gone over the -- over the facts, so I won't go through the details of the application, but I did want to note at the bottom that the ACHD staff report was -- was approved. I think in the report that you -- you have has indicated that it had not been finalized, but it was, in fact, finalized. It didn't go to Commission. There was nothing controversial. There were no appeals. So, it was really a staff document. It went through the appeal period and was approved finally on May 1st. We have gone over the -- the waiver request. Don't need to talk about that any further. The location of the property, as everybody knows, is along McDermott at McMillan. It's within the medium density residential area within your comp plan. The area that is highlighted in sort of the pinky color is the service sewer shed for the lift station at The Oaks. To the south, of course, is the West Ada School District facilities. There are, of course, Nampa's comp plan area that's to the south and to the west and Star's comp plan area is to the north. Again, looking at the surrounding land uses, you can see that this is an area that's not isolated . It's -- it will ultimately be influenced by what happens with Star and with Nampa as they progress through their comp plan amendments. I don't believe that the -- the Nampa comp plan has been -- an update that's taking place has been adopted, but the Star comp plan was adopted on April 22nd and as Council knows, they decided to identify some land uses within your planning area. So, I will leave it at that. Always an interesting situation. The main thing I would like to talk about is your -- is The Oaks lift station and its sewer shed. That's defined by the -- the dark black line. I have noted where Gander Creek is here. This is a very limited east-west. It's mostly a north-south service area. It really represents an opportunity to efficiently use the city infrastructure, which is available at the lift station. Gander Creek has -- it's directly across the street from it. It also has easy access to city water. The west boundary of the sewer shed is really a major development constraint and I will explain in the next slide. The staff has requested there -- there be no sewer stubs to the west, so there won't be any stubs that are along the mid mile collector. The ultimate sewer plan for this four section area is a lift station that's at Can-Ada. So, if you -- let's get straight here. It's located right here. It's two miles away along McMillan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 89 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 37 of 60 from the existing lift station. So, for a developer to consider -- to propose a development that's west of where we are located, it would mean that they would have to pay the expenses of putting in a gravity line all the way out to the lift station, building the lift station and, then, doing a pressure line for another two miles to come back. An extremely expensive off site development cost. It's -- so, really, your sewer shed is going to be a major development constraint for a period of time and it's -- it's uncertain as to when someone might step up and do that or if the city would be involved in -- in participating in that. I don't know. But it's -- in the short term it's -- it's a major constraint. The West Ada School District and Heartland, the applicant, signed a memorandum of agreement last September prior to the approval of the West Ada annexation and rezoning. In that agreement, which will become a binding agreement upon annexation of this property, Heartland will extend the mid mile collector from the McFadden Drain, which is really the north boundary of the West Ada School District's property, will extend that as a collector road all the way up to McMillan. So, there now will be two public points of access for people traveling to the school and school students to be able to get there as well. We will complete that road when Owyhee High School is substantially complete and is applying to the city for a C of O and we -- we understand that the move in probably for -- for the school will be in July of 2021 and, then, the students will, you know, arrive shortly after that. So, the road will be in place by really the summer of 2021 and this was the map that shows the collector. It would start down here at the West Ada School site. The school district will be responsible for building the bridge across the McFadden Drain. We will be responsible for doing the bridge across the Five Mile Creek and it will end up here at McMillan. It will be a three lane roadway at the intersection and, then, it will transition into a half street, which is -- meets ACHD's standards, curb and gutter on one side, half a street plus 12. Twelve feet of additional tables. An extremely safe roadway. We gave a lot of thought to the community development principles . We were aware of the previous application and the difficulty that it had and so we wanted to try to, you know, establish some principles that we could follow in the planning and one of the main ones is -- is housing choice and that's really providing a variety of housing products that cater to different incomes, to different buyer preferences and, of course, life stages. We also were focused on creating a healthy community. We have done a great deal of work with URI on that topic and one of the best ways to encourage that is to have an active and walkable community to make the healthy choice, the easy choice to encourage your residents to get out, run, walk, scooter, you know, whatever around the neighborhood and take advantage of some of the recreational activities. We also have a number of recreational opportunities that Sonya has described, which caters to a wide range of users and ages and also these activity areas, which are dispersed within the overall community, they are great locations for gathering and interaction on the part of the residents and as Sonya said we are connecting to the Five Mile regional pathway. The Meridian Fire Department and Heartland have also signed a letter of intent and it deals with the property that's right here at the -- here we go. At the southwest corner of the overall plan. It's approximately four acres. The deal is that Heartland will donate approximately two acres, the Meridian Fire Department will purchase approximately two acres at a below market purchase price, which is, basically, the average of Heartland's land acquisition cost. The assumption was that they were entering into a purchase agreement by May 1st, but that was assuming that we might be at Council and have a successful outcome in April. So , obviously, if we Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 90 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 38 of 60 are successful tonight that will happen fairly shortly and, then, they would close within 30 days of recording the final plat that includes the Meridian Fire Department property, which is expected to be phase two. So, when we have a plat ready it will -- it will take place. Sonya talked about the -- the diversity of housing products. Again, we have six products, the lots ranging from 38 feet to 80 feet. A tremendous variety. We have alley loaded product, which is the orange highlighted area. The larger lots are in the north section. And the -- and the south section has more compact lots and the thought behind what that was -- it was closer to the school facilities made more sense to increase the density in that particular area. The landscape plan. Sonya went through it. One thing that we added from the Planning Commission meeting is the pool in the south area . We did not have a pool in the iteration that went before P&Z. So, we are adding a pool. The same size as the one to the north, 20 by 50, and seven parking spaces, which is also the situation up at the north end. In the parks and pathway, the idea here is we wanted to create internal connectivity, but also connectivity to the school and P&Z had a couple of suggestions for us and those are highlighted in the ovals, to create additional pedestrian connectivity. So, we have got a great east-west, north-south connectivity across the property. They had thought that it wasn't as direct as they would have preferred and so that gives great access from the north side for our residents or even those that are coming from the east side of McDermott to -- to be able to get to the school directly or they could follow the trail that's the ten foot pathway that Sonya described along McDermott, through the property, along the creek and, then, to the mid mile collector. She went through all of the facilities that are in the various parks, so I won't go through that. So, the Highway 16 sound mitigation -- at Planning Commission the -- the discussion was a bit rambling and it -- there was kind of an -- a bit of an arbitrary -- arbitrary conclusion to -- to what should be there and our personal belief is that the Commissioners were speaking about a berm as a general term for a berm and wall. The problem with having -- we don't object to a 12 foot height that has been recommended by staff. We were proposing a ten foot height. The problem with a 12 foot berm is -- and to have, you know, reasonable slopes on it, instead of a 40 foot buffer area we would probably need a 70 foot buffer area to be able to do that. And, frankly, the -- the concrete sound mitigation wall is probably a better alternative than -- than to the berm directly. It's more -- it's more opaque and really would probably work quite well. So, we would be ten feet above the Highway 16 center line elevation and, again, this is -- this is looking at the current condition where Highway 16 is at grade and I will talk a little about the alternative that's being considered. One of the things that we did do -- and this is an updated diagram from what Sonya had told you. We are creating a lot owner easement. It was one of the ideas that was suggested by staff in order to get away from a no man's land between, you know, the rear lot fencing and this particular fencing. The police department is a bit concerned about that and so we chose the option of creating a use easement in that buffer area, so the side yard fencing will go all the way up to the sound wall and it also really -- you know, I think it's a better solution for maintenance of the -- the landscaping that's on the berm. These are the three areas that have the excessive block length. The -- the standard is -- is 750 feet. According to staff's report we are at 763, 790 and 800 feet. Obviously, we are not at a thousand or 1,200 or 1,500. The reason for that is that they are along the McFadden Drain and along the Five Mile -- File Mile Creek area. We don't have the opportunity to create alleys, do other crossings or other street crossings. But, really, when you think Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 91 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 39 of 60 about the extra length, it's the width -- if it's 800 feet, it's the width of a 50 foot lot. So, we are really not talking about a significant impact that we would really hope that the -- the Council will agree to the situation. Highway 16 design and funding. Right now we are consistent with the existing plans. We have spent a lot of time with ITD. Particularly we spent a lot of time talking about the side slope on -- on McMillan and making sure that our plan was in the right -- our subdivision was in the right location, so that there wouldn't be any impediment that ITD -- ITD to build that overpass. The 300 foot right of way, which was, you know, part of the record of survey for their preliminary EIS or the final EIS, we have incorporated that as well. So, the possible revisions are -- well, as follows. And we were in contact with Amy Schroeder just recently in -- in an e-mail to find out exactly what they were doing and what they were thinking -- and I'm summarizing here. The preliminary study results favor Highway 16 going over the east-west streets. So, not just McMillan, but the other -- other streets as well. That won't be finalized until they go through a public meeting, which is either at the end of October or in September. They, then, will have to amend their NEPA, their EIS approval and subm it that to FHA -- I guess -- I'm not sure who they actually submit it to. There will be an updated noise study model done if they -- if they change the Highway 16 configuration where it elevates. So, they will have to demonstrate in their EIS they are mitigating sound for their roadway based on the new configuration. So, obviously, we have -- we won't be -- we are not part of that, that's not something we can solve, it's really going to be an ITD requirement. The funding and timing, we know that they have 90 million dollars for right of way acquisition and part of -- part of that is to be able to, you know, kind of reduce project costs by looking at the right of way and the configuration to see if they can sa ve some dollars. There is no funding as we know for any appropriation for final engineering or construction and, obviously, there is no -- no known time frame for that. So, this is the preferred alignment. I think you have all seen that. Conceptual phasing -- because we have -- we have identified the phases -- phasing -- that the Highway 16 is phases five to nine, that would be at least five years out before we would get to phase five. So, there is a lot of time to get a lot of things sorted out and if we got the change -- and I know what you're going to say. But I just want to show you this. This is a sketch plan of how we could modify the layout if there was not an overpass. It would be a very simple change to the -- to the preliminary plat. It could be done in final plat. Am I overtime? De Weerd: I think you know you are. Taunton: Sorry. I had a few more slides to show you, but they were images of the -- of the project, so if I can -- De Weerd: Council, any questions? Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: What are your other images and your slides you were going to show us? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 92 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 40 of 60 Taunton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Palmer, I would be glad to show those, go through them very quickly. De Weerd: Because he asked you may. Taunton: Thank you very much. So, these are a few of the project images that we have developed to try and give Council, you know, kind of a three dimensional impression of what the project would be like. Obviously this is the entry on McMillan. Plan to spend a great deal of effort and money on the landscaping of course. This is an aerial view of the same location looking at the entry road towards the park at the north side. The pool, the playground, and the play fields. This is a view of the -- of the pool area in the north subdivision. It will be comparable in the south subdivision. This is the playground facility. The play field that is in the park. These are an example of some illustrations of the alley- loaded housing that would front directly on the park. And I personally live in this situation in Boise and I can tell you it's extremely attractive, very pleasant to have a sidewalk as your front street and the park across it. This is an example of the conventional front drive housing situation. Here is the south subdivision entry from McCrossen Street. This is an illustration of what the fire station might look like. You can see the park in the background and there is a close-up of the pool. Change -- change building and park, play field, playground, et cetera, in the north. So, we really have a comparable situation both for the north and south. And that is it. Thank you. Appreciate the opportunity. De Weerd: Any other questions? Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor. I have got a couple of questions. Bob, you mentioned creating a collector, I believe along the west boundary and, then, did I hear you right, called it a half street? Could you explain a little bit more about that? I'm a little curious about a half street. Taunton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Roberts, it's a standard practice to do a half street where a developer doesn't own full right of way or there isn't dedicated right of way. It's a very safe condition. You build half -- half of the -- of the roadway, which is half of 46 feet and, then, you add another 12 feet of pavement, but it's only -- and, then, on the -- on the far side it's gravel shoulder and a swale, as opposed to curb and gutter and detached sidewalk on -- on the Gander Creek side. When you get more up to McMillan it will actually expand to be three full lanes, an incoming lane, a left turn lane, and a through right turn lane. So, it will be a proper intersection. And that section matches what the school district is doing with their portion of the collector to our south. Little Roberts: Great. Thank you. Taunton: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 93 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 41 of 60 Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, follow up on a different subject. If you could touch a little bit on the two acres that the fire would be purchasing and two acres that you would be donating. Who takes care of that until it's time to build the fire station? Taunton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Roberts, I assume that once the property closes that the city would maintain that property. Little Roberts: And -- follow up. And you were looking at doing that -- it sounds like ASAP -- you were speaking anticipating May it sounded like prior to some delays? Taunton: Mayor de Weerd, Councilman Roberts, the -- we assume that the formal agreement -- purchase and sale agreement will be executed -- if we are successful tonight very quickly. But it would be when we record the plat for phase two. So, the phase one has approximately 50 lots. It could be probably next year, but could be the year -- year after when that plat is recorded and the parcel is created. Little Roberts: Great. Thank you. Taunton: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other questions at this point from City Council? Okay. Thank you. Taunton: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Clerk, can you read who has signed up. Johnson: Yes. The first person wishing to testify is Son ia Daleiden. De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Daleiden: Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Sonia Daleiden. I'm with Kittelson and Associates. The address is 101 South Capital Boulevard, Suite 600, in Boise, Idaho. I don't have any specific testimony. We were the transportation consultant who prepared the traffic impact study, as well -- as well as in coordination with ITD related to the needs for the State Highway 16 improvement. So, I just signed up in case there were any questions related to traffic or transportation or connections to the school and if there is not I don't need to say anything further. De Weerd: Council, any questions regarding the transportation aspect? Borton: Sure. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: The recent new new information about preferred Highway 16 being elevated over all of the east-west, are you able to share what might be expected as far as the height of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 94 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 42 of 60 it, kind of give me some scale of what elevated State Highway 16 could be adjacent to this property. Daleiden: Yeah. So, unfortunately, I don't want to speculate on that at this time. They are still going through design -- design concepts at this point for that. Probably the best thing to say it would be a standard expressway or highway overpass. So, similar to what the overpasses on 84 or the connector would be, but I -- I wouldn't want to speculate on specific height right now. Yeah. De Weerd: Is it a moving target? Daleiden: It is really and I -- again, I don't want to -- I'm not representing ITD here, so I don't want to overstep my bounds at all, but, obviously, they are weighing a lot of competing conflicts related to grading, borrow, fill, all that -- those sorts of things. So, I don't want to speculate on the details yet. It's still a moving target. I think the most important thing as it relates to this development is the fact that if the grades do change and if the -- if it's now the expressway going over the side streets, that would trigger the need to update the noise analysis and the EIS and similar they are -- they are underway -- getting underway without evaluation right now and because the school is an approved use, they are now accounting for that and in -- in the updated noise analysis they will be doing if this development is approved, that would follow the same path and that would be included in their updated noise analysis for the different configuration. De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you. Daleiden: Thank you. Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is David Bailey. Kevin Amar. De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Amar: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members. My name is Kevin Amar. My address is 1548 West Cayuse Creek Drive here in Meridian. I am one of the builders that will be building in this subdivision and I wanted to tell you a little bit why we , as a -- as a residential builder what we look for in a subdivision and why we chose these in comparison with other ones in the community. We have also built in Hillsdale Creek, and Reflection Ridge and Spurwing Heights and Bridgetower West and they all have something in common with this one and that is it's -- it's not a subdivision for us. What our clients are looking for -- they want that community. They want an area with a variety of lot sizes. They want multiple common areas and gathering areas. This one even went as far as having two pools, which it did not have before. Pathways. Parkways. All of those things combined help us provide for our clients with what they want. We have many clients that look for the smaller lots, because Idaho is an outdoor community and so they don't want to be home mowing their lawn or taking care of their house , they -- they go to the mountains and they ride bikes and they have a lot of fun outside, but they still want a really nice house. We have other people that want, you know, a larger, more traditional Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 95 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 43 of 60 home and this provides that as well and this really -- in conjunction with the proximity to the new high school will be an area where many of our clients , the people that we build for and the people that are interested in this type of community, they will really gravitate there, because they can live here for the duration of their -- their life or at least the time that their children are in school. So, we are excited about this project. We -- we are really happy with the way the developer has put together the plan and the common area and the variety a lot sizes and we would ask for your approval this evening and I would stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Kevin. Council, any questions? Amar: Thank you. Johnson: Madam Mayor, one additional. Joe Yochum. De Weerd: Good evening, Joe. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Yochum: Certainly. Joe Yochum. Business address 1303 East Central Drive, Meridian. 83642. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you for giving me a couple minutes to speak this evening. I'm here tonight as a representative of the West Ada School, speaking in support of the Gander Creek annexation application. I'm happy to say Owyhee High School is currently under construction just south of the Gander Creek proposed development and as a condition of approval in 2018, the City Council did require the new collector road be extended north to McMillan Road in order for the new high school to receive a certificate of occupancy. If the Gander Creek annexation is approved, Trilogy has agreed to pay the cost of extending the collector. This is a tremendous financial benefit to West Ada School District and its students, staff, and taxpayers. The school district is also in favor of a residential community close to the high school and the future elementary school. It affords students, parents, and staff the opportunity to live close to the school and have the option to walk or bike to school. The construction of a ten foot wide pathway on the north-south collector from Ustick to McMillan and a ten foot sidewalk on McMillan Road will provide a safe route to school for students in the Gander Creek and east of McDermott Road and it will also save the district transportation costs by reducing bus routes and, then, a final item is the donation that Trilogy is providing the city of two acres and make available the other two acres for purchase for the Meridian Fire Department. This does place an important public service next to -- to school properties. It will help advance the development of the facility. So, that being said, we look forward to the Council approving the annexation application of Gander Creek. Thank you. De Weerd: Questions for Joe? Palmer: Madam Mayor? Cavener: Mr. Cavener. I will let Mr. Palmer go. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 96 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 44 of 60 De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I don't have a question. I just want us all to take a moment and remember this moment when the school district asked us to approve a 126 acre, R-8 residential neighborhood in Meridian. De Weerd: Four hundred lot subdivision. Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Madam Mayor, I should have went first. Joe, appreciate you being here. Also appreciate the communication that you and your office provide our staff with all the applications that we receive. I know with this particular application we didn't get a correspondence from the school district. My assumption that's because this potential development can impact a lot of potential future school locations. I was hoping you might be able to just take a couple moments and talk about what future schools look like in this area outside of Owyhee. I'm not so naive to think that this neighborhood is going to be full of just high school students, but likely middle school students and elementary and just trying to get a good sense about where the district would plan to send those students. Yochum: Certainly, Madam Mayor, Council Member Cavener. So, we have several school sites in the -- I guess the vicinity. We have a 20 acre middle school site back to the -- back to the east off of Chinden off Levi Lane. There is another elementary site down by Black Cat and Ustick. It's another ten acre site. Then, of course, the 15 acres we are saving north of Owyhee for the future elementary. So, that's the school sites we have in that area west -- the west Meridian. Now we know we will have to keep looking further to the west for the years down the road , but -- then we have one south of the freeway -- or several -- excuse me. A couple south of the freeway. But in west Boise -- or west Meridian that's all. Cavener: Madam Mayor, follow up. Construction timeline on the middle school, elementary school and until those are built where -- where do you plan to send the students? Yochum: So, we are about to break ground on Pleasant View Elementary in the Bainbridge-Bridgetower Subdivision off of Gondola. We have bid that project out and ESI is our construction manager and they are mobilizing on that site . So, we expect to be moving -- moving dirt here by June 1st and that elementary school is set to open next fall. So, 2020. And that elementary school will provide relief to Hunter, Ponderosa, I believe a little bit of Willow Creek. So, that will take care of some of the growth that's pushing out that Ustick corridor for the moment. And, then, after that, you know, we are considering another bond next year. That was a proposal that came from the boundary committee just recently and so that committee has not yet met yet and so our board, of course, has not approved a bond measure, but that -- that committee will be forming here fairly soon. Cavener: Appreciate it. De Weerd: Any other questions for Joe? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 97 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 45 of 60 Yochum: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Johnson: Madam Mayor, that was the final sign in. De Weerd: Okay. Yes. Hi, Denise. LaFever: Hi, Mayor Tammy. Denise LaFever at 6706 North Salvia Way and I want to commend the developer for coming together and being a partner with the school district and a partner with our fire department, because I was sitting through the school hearings and it was really tough not having that access to McMillan and that really made or break if that high school would be approved. So , to go back through and have a future school built before you absolutely need it is fantastic and the fact that the devel oper is actually partnering with the school district to make that happen is absolutely commendable. So, with that said I wholeheartedly approve that, because that's what it's all about, partnering to make things better. De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any other testimony on this application? Okay. Any final remarks from the applicant's representative? Taunton: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, again, my name is Bob Taunton. My addresses is 2724 South Palmentier Way in Boise. Just wanted to talk about the conditions. I think the -- in the letter that I sent to Sonya today I think we were good -- we are corrected now on how many houses are going to remain , that there is just the one. So, correcting the -- the condition to delete the parcel number for the second one. Correcting the name in A-2-H. The condition A-3-E, which had to do with the fence along the Five Mile Creek. Obviously, we were taking the lead from Kim Warren on that. But, apparently, there is other provisions in the code that suggests there needs to be a fence. So, we are -- we are fine with that. We will put -- the fence will, obviously, be on the south side of the pathway on the north side of the Five Mile Creek. Also I -- it was hard to tell in the landscape plans, but we -- we -- we do show landscaping on either side of the -- of the pathway. There can't be any trees on the south side per Nampa-Meridian, but we will have, you know, appropriate landscaping on the -- on the north side of the trail. So, a little hard to read in the landscape plans. In fact, I had to call up our landscape architect to see if I was reading them correctly or not. And, again, on the -- on the sound mitigation, we would request that the 12 feet be a combination of a berm and a sound wall and not just a berm and -- because that will -- we will not be able to fit that into the 40 foot buffer area that we have placed on -- on the property that is required by code and I think -- I think that is it. Oh, the other thing is just to request Council to approve the slightly extended block faces that we have for the lots that are adjacent to the Five Mile Creek and the McFadden Drain. With that I plan to take any other questions. De Weerd: Questions? Bernt: A comment. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 98 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 46 of 60 De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I would be in favor of the berm plus the -- the wall and it's important, I believe, along this corridor and within the City of Meridian that it -- that it gives heads up to other developers as well on the staff that we keep that sound mitigation somewhat consistent. I believe that we either need to choose berming or a wall and not both. I think it would look funny if it were one subdivision was berming and the next subdivision was a wall and so on and so forth. I mean if you go down I-84 I think it looks terrible and I wouldn't want that to happen within our city limits. So , whatever we choose I would like it to be consistent. De Weerd: Other questions for Bob? What is the phasing of the sidewalk program along McMillan and the roadway. You're connecting to the high school. Taunton: Mayor de Weerd, Members of Council, the -- you're talking about the ten -- ten foot pathway that comes north, cuts through the property and, then, has a ten foot sidewalk that goes over to -- De Weerd: No. I would say your development sidewalk along the -- the arterial on McMillan and, then, whatever the road is called, only further down. Taunton: Well, the -- De Weerd: On the West. Taunton: -- McCrossen -- De Weerd: Yes. Taunton: -- the collector road on the west side, the sidewalk -- it will be a ten foot pathway from the McFadden Drain up to Five Mile and, then, a five foot sidewalk from Five Mile Creek up to McMillan. That will be constructed at the same time as that road is constructed. So, that would likely be, you know, in our -- in our second -- second phase and most likely -- but certainly before the school opens. And, then, the sidewalk that is on McMillan, we will be doing that in combination with phase -- phase one. De Weerd: Would you be able to put the sidewalk on McMillan -- I saw that it was in phase one, phase five, and phase three I think. I don't have the phasing plan in front of me, but can you put it in all at one time before the school opens? Taunton: Yes, we can. One thing to remember is we do have an out parcel and I think the city staff is going to be talking to the Evans folks, since they have, you know, a bit of frontage, we had asked them if they would be willing to do a sidewalk easement, you know, in favor of the city, but we were unsuccessful, but I think the city is going to make an attempt to try and speak with them and -- and see if they can convince them to create -- allow for an easement, so that the sidewalk can be extended. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 99 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 47 of 60 De Weerd: Well, this would be a major portion to get students -- I know they would rather cut through your development to angle down to the high school, but it will give a safer route to the high school. Taunton: Correct. De Weerd: Appreciate that. Any other questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Maybe just a comment just while you're at the podium. One of the challenges -- huge challenge with this is this -- the Highway 16, change in the new recommendation. There is so much good with this application. You do fantastic work. You have been doing it around the valley really well for a long time. But Highway 16 is a -- in my mind a massive consideration. Among the things that I struggle with is the issue with regards to the berming and fencing. Those are means to, among other things, mitigate noise. We don't know what noise we are mitigating. We don't know what ITD's revised study, which would address some noise mitigation, would mean for us to help mitigate. Maybe a two foot berm is appropriate. Maybe no berm. And I don't know, but there was such a robust discussion at P&Z about -- even to a confusing extent sometimes, you know, about berming and fencing and the setback, all of which tried to capture what appeared to be an obvious recognition that that's a big road and even at grade at P&Z was a big consideration, which it was a good discussion I thought by you and all the Commissioners and Mr. Bailey and others. The fact that it's elevated now -- and I asked a question which is probably not a fair question, but I don't know what it means. I don't know if it's 60 feet high, is it 60 feet high the whole way, is it -- I don't know and that's my fear. So, I'm -- I don't -- I don't expect you to be able to answer it; right? There is not -- we don't have that data yet. You might have it in the summer, even a lot more information. So, it doesn't -- to me it means that this gets continued. I'm just guessing or speculating is the word that's been used to try and address some of those considerations and you can't -- there is no open space or fire station or block length that changes that huge concern . It may be easily solved. We may know more information. And there might be a great solution to come up with to address it. But, boy, are we guessing and we don't -- haven't approved, you know, residential uses adjacent to 75 foot, I don't know, elevated highways? Ten feet? Thirty? I don't know. So, that's what gives me concern that we can't answer it today without guessing. Taunton: Could we -- may we respond to that? Borton: Certainly. De Weerd: Yes, you can. We would love it if you would respond. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 100 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 48 of 60 Daleiden: Again, Sonia Daleiden with Kittelson and Associates. I will respond. It's not going to be a straightforward answer or an easy solution. I think the best we can do at this point is plan for what is in the current EIS for 16. They are going through a reevaluation process, as we learned from ITD. Any changes to what's in the EIS, such as 16 going over, would require an extensive public involvement process and , then, an EIS update. So, the thought right now is that it looks promising from a cos t perspective for 16 to go over, but there is a lot of road ahead for that to be the preferred solution. So, I think the best is to plan for what is in the EIS today, which the proposed wall, berm plus wall ten foot total height that the development is proposing -- 12. Sorry. Twelve total height would be the best solution for that. I will also say if 16 is going over, you're unlikely to build a wall that's going to mitigate that. I mean it's -- your wall would be incredibly high and that wouldn't be practical or feasible. I think you would be looking at other sound mitigation, such as building materials, windows in the house and that sort of thing that would mitigate the sound inside the homes that are directly along that right of way. But you're -- if it goes over you're not looking at, oh, well, a 14 foot wall would do it versus a 12 foot. A wall is not going to be the solution. There will be other solutions. So, hopefully, that helps a little. Borton: It does. In fact, Madam Mayor, if I could, I think it highlights some of the -- and it's nobody's fault, quite frankly. You sort of got this pivot placed upon you at this hour, but it highlights the -- kind of the speculation that we are all subject to. I mean because of an annexation adjacent to an elevated highway might make Planning and Zoning say I'm not -- I don't know if houses should be next to it. I just don't know and it's one of their good considerations and building materials or not -- I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't know and to pick a permanent path today to me is -- that's concerning. Daleiden: One clarification if I might, Mayor and Council Member Borton. We are not talking about an elevated highway; right? The elevation would be for a defined period of time over the cross street. So, it would just be in the vicinity of McMillan. It wouldn't be for the extent of the entire development all the way down. Taunton: Madam Mayor, Council Member Borton, one of the things that I keep thinking of, because I'm in the development business and people are making assumptions and whatnot about -- about this particular corridor. I had several clients that are in the corridor -- is the total -- total uncertainty of when it's going to be constructed and we all know what the funding situation is and there -- who knows, there could be some changes down the road because of funding that suggest, you know, an at grade situation. We don't -- we don't know that. But I think the -- the construction of it is probably going to be phased. The betting money in the development industry is that when there is some money it's all going to be down at the south end. The railway tracks. Franklin. The flyovers at 84. That is going to be incredibly expensive and will be pretty much an elevated structure all the way. So, that's likely to use up a lot of funding that we might be able to find. So , when -- when something would happen at McMillan and McDermott, whether it's an overpass or, you know, which way -- it could be years down the road and it's just hard -- hard to speculate of course. We may -- we may have some -- some updated information, you know, later this summer. The sound study, from what Amy Schroeder said, would Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 101 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 49 of 60 probably be finished by the end of the year. So, we -- we have some -- some information. But, obviously, we have parts of the property that really could be developed that are quite a ways away from -- you know, from -- from the 300 foot right of way. De Weerd: I guess Mr. Borton kind of opened maybe my Pandora's Box. It's no surprise to anyone that I have been -- had huge concerns that we have started the development approval on the west side of McDermott, because we don't know what the alignment of Highway 16 is and the illustration that the design of Highway 16 is changing kind of emphasizes why we have wanted to hold jumping on that side. I have held my comments, because we already made the decision with the approval of the high school and this does, as Denise pointed out, complete a very important component to that high school and the safety thereof, which is a huge concern. The sidewalks, how we get students safely to the school, has been a big concern of mine personally and I don't want to wait until the first teenager that gets hurt to say, hum, we should have thought of that. But you -- this development is providing some answers to that. I do have concern about the Highway 16. I -- I think that you certainly gave development that's much more of a reason to seriously consider this, because it's a -- it's a good one. It's -- it's much different from the one that we -- we turned down prior to this. I think that what Kevin mentioned , that building a community is important. That's what we have tried to do in the -- in the city is to build communities within our community that -- that add value. I do appreciate that you have partnered with the school to -- to be part of the solution to the road issue. Now, we haven't set any money aside, by the way, for any fire department land, but I guess those discussions would commence and there is a concern for our public safety services being stretched to the side of -- of McDermott. This -- this does stretch out and as shown in the staff report it is at a very far edge that makes it hard to service it and it will cost our existing taxpayers to serve that area, because it will not pay for itself in the beginning. We have been holding that line for a reason and it's not just water and sewer, it was because when we annex a piece of property, it's more than just water and sewer, it's about parks, it's about police and it's about fire and it's about getting our fire apparatus there in the amount of time that we have committed to, because, you know, every minute counts when a fire is underway or if it's a life issue, primarily a heart issue. This -- this is a hard one. It's a hard one to -- to consider continuing to expand on that side of McDermott when we know our services right now are stretched and there is a lot of land between that western side, which is -- is going to stretch our -- our ability to respond in -- in a fashion that I think our citizens should expect us to respond in. Taunton: Madam Mayor, may I comment? At the Planning Commission the -- the fire chief I thought gave a fairly positive response to -- to that. He wasn't objecting to the -- you know, to our application. I felt that both he and, then, in talking with Mr. Colaianni from the police department, they felt that, really, they could have adequate coverage. They will, obviously, have a resource officer at the school. So , we walked away from Planning Commission thinking that, you know, public services, such as police and fire, were not a huge issue. Yes, they -- you know, it's -- we are on the periphery. We understand that. But we certainly didn't get the feeling that that was a deal breaker for us. But I'm not the Police Department, nor am I the Fire Department, so -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 102 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 50 of 60 De Weerd: Well, we have got land, but we don't have a station on it. Any other comments from Council? I tried hard not to go there. Okay. Council? Okay. If there is no questions for staff or the applicant or any of those that testified, Council, I would entertain a motion to close. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Move we close the public hearing for Item 10-D, Gander Creek, H-2019- 0013. Palmer: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Kind of follow up to my comments to Bob and the concerns I have raised and my preference, I think there is a lot of great with this application, but my preference is to address the unknown a little better than I can right now. I would be inclined to continue it to mid July. Perhaps we have a little more information by then. I would rather do that perhaps than continue it to the fall and something comes earlier. My -- my assumption is if you prefer to at least get back in front of us in the summer, in the off chance there is more information on 16 -- and if there is not it might get bumped down the road and the applicant would understand the reason for the continuance is to try and create some certainty where there isn't right now on 16. So, that's my preference. I couldn't vote to approve it now, I just don't have the information I need. I would certainly continue it. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I'm certainly in favor of the application that's before us. I would be in favor of it later on this summer. My concern is pressing pause , hope that the state can respond in a timely manner. Will we know more by the end of July than we know today? Will we know more by the end of the year than we know in July. Will we know more five years from now than we know the end of this year. There is a lot of what ifs and so I'm supportive of moving forward tonight, but I'm happy to support the will of the body if -- if we all think that we can glean better information six months from now or a year from now or however long would be necessary to wait. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 103 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 51 of 60 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: The comment that -- that sticks in my head in this scenario is the -- Councilman Rountree's wisdom that applies of there are certain circumstances where we aren't to be in a hurry and that's my worry and it stays with me that I think that's what he would be saying. Again, it's not a denial of the application, but I would rather do something right than do it right now. That's why I think a continuance seemed appropriate. De Weerd: Okay. Well -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I will make a motion, I will see where discussion goes. I move that we continue H-2019-0013 to July 23rd, 2019. De Weerd: We have a motion to continue. Do I have a second? Okay. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I will try and get through all these. I move we approve H -2019-0013 with the waiver for the existing home at McMillan and McDermott to not be required to hook up to city services and with a waiver for the block lengths that was discussed and deleting the parcel with the really long number that was mentioned. Cavener: A.1.G and 1.H. Palmer: A.1.G and A.1.H. And on A.2.H amending the condition that was stated there. Staff was okay with that. Not touching A.3.E, because it seems that fence is solved and the applicant was okay with it and for A.3.J, making the requirement 12 feet total berm and wall. And, then, that first house setting issue for City Council, I'm not sure how to word it or if it's necessary to include anything in the motion on that point. If anybody has any direction. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Just for clarification, is Council Member Palmer also including the commitment from the developer to have all the external sidewalks to be built prior to the school opening? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 104 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 52 of 60 Palmer: Correct. Bernt: One point of clarification, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Mr. Palmer, did you say berm and wall or -- what did you specify in your motion? Palmer: Yeah. The total height of the berm wall -- Bernt: Is 12 feet? Palmer: It's to be 12 feet. Bernt: Okay. Both. Berm-wall. Palmer: Correct. Madam Mayor. Sonya, did -- is there anything that needs to be in the motion on that first house setting for Council that you dealt with it here? Allen: I'm sorry, what was that question? Palmer: On the first house setting issue for Council, is there anything to be included in the motion with regard to that? Allen: No. If it's your intent that they provide local street access to that property, they can do it by either their diagram that they showed an actual local street or via a common driveway. Either way. Palmer: What she said. De Weerd: And did you address the block length? Palmer: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Palmer: Did I miss anything? De Weerd: Can you repeat it? Palmer: No out denial. No -- Allen: Councilman Palmer -- Madam Mayor. Excuse me. Did you address the waiver for the existing home to hook up to services? Palmer: I breezed through it, but, yeah, I mentioned it. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 105 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 53 of 60 Allen: Okay. Palmer: To not require it. Allen: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: I appreciate you asking for -- for clarification. I have a motion and a second to approve with a lengthy list and I would love it to be repeated, but we will just wait for our minutes. I just want to make sure before you vote you know that all of the -- the items have been included in -- in the motion that you're concerned about. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I will be voting no. The only -- and the reason I will be voting no is if there is concern that in July we don't have the answers necessary to take ac tion, we certainly don't have them today. So, it doesn't seem appropriate. If it wouldn't be appropriate to decide it in July for lack of information, how do we have more information today that would warrant a decision, so I will vote no. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Is there a date? Why July? Is there a date that ITD or the state or something when they are going to have some new information that might dictate -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I believe the representative from Kittelson mentioned a meeting that -- that would make some of those findings. Borton: Madam Mayor, it was somewhat -- kind of a guesswork from comments. There was a lot of fall and end of the year, but in lieu of doing that I figured by July -- end of July there might be at least more information to say here is what's going on, here is what we know or here is the progress that's about to occur in the fall. So, you won't know less than you do now, that's for sure, so that's why I picked it. Understand -- and it could get continued on that date to another date if there was still critical information that we didn't have or we could act on that day if we have enough. That was kind of the logic behind it. It's a great project, I just got to get my head around that unanswered question. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, nay; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, nay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 106 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 54 of 60 De Weerd: Okay. The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO NAYS. ONE ABSENT. E. Appeal of Purchasing Manager's Denial of Protest of 2019 Request for Proposals (MYR-1921-11034) by Perkins Coie on behalf of Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime De Weerd: Okay. 10-E is regarding an appeal of the purchasing manager's denial of protest and that's regarding MYR-1921-11034. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bernt: On May 14th when the discussion was made -- that were had in regard to this information I left early in that meeting to go watch my daughter's track meet at East Junior High. By the way, they -- they got third place. Go East Hornets. But I did -- I just wanted to mention I did watch the discussion online and so I'm fully aware of what that discussion was and I feel like I'm capable of rendering some information tonight. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: The -- the protestee or protestor is here tonight. We all received a fairly lengthy packet over the weekend. While I have had time to peruse through it, I have not had the opportunity to dive as deep into this as I would like. I'm open to hearing from the protestor tonight, but I also would maybe ask that after that that if this body's comfortable of maybe continue it for a week or two to allow -- I don't know if all of you had the time to go through it, but to allow us ample time to go through it before we render a decision. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary, do you want to make any opening remarks or shall I just call on the -- the appellees? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members -- De Weerd: Appellant. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I can put at least some information in the record. If you have any questions Mr. Watts is also here, our purchasing manager, if you have questions on the process. So, the RFP for vehicle share -- ride sharing program was issued by the city on March 15th of 2019. The proposals were -- the proposals were received on April 5th from two applicants for the -- for that solicitation. April 15th the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 107 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 55 of 60 proposals and evaluation materials were sent out to the evaluation committee. The committee held an evaluation team meeting on April 24th. They discussed their proposal and the proposals that had been submitted. The evaluators were released to finalize their evaluation and return it to purchasing. Each individual evaluator graded and scored the evaluation on their own. They don't do that collectively. Purchasing received their last scores on April 29th from the committee members. May 3rd they sent the evaluation results to the committee confirming the committee's recommendation, which is that the committee wanted to select only one vendor for this proposal, rather than both. Purchasing issued the potential award to Bird, the successful submittal as the selected vendor and notice of intent to award was sent to both vendors, along with the evaluation results. The city received the protest on May 16th from Lime that is here tonight. The protest was based on one of the evaluator's scores was significantly lower than the other evaluators. Our process requires the purchasing manager review that protest and respond appropriately. Mr. Watts did issue an official denial on May 17th addressing all the issues raised by the appellant here in this case. They, then, submitted a written appeal subsequent to that and that's what's before you tonight. The issue, again, is based on their letter of May 16th and the issues they raised in that and, then, again, Mr. Watts' response, which is a letter in your packet on May 17th. They also have made a public records request that is related to this application or this proposal. That has been in process with our office for compliance and they are still working on the compliance of that. They did request in the most recent appeal to continue tonight's hearing to at least June 4th for them to secure the public records request. I advised them on more than one occasion that's totally within the Council's discretion on whether to grant that. If you think it's relevant for the conversation of the appeal, that's certainly within your purview. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I don't think it benefits anybody, given the massive amount of information to -- to go through and the fact that we are still waiting on -- for Ted to have to review a whole bunch of e-mails, so that all the information is present and ready. I think we should have it all done and ready before we have this discussion and they will have the added benefit of all the members of Council here. So, I move that we continue Item 11 -A to -- no. 10- E. I'm tired. Obviously we shouldn't have this discussion. I move we continue Item 10- E to June 4th. Nary: Madam Mayor -- I will wait for a second. Sorry. De Weerd: Yes. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Membe r Palmer, I would ask if you're going to do that to do it to June 11, so that way we would have time to provide it to them and they would have time to review it, because it may be the end of this week or early next week before we even can provide it all. So, if you want to give them an opportunity to review it I would suggest the 11th. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 108 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 56 of 60 Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I move we continue this item to June 11th. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue this item under 10-E for appeal of the purchasing manager's denial until -- Cavener: Madam Mayor -- oh, sorry. De Weerd: June 11th. Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. I don't know if it's -- if it's possible or worth it, but I believe the representatives of Lime have sat through our entire meeting tonight and I don't know if it's -- enough for Council to at least give them an opportunity to speak or if they speak tonight if they somehow forfeit the ability to speak at a later point in time, I just -- I know when you sit all the way through the meeting I would like to just give them the opportunity to address anything that they feel is relevant to the Council before we continue this for a couple weeks. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would suggest if the Council is going to take any -- any type of testimony from the appellant, that it only be related to the continuance that's before you and not to the substance of the appeal itself. Otherwise, we are just hearing the appeal anyway. So, if you want to hear anything regarding the request to continue -- or the motion to continue, that would be relevant, but any other information I think at this point would be inappropriate given that there is no other opportunity for the rest of the discussion about the appeal. De Weerd: So, the cleanest way is just to continue it. I have -- Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: -- a motion and a second to continue this to June 11th. Those in favor please say aye. Any opposed say nay. Okay. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: So, we will hear this on June 11th. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 109 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 57 of 60 Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I'm sure -- this is so much fun and entertainment that we won't even charge you for listening. Yes, Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Could we at least give them a City of Meridian pin for sticking with tonight? De Weerd: I will ask Mr. Clerk to get them a pin, as they do for high school students that last throughout our whole -- Cavener: Maybe one for Lindsay, too. De Weerd: -- meeting. Cavener: I think is this a new record for her tonight. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Borton. Borton: It was going to be a question on the continuance of it coming forward, but we continued it, so it can wait for another day. Item 11 : Department Reports A. Legal: Budget Amendment for FY19 in the Amount of $1,100 for Dairy Days Parade (Action Item) De Weerd: Thank you. I was going to add something and I thought better of it. Okay. Item 11 -A is under our Legal Department, budget amendment for our Dairy Days Parade. Mr. Nary. Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The budget amendment is subsequent to our discussion last week about the additional cost for the traffic control for the Dairy Parade. It's a little unusual in that the budget actually is in the Police Department, so I did tell our CFO -- sorry if there is a mixup of us doing a budget for the Police Department and his words were -- I sign lots of things that I'm not totally sure why I'm signing it, so it's fine. So, I thought I would make sure that I got that on the record for Todd. So, anyway, it is just a clean up to follow up with the direction received last week to make sure there is adequate money funding that particular portion of the parade. De Weerd: Any questions for Mr. Nary? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 110 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 58 of 60 Borton: I move we approve the legal budget amendment in the amount of 1,100 dollars for Dairy Days Parade. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the legal budget request. Any questions? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Parks and Recreation Department: FY2019 Net-Zero Budget Amendment for Volunteer Ambassador Utility Vehicle Batteries Action Item) De Weerd: Item 11-B was requested to be vacated from the agenda to be heard on June 11 th. I do not think I need a motion. Item 12: Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 19-1828: Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-1(B), Regarding the Definition of Vehicle Immobilization De Weerd: I will just move on to Item 12-A, which is Ordinance 19-1828 and ask Mr. Clerk to, please, read this by title. Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance No. 19-1828, amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-1(B), regarding the definition of vehicle immobilization. De Weerd: Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none -- Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 19-1828 with suspension of rules. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 12-A. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 111 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 59 of 60 Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 19- 1827: An Ordinance To Amend The Municipal Code Of The City Of Meridian, County Of Ada, State Of Idaho, Amending Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 12(E)(2), Meridian City Code, Known As The Meridian Impact Fee Ordinance Fee Schedule; To Provide For An Amendment To The Police, Fire, And Parks And Recreation Impact Fee Schedules; And Providing An Effective Date. De Weerd: Item 12-B is the second reading of Ordinance 19-1827. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read this by title? Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. This is Ordinance No. 19-1827, an ordinance to amend the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, amending Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 12(e)(2), Meridian City Code, known as the Meridian Impact Fee Ordinance Fee Schedule; to provide for an amendment to the Police, Fire, and Parks and Recreation impact fee schedules; and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Thank you. The third reading and the public hearing will be held next City Council meeting. Item 13: Future Meeting Topics De Weerd: With that we are under Item 13. Any items to note under this? If none, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Borton: Move to adjourn. Cavener: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion to adjourn and a second. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you for that clear motion, Mr. Borton. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:16 P.M. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 4, 2019 – Page 112 of 467 Meridian City Council May 28, 2019 Page 60 of 60 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR TA Y DE WEERD ATTESTS 1% CH N - INTERIM CITY L4 /1 DATE APPROVED City or w E IDIZ IAN+AMO, tD SEAL I , 0 Ei Nx--DAH CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 5 Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Announcements Meeting Notes: (:.Q/rE IDIIZAN?- � J CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 6 Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Future Meeting Topics — Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum) Signing up prior to the start of the meeting is required. This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials regarding matters of general interest or concern of public matters and is not specific to an active land use/development application. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented under this public comment section, other than the City Council may request that the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for a more detailed discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to further assist you in resolving the matter following the meeting Meeting Notes: 5/28/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 5/28/2019 Hearing Type: Public Forum Active: *-* Signature Name Discussion Topic Sign In Date/Time Tyler Rountree Presentation 5/28/2019 5:30:21 PM Susan Karnes Testimony Sign In 5/28/2019 5:38:04 PM Sally Reynolds Interagency cooperation with West Ada SD 5/28/2019 5:56:28 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http:Hi nternalapps/SIGN INFORM TOOLS/Si gnlnForm Detai Is?id=242 1/1 From; C.Jay Coles ci coles@,Pme rid ia ncity.org Subs_-ct. RE: Sign ins Date: Dec 19, 2018 at 10:10:27 AM To: Susan Karnes susankarnes@gmaii.com Cc: Chris Johnson cjohnson@meridiancity.org Susan, Thanks for the email. To address your first question, the law requires us to give anyone who would like to testify the opportunity to do so. The sign in sheets are one way in which we accomplish that — asking those who would like to provide testify to sign up so we can call them up to the podium. We do not read the names aloud of those who did not indicate they wanted to testify. It is entered into the record of the meeting (the minute book) but it is not read aloud with their opposition or favor because the sign in sheets are not a petition. The second way in which we adhere to the law is once we have invited all those up that signed in to provide testify, the Mayor asks if anyone one else present, whose name was not called, would like to provide testify — and we invite those individuals up to the podium to do so. To answer your second question, the law does not automatically guarantee or grant someone representing a group that additional time. That time must be requested of the Mayor and Council and then they either grant or deny that request. Anyone desiring that time can make that request when they come up to testify — they simply must request that of the Council, state who they are representing and then the Mayor and Council will make the decision on the additional time. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, C.Jay Coles City Clerk I City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave.,_ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208.888.44331 Email: cjcoles@meridiancity.org IDIS N I Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Susan Karnes <susankarnes@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 7:19 AM To: C.Jay Coles <cjcoles@meridiancity.org> Subject: Sign ins Good morning, C.J., From: C.Jay Coles cjcoles@meridiancity.org Subject: RE: Sign ins Date: Dec 19, 2018 at 10:10:27 AM To: Susan Karnes susankarnes@gmali'.com Cc: Chris Johnson cohnsonmeridiancity.org Susan, Thanks for the email. To address your first question, the law requires us to give anyone who would like to testify the opportunity to do so. The sign in sheets are one way in which we accomplish that — asking those who would like to provide testify to sign up so we can call them up to the podium. We do not read the names aloud of those who did not indicate they wanted to testify. It is entered into the record of the meeting (the minute book) but it is not read aloud with their opposition or favor because the sign in sheets are not a petition. The second way in which we adhere to the law is once we have invited all those up that signed in to provide testify, the Mayor asks if anyone one else present, whose name was not called, would like to provide testify — and we invite those individuals up to the podium to do so. To answer your second question, the law does not automatically guarantee or grant someone representing a group that additional time. That time must be requested of the Mayor and Council and then they either grant or deny that request. Anyone desiring that time can make that request when they come up to testify — they simply must request that of the Council, state who they are representing and then the Mayor and Council will make the decision on the additional time. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, C.Jay Coles City Clerk I City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208.888.44331 Email: cjcoles@meridiancity.org Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Susan Karnes <susankarnes@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 7:19 AM To: C.Jay Coles <cjcoles@meridiancity.org> Subject: Sign ins Good morning, C1, �rE IDIIZAN�-, A H�) CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 A Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Approve Minutes of May 14, 2019 City Council Workshop Meeting Agenda Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.A . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Appr ove M inutes of M ay 14, 2019 City Council Workshop M eeting C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Minutes Minutes 5/20/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/20/2019 - 7:53 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 5 of 664 Meridian City Council Workshop May 14, 2019 Page 50 of 50 Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, absent. De Weerd: All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (5:45 p.m. to 6:08 p.m.) Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Palmer: I move we come out of Executive Session. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I move we adjourn. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:08 P.M. (AUDIO REOORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 5 / 2-P)� MAYOR TAMMY DEW DATE APPROVED 6VO-TED A ATTEST: r Cif „ C JJ ON - INTERIM CITY C ARK C/rE IDIIAN,Z IDA 0 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 B Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0053 Item Title: Final Plat Continued from May 21, 2019 for Keep Subdivision By Jarron Langston. Located at the SW Corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. Meeting Notes: 0 ve I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.B . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - F inal P lat Continued from M ay 21, 2019 for Keep S ubdivision (H-2019-0053) by J arron L angston, L ocated at the S W C orner of S. Eagle Rd and E. L ake Hazel Rd C lick H ere for Application M aterials C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 5/24/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 11:44 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 56 of 664 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 5/28/2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0053 Keep Subdivision LOCATION: Southwest corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd., in the NE ¼ of Section 5, T.2N., R.1E. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant proposes a Final Plat consisting of 59 building lots and 7 common lots on 53.48 acres of land in the R-2 zoning district. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Jarron Langston – 9563 W. Harness Dr., Boise, ID 83709 B. Owner: Jack Hammond, JHP 2 Inc. – 3728 E. Vantage Pointe, Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. STAFF ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the proposed final plat for substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat in accord with the requirements listed in UDC 11-6B-3C.2. There is one fewer building lot in Block 2 depicted on the final plat than on the approved preliminary plat. Because the number of buildable lots is fewer and the common area is the same as shown on the approved preliminary plat, staff deems the final plat in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required. Amenities are proposed as follows: a tot lot with children’s play equipment, a 16’ x 16’ gazebo, enclosed bicycle storage, micro-pathways and 5% additional open space. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 57 of 664 Page 2 IV. DECISION Staff recommends approval of the proposed final plat within the conditions noted in Section VIII of this report. V. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat (date: 3/28/2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 58 of 664 Page 3 B. Final Plat (date: 2/4/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 59 of 664 Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 60 of 664 Page 5 C. Landscape Plan (dated: 5/23/19) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 61 of 664 Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 62 of 664 Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 63 of 664 Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 64 of 664 Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 65 of 664 Page 10 D. Amenity Details Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 66 of 664 Page 11 VI. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division Site Specific Conditions: 1. Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approval associated with this development (H-2018-0043, Development Agreement #2019-031102). 2. The applicant shall obtain the City Engineer’s signature on the subject final plat within two years of City Council approval of the preliminary plat (by August 7, 2020), or apply for a time extension, in accord with UDC 11-6B-7. 3. Prior to submittal for the City Engineer’s signature, have the Certificate of Owners and the accompanying acknowledgement signed and notarized. 4. The final plat prepared by Compass Land Surveying stamped on 2/4/2019 by Lawrence H. Koerner, included in Section VII.B shall be revised as follows: a. Correct plat title as follows, “Plat of b. Add note: “Direct lot access to E. Lake Hazel Rd. and S. Eagle Rd. is prohibited”. c. Note #3: Include recorded instrument number. d. Note #6: Change “resubmission” to “re-subdivision” if appropriate. e. Change “W.” Lake Hazel Rd. to “E.” Lake Hazel Rd. f. The street frontage of Lot 4, Block 1 shall be widened to a minimum of 80 feet as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-4. g. Lots 22, 24-25, Block 2 are restricted to one street access on one frontage, designated by a note on the final plat. h. Include recorded instrument numbers in the Legend on Sheets 1-3. i. There are two different symbols for “Area of Right-of-Way Dedication” noted in the Legend; the symbol depicted on the plat on Sheet 1 along E. Lake Hazel Rd. is different from the symbol depicted on Sheets 2 and 3 for the same area – revise/delete accordingly. j. Include a note for the temporary turnaround easement on Lot 16, Block 1 to terminate at such time as E. Wickham St. is extended to the west and the turnaround is no longer needed. k. Include a note stating that Lots 22-24, Block 3 shall only take access from S. Rosings Pl.; access via E. Bingley Dr. is prohibited. 5. The landscape plan prepared by Stack Rock Group, dated 2/5/19, needs to be revised as follows: a. Include street buffer widths for S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. in calculations table that comply with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-4. b. Change “W.” Lake Hazel Rd. to “E.” Lake Hazel Rd. c. In the Plant Schedule, include caliper size for Crimson King Maple (minimum 2” caliper). d. Depict fencing along the rear of building lots along the Farr Lateral and adjacent to internal common lots in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7. 6. The Developer is responsible for constructing a fence to distinguish common from private areas along the rear of building lots abutting the Farr Lateral on Lot 1, Block 3. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 67 of 664 Page 12 7. A 16’ x 16’ gazebo, children’s play structure, and enclosed bicycle storage shall be provided as amenities for this development. 8. Future homes constructed in this development shall substantially comply with the conceptual elevations approved with H-2018-0043 included in the Development Agreement. 9. The rear and/or sides of structures on lots that face S. Lake Hazel Rd. and S. Eagle Rd. (i.e. Lots 2-6 and 8-12, Block 1; Lots 30-32, Block 2; and Lot 3, Block 3) shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public streets. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. 10. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions from the preliminary plat and/or development agreement does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. B. Public Works 1. Site Specific Conditions: 1.1 Please address and incorporate the following street light concerns into the street light plans developed for this project: a. Reserve and utilize correct/current streetlight numbers. b. Six (6) Type 1 streetlights 30' in Height with an 8' mast arm are required on Lake Hazel Road. 30' high davit poles may be used on Lake Hazel to avoid conflicts with overhead power lines. c. Six (6) type 1 streetlights 30' in height with an 8' mast arm are required on Eagle Road Frontage. Two lights on the northern portion and four on the southern. d. All type 1 lights are required to be metered. 2. General Conditions: 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.4 Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 68 of 664 Page 13 2.5 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all incomplete fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, prior to signature on the final plat. 2.6 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post with the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Surety Agreement with the City of Meridian. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.7 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years. This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.8 In the event that an applicant and/or owner cannot complete non-life, non-safety and non- health improvements, prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat and/or prior to occupancy, a surety agreement may be approved as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3C. 2.9 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.10 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.11 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.12 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.13 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-1-4B. 2.14 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.15 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.16 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.17 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 69 of 664 Page 14 2.18 Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer’s expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor’s work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 2.19 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.20 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.21 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Water Department at (208)888-5242 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources. 2.22 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment procedures and inspections. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 9-1-28.C.1). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to development plan approval. 2.24 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 70 of 664 �/rE IDIIZNA*,----- �J CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 C Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0056 Item Title: Final Plat for Lost Rapids (H-2019-0056) By GFI - Meridian Investments II, LLC. Located at the SW Corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 2O-26 and N. Ten Mile Road Meeting Notes: 9 APPROV, hu I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.C . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - F inal P lat for L ost Rapids (H-2019-0056) by G F I - M eridian Investments II, L L C, L ocated at the S W corner of W. C hinden B lvd./S H 20-26 and N. Ten M ile Rd. C lick Here for A pplication Materials C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 10:54 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 71 of 664 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 5/28/2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0056 Lost Rapids LOCATION: Southwest corner of N. Ten Mile Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd./SH-20/26, in the NE ¼ of Section 27, T.4N., R.1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Final Plat consisting of 13 building lots, 1 residential building lot, 1 common lot and 1 other lot on 36.2 acres of land in the C-G and R-40 zoning districts for Lost Rapids Subdivision. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: GFI – Meridian Investments II, LLC – 74 East 500 South, Ste. 200, Bountiful, UT 84010 B. Owners: Costco Wholesale Corporation – 999 Lake Dr., Issaquah, WA 98027 GFI - Meridian Investments II, LLC – 74 East 500 South, Ste. 200, Bountiful, UT 84010 C. Representative: Kelly Kehrer, KM Engineering, LLP – 9233 W. State St., Boise, ID 83714 III. STAFF ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the proposed final plat for substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat in accord with the requirements listed in UDC 11-6B-3C.2. Because the final plat depicts the same number of building lots as shown on the approved preliminary plat, Staff finds the proposed final plat is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required. All development shall comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C- G zoning district in effect at the time of development. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 72 of 664 Page 2 IV. DECISION Staff recommends approval of the proposed final plat within the conditions noted in Section VI of this report. V. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat (date: 1/12/2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 73 of 664 Page 3 B. Final Plat (date: 4/22/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 74 of 664 Page 4 C. Landscape Plan (dated: 2/28/19) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 75 of 664 Page 5 VI. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division Site Specific Conditions: 1. Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approval associated with this development [H-2018-0004, Development Agreement #2018-07970 (GFI) and #2018-069276 (Costco)]. 2. The applicant shall obtain the City Engineer’s signature on the subject final plat within two years of the City Council approval of the preliminary plat (on or before 4/24/2021), or apply for a time extension, in accord with UDC 11-6B-7. 3. Prior to submittal for the City Engineer’s signature, have the Certificate of Owners and the accompanying acknowledgement signed and notarized. 4. The final plat prepared by KM Engineering stamped on 4/22/2019 by Kelly Kehrer, shall be revised as follows: a. Note #11: Include recorded instrument number. b. Note #12: “. . . easement over drive aisles and parking areas . . .” c. There are two (2) note #15’s on Sheet 4 – the second note #15 should be #16. d. Sheet 1: Include instrument number for right-of-way dedication. e. Sheets 2 and 3: Include recorded instrument numbers for ACHD and City of Meridian easements. f. Depict the street buffer within the residential (R-40 zoned) portion of the development within a common lot maintained by the homeowner’s association in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2. 5. The landscape plan prepared by KM Engineering, dated 2/28/19, shall be revised as follows: a. All internal landscaping and the site plan should be shown in a lighter line type; only street buffer improvements should be shown in a dark line type. 6. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division for the multi-use pathway along W. Chinden Blvd./SH-20/26 prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat; coordinate the details of the easement with Kim Warren, Park’s Department. 7. Up to two (2) building permits for the Costco Wholesale and associated fuel sales facility structures are allowed to be issued on the subject property prior to recordation of the plat. 8. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to application for building permits. 9. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions from the preliminary plat and/or development agreement(s) does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. B. Public Works Site Specific Conditions: 1. Streetlights for this development will be installed with the ACHD project for Ten Mile Rd. and ITD project for Chinden Blvd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 76 of 664 Page 6 2. On Sheet C3.0 of the development plans - Ensure sewer service, serving Lot 9 and immediately upstream of SSMH 5, meets the minimum horizontal separation requirements from proposed SSMH. Sheet C3.0 - Extend 8-inch SS main "to and through", i.e. extend SS main west from SSMH 7 to the property line. Sheet C3.2 - Ensure sewer service, serving Lot 3 and immediately upstream of SSMH 2, meets the minimum horizontal separation requirements from proposed SSMH. General Conditions: 1. Sanitary sewer service to this development is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2. Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 3. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 4. Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. 5. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all incomplete fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, prior to signature on the final plat. 6. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post with the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Surety Agreement with the City of Meridian. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 7. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years. This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 8. In the event that an applicant and/or owner cannot complete non-life, non-safety and non- health improvements, prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat and/or prior to occupancy, a surety agreement may be approved as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 77 of 664 Page 7 9. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 11. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 12. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 13. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-1-4B. 14. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 15. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 16. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 17. At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 18. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer’s expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor’s work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 19. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 20. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 78 of 664 Page 8 21. Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Water Department at (208)888-5242 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources. 22. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment procedures and inspections. 23. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 9-1-28.C.1). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not avail able, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to development plan approval. 24. All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 79 of 664 EIDIAN,!DAHO -- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 D Project File Name/Number: H-2018-0121 Item Title: Development Agreement for Villasport H-2018-0212 with Sadie Creek Commons, LLC (Owner - Developer) Located at the Southwest Corner of E. Ustick Rd. and North Eagle Rd. Meeting Notes: var-c'ye-� 6>(n A-4- 66L I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.D . Presenter: S onya Allen Estimated Time for P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Development Agreement for Villasport (H-2018-0121) with Sadie C reek C ommons, L L C (O wner/D eveloper) located at the Southwest corner of E . Ustick Rd., and N. Eagle Rd. D evelopment Agreement between the City of Meridian and Sadie C reek Commons f or Villasport (H- 2018-0121) C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Development A greement-Villasport A greements / C ontracts 5/21/2019 E xhibit A-Villasport H-2018-0121 E xhibit 5/21/2019 E xhibit B -Villasport H-2018-0121 & VA R H-2019-0032 E xhibit 5/21/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Community Development.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/22/2019 - 9:06 A M Community Development.A lbertson, Michelle Approved 5/22/2019 - 10:17 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 80 of 664 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 1 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 2 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 3 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 4 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 5 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 6 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 7 o f 6 6 4 M e r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 8 8 o f 6 6 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 89 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 90 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FILE NO(S). H-2018-0121; H-2019-0032 - 1 - CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for a Modification to the Development Agreement to Remove the Subject Property from the Original Agreement and Enter into a New Agreement for the Proposed Development; and a Variance to the Minimum Setback Standards Listed in UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 and 11-4-3-2A.2 for Villasport, by Sadie Creek Commons, LLC. Case No(s ). H-2018-0121; H-2019-0032 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 2, 2019 (Findings on April 23, 2019) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the “Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,” codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 219 of 699 EXHIBIT B Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 91 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FILE NO(S). H-2018-0121; H-2019-0032 - 2 - 7. That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council’s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant’s request for a Development Agreement Modification and Variance is hereby approved per the provisions in the Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Development Agreement Duration The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67-6511A. The development agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request. A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the city within six (6) months of the city council granting the modification. A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six (6) month approval period. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, denial of a development application entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of April 2, 2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 220 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 92 of 664 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the '23 day of t r 2019. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOE BORTON VOTED P COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT LUKE CAVENER VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER ANNE LITTLE ROBERTS VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER TY PALMER VOTED_P COUNCIL MEMBER TREG BERNT VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER GENESIS MILAM VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED TIE BREAKER) Mayor Ta y Weerd P Ep AU, vs Attest: O 2 ('ity of g ID1ANi`"` IDAHO Dh'' Jo nso r„+-- 04" 1-1, sem, SEAL the Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By; Qj&ru— 11U Dated: Y -C93 C 619 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FILE NO(S). H-2018-0121; H-2019-0032 -3 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 93 of 664 EXHIBIT A Page 1 HEARING DATE: April 2, 2019 Continued from: 1/22/2019 & 2/19/19 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0121 (MDA); H-2019-0032 VAR) Villasport – MDA, VAR LOCATION: Southwest corner of E. Ustick Rd. and N. Eagle Rd. in the NE ¼ of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E. Parcels: S1105110067; S1105110100 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant requests a modification to the existing Development Agreement (DA) (Inst. 108008770, Sadie Creek Commons) to remove the subject property from the agreement and enter into a new agreement for the proposed development. A Variance is also requested to the minimum setback standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 for outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed to maintain a minimum setback of 100 feet from any abutting residential district; and 11-4-3-2A.2 that restricts an outdoor event or activity center from being located within 50 feet of any property line. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 222 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 94 of 664 Page 2 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary B. Project Area Maps Description Details Page Acreage 11.39 Future Land Use Designation MU -R (mixed -use regional) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Athletic club (i.e. indoor/outdoor entertainment/recreation facility) and spa (i.e. personal service) ; and retail Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning NA Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The Milk Lateral runs along north and east boundaries of site Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: July 18, 2018; 6 attendees History (previous approvals) ROS #6418 created the configuration of these parcels approved by the City in 2004. AZ-05-052 (DA #108008770, Sadie Creek Commons); PP-05-053 and CUP-05-049 expired); VAR-05-022 (right-in/right-out access via Eagle Rd.); MDA-13-005 (amended DA that was never executed & has since expired); A-2018-0361 (PBA –reconfigured 2 existing parcels , ROS #11747 ) Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 223 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 95 of 664 Page 3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Sadie Creek Commons, LLC – 10789 W. Twain Ave. #200, Las Vegas, NV 89135 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group – 462 E. Shore Drive, Ste. 100, Eagle, ID 83616 IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date (MDA) City Council Posting Date (VAR) Legal notice published in newspaper 2/1/2019 3/15/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 1/29/2019 3/12/2019 Nextdoor posting 1/29/2019 3/12/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 2/7/2019 3/21/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS Development Agreement Modification: The development agreement modification proposes to remove the subject property from the terms of the existing development agreement [i.e. Inst. 108008770, AZ-05-052 Sadie Creek Commons] and enter into a new development agreement for the proposed development/site. The previously approved conceptual development plan was for a mixed use development consisting of 150,000 square feet of commercial retail, restaurant and office uses on 15.33 acres of land; three Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 224 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 96 of 664 Page 4 3) accesses were approved via E. Ustick Rd. and one right-in/right-out was approved via N. Eagle Rd. (see Section VII.A). The provisions in the DA pertain to that development plan and is applicable to the subject property as well as the out-parcel at the northeast corner of this site. A new conceptual development plan and building elevations are proposed with the subject application that demonstrate how the property is now proposed to develop. The new plan proposes a 99,000+/- square foot 2-story building for an athletic club and spa and a 15,300+/- square foot retail building; associated parking for the proposed uses is also depicted (see Section VII.B). Note: A concurrent conditional use permit (CUP) application was submitted with the subject MDA application that was approved by the Commission contingent upon Council approval of the MDA application. Since that approval, the Applicant submitted a request for City Council review (H- 2019-0011) of the Commission’s decision on several conditions associated with the CUP; this request will be scheduled on the same agenda before the MDA application. If Council approves any changes to the CUP conditions through the Council Review request, the DA provisions in Section VIII of this report should be updated accordingly. Variance: A Variance is requested to two (2) sections of the UDC as follows: UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 states, “ All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a minimum setback of 100 feet from any abutting residential districts. The playing areas of golf courses, including golf tees, fairways, and greens, are an exception to this standard.” The adult lap pool, concrete pool deck and the outdoor turf area depicted on the site plan are within 100’ of the residential district to the south which adjoins the southern property line of this site. A landscaped common area (7+ feet wide) with a 6-foot tall solid fence and a street separates the site from the adjacent residential properties to the south. The Applicant is also proposing to landscape a 6-foot wide area on the other side of the fence on this site which will assist in buffering the noise and light from the site. The residential zoning in this area is unique in that it stretches to the opposite side of the road from the residential area to the south and includes a common area along the street which abuts this site. Typically, zoning goes to the centerline of adjacent streets. This irregularity creates a wider setback than would normally be required for outdoor recreation uses on this site. Another consideration is if the commercial directly abutted the residential property line(s) without a street separating the uses, the setback would be calculated from the common property line rather than the centerline of the street resulting in a lesser setback. Staff recommends Council examine the intent of this requirement when considering the variance request. The Applicant requests the required setback is reduced as depicted on the site plan in Section VII.C, which can be interpreted several different ways based on the discussion above, as follows: o If measured from the centerline of the street, the setback would be 33 feet to the turf area and 43 feet to the pool deck at its narrowest point; or , o If measured from the residential district, the setback would be 6 feet to the pool deck area and 11 feet to the turf area; or, o If measured from the property line of the nearest residential structure, the setback would be 68 feet to the pool deck at its narrowest point and 100 feet to the turf area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 225 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 97 of 664 Page 5 Staff recommends the Council consider the latter interpretation when making a decision on the Variance request as it best meets the intent of the setback requirement. If Council finds a Variance is appropriate, additional buffering measures such as an 8-foot tall fence or wall and dense landscaping consisting of a mix of conifers and deciduous trees and shrubs should be considered as mitigation. The additional landscaping would also assist in screening the mass of the proposed 37+/- foot tall structure to the residential uses. UDC 11-4-3-2A.2 states, “No outdoor event or activity center shall be located within 50 feet 50’) of any property line and shall operate only between the hours of six o’clock (6:00) AM and eleven o’clock (11:00) PM.” The adult lap pool, concrete pool deck and the outdoor turf area depicted on the site plan are within 50’ of the southern property line at approximately 11 feet for the turf area and 6 feet for the deck area around the pool; the Applicant requests a reduction in the setback accordingly as shown on the site plan in Section VII.C. The same logic discussed above could also be considered by Council for this provision. If the southern boundary of this site directly abutted another buildable lot without a street separating the properties, the area between the property line and the outdoor activity center would actually be less than what is proposed. As proposed, the separation between the residential property line and the outdoor activity center is 68 feet to the pool deck at its narrowest point and 100 feet to the turf area which is much greater than the requirement. Staff recommends the Council consider the intent of the requirement when making a decision on the Variance request. Due to the location of the Milk Lateral, an existing irrigation facility that bisects this site north of the proposed building, the buildable area of the site is constrained. Although the lateral is being piped and shifted further to the north, the topography and slope of the pipe to allow the flow of irrigation water through it is such that the lateral cannot be moved any further to the north to accommodate the required setbacks by shifting the building further to the north than proposed see exhibit in Section VII.C). Additionally, the Applicant states a cross-access easement to Centrepoint Way exists on the east side of the property which further constrains the buildable area. Therefore, the Applicant feels a hardship exists due to the characteristics of the site that make compliance with the setback standards unfeasible. See Applicant’s narrative for more information. Based on the required Findings for Variance requests included in Section IV, the Council should determine if a Variance is appropriate to the above-noted setbacks as requested by the Applicant. A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan ) Mixed-Use Regional (MU-R) The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3-5 in the Comprehensive Plan as shown below. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan ): The proposed development promotes the following action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan: (staff’s analysis in italics) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 226 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 98 of 664 Page 6 Plan for an encourage services like healthcare, daycare, grocery stores and recreational areas to be built within walking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) The proposed athletic club/spa will be located in close proximity to residential uses. Develop indoor/outdoor multiple-use facilities (i.e. recreation center, fairgrounds, etc.) for a variety of recreational, educational, cultural and sports purposes and uses.” (6.01.02D) The proposed indoor/outdoor athletic club will provide for a variety of recreational, educational and sports opportunities to area residents. Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) The outdoor hours of operation of the proposed facility will be limited to 6:00 am 11:00 pm, which should be compatible with adjacent residential uses. Additionally, the outdoor recreation area is required to maintain a minimum setback of 100’ from any abutting residential property line with a home. Require screening and landscape buffers on all development requests that are more intense than adjacent residential properties.” (3.06.01G) A landscape buffer/screening will be provided adjacent to residential properties in accord with UDC standards. C. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed athletic club is classified as an “arts, entertainment or recreation facility, outdoor” and the spa is classified as a “personal service” in UDC 11-1A-1; both are listed as principal permitted uses in the C-G district per UDC Table 11-2B-2. A CUP (H-2018-0121) was recently approved, contingent upon Council approval of the subject MDA application, solely for the proposed hours of operation of the facility because the property abuts a residential use and district in accord with UDC 11-2B-3A.4. The Commission allowed the hours of operation for the athletic club and spa to be from 4:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) for indoor activities and from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm for outdoor activities, with outdoor music limited to the hours between 9:00 am and 10:00 pm. Note: The Applicant has submitted a request for Council review of the Commission’s decision on the CUP application (H-2018-0121) in regard to several UDC standards (see H-2019-0011 for more information). VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement in accord with the provisions in Section VIII; and denial of the proposed Variance based on the Findings in Section IV. Note: Although Staff could make some of the Findings required for the Variance, Staff could not make all of the Findings which is required in order to grant a Variance. Note: The easternmost driveway access via E. Ustick Rd. depicted on the concept plan in Section VII.B requires Council approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3, which limits access via arterial streets when access via a local street is available. In this case, access is available via (2) local streets. If a waiver, is not approved, the site plan should be revised accordingly. Council action is needed on this request. B. The Meridian City Council heard these items on January 22, February 19, and April 2, 2019. At the public hearing, the Council approved the subject MDA and VAR requests. a. Summary of City Council Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group (Applicant’s Representative); Mike Fassler, Villasport; Jeff Bower, Givens-Pursley; Becky Webb; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 227 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 99 of 664 Page 7 ii. In opposition: Jeffrey Vrba, Jackson Square Homeowner’s Association; iii. Commenting: Jared Schofield; Elizabeth Gammon; Scott Baumann; Carrie Gammon; Denise LaFever; Julie Hysmith; Janet Bailey iv. Written testimony: None v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen vi. Other staff commenting on application: Lieutenant Leslie b. Key issue(s) of Public Testimony: i. Not the right location for this type of facility – there are 10-11 fitness centers/gyms within a mile of this site; ii. Against proposed location of outdoor swimming pool and associated noise adjacent to existing homes; iii. Against mass and height of proposed structure in relation to adjacent homes; iv. Against proposed hours of operation (i.e. 5:00 am); v. Concern there is not adequate parking for the site for community events. vi. Traffic concerns generated from the proposed development; c. Key Issues of Discussion by Council: i. Sound mitigation for pump system and development adjacent to residential uses; ii. Traffic impact on adjacent private and residential neighborhood streets and traffic calming for speeding cars on residential streets; iii. How the development area of the site is constrained by the Milk Lateral and an existing access easement; iv. The Findings required in order to grant a Variance. d. Key Council Changes to Staff Recommendation i. City Council approved a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3 for an access driveway via E. Ustick Rd. (strike condition #A.1l in Section VIII); ii. Modification to condition #A.1e in Section VIII to allow the outdoor activity center to be located within 6’ of any property line as proposed with the Variance; modification to the hours of operation from 5:00 AM instead of 6:00 AM; and requirement for the slide associated with the swimming pool to close at 9:00 PM (the pool may stay open until 11:00 PM). iii. Modification to condition #A.1f in Section VIII to allow the setback for outdoor recreation areas abutting residential districts as shown on the site plan approved with the variance (H-2019-0032). iv. Modification to condition #A.1h in Section VIII to reflect Council approval of a waiver to not require the outdoor speaker system to be located 100’ from all residential districts; and to include the Applicant’s agreement to limit the hours of operation of the outdoor speaker system from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 228 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 100 of 664 Page 8 VII. EXHIBITS A. Existing Development Agreement Provisions & Conceptual Development Plan (AZ-05-052, Instrument No. 108008770) Link to full version of Development Agreement: Sadie Creek Promenade AZ-05-052 Applicable Development Agreement Provisions: 4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under City’s Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian Unified Development Code § 11-2B which are herein specified as follows: Construction and development of up to 150,282 square feet of retail/restaurant/ and office uses in a proposed C-G zone on 7.7 acres pertinent to this AZ 05-052 application. The 36.33 acre site, which includes a portion of this project, was approved for annexation with a Development Agreement in April, 2004 under the name of Kissler Annexation file no. AZ 03-018). The DA, instrument no. 104107406, requires that any future use be approved either though a site specific CUP application or a Planned Development. A concept plan for the overall site was submitted with the AZ 05-052 application for informational purposes. This entire project consists of 15.33 acres a preliminary plat and conditional use permit was submitted and approved (PP-05-053, and CUP-05-049) which satisfies the CUP condition of the previous DA agreement. Certificates of Zoning Compliance are required for all buildings in this project. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5. DEVELOPMENT IN CONDITIONAL USE: Owner/Developer has submitted to City an application for conditional use permit site plan dated September 15, 2005, and shall be required to obtain the City’s approval thereof, in accordance to the City’s Zoning and Development Ordinance criteria, therein, provided, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any buildings or improvements on the Property that require a conditional use permit. No new buildings are approved for construction under this conceptual CUP/PD application. All future buildings shall require approval of design review at staff level prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and/or building permit 6. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY : 6.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 1. That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 2. That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 229 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 101 of 664 Page 9 2. That the applicant be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. 3. That any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 4. That prior to the issuance of any certificate of zoning compliance all landscaping shall be constructed along the western property boundary and along Ustick Road to the point of connection with Sadie Creek Avenue. These office lots should include either a permanent easement or be redesigned to include landscaping in common lots including masonry block wall on western boundary. 5. That the maximum square footage of one single building shall not exceed 75,141square feet, which is ½ of the maximum requested of 150,282 square feet 6. That all buildings along the western property boundary shall be single story buildings designed to discourage views and access facing the west, unless required for emergency access. Furthermore, these office lots shall have hours of operation consistent with office operations which have been determined to be 6 am – 10 pm. 7. That the applicant shall redesign the site to meet the 300’ standard separation for drive thru uses with this application or variance is obtained. 8. That all access for Sadie Creek Promenade Subdivision shall be taken from Ustick Road at points determined by ACHD. 9. That Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 of the site plan dated September 15, 2005 are for office uses only. Non retail uses shall be located on these lots. All other lots shall be limited to Office/Retail/Restaurant/Drive thru uses and General Commercial uses listed as permitted in UDC Table 11-2B-2. Any uses (excepting Drive Thru) not listed as permitted shall be subject to conditional approval. 10. That the western most public road referenced to as Sadie Creek Avenue may be renamed as approved by the Ada County Street Naming Committee. The road name has been approved as Centrepoint Way. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 230 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 102 of 664 Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 231 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 103 of 664 Page 11 B. Proposed Concept Plan (dated: 10/18/18) & Building Elevations (dated: 7/17/18) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 232 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 104 of 664 Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 233 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 105 of 664 Page 13 C. Variance Exhibits Relocated Milk Lateral (red line) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 234 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 106 of 664 Page 14 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Development Agreement Modification A new Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of the request for a modification to the existing DA to exclude this property from the existing agreement Inst. 108008770). A new DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the Property Owner(s), and the Developer. A CZC and DES application shall not be submitted to the City until the DA is approved by City Council and recorded. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the new DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting approval of the development agreement modification. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. The subject property shall be excluded from the terms of the Development Agreement recorded as Instrument No. 108008770 for Sadie Creek Commons. b. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations included in Section VII, the conditions of approval of the conditional use permit (H-2018-0121), and the provisions contained herein. c. The future structures and site design submitted with subsequent Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual. d. The athletic club is required to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2, Arts, Entertainment or Recreation Facility, Indoors and Outdoors except as contained herein approved with the variance. e. No outdoor event or activity center, including but not limited to the swimming pools, shall be located within fifty six feet (50 6') of any property line as shown on the site plan approved with the variance (H-2019-0032) and shall operate only between the hours of six five o'clock (6:00 5:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2A.2 with the exception of the water slide associated with the swimming pool which shall close at 9:00 PM (the pool may stay open until 11:00 PM). f. All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any abutting residential districts as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 as shown on the site plan included in Section VII.C approved with the variance (H-2019-0032). With the CUP application, the Commission interpreted the setback measurement to be from any residential property line with a home, rather than from a residential district. g. An outdoor stage or musical venue is prohibited on this site as the site is within 1,000 feet of a residential district and such uses are not allowed, unless approved through a conditional use permit as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 235 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 107 of 664 Page 15 h. Outdoor speaker systems associated with the athletic club (i.e. outdoor entertainment/recreation facility) use are required to be located a minimum of 100 feet from all residential districts, unless waived through approval of a conditional use permit per UDC 11-3A-13. City Council waived this requirement through the Council Review request; however, the Applicant did agree to limit the operation of the outdoor speaker system from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. i. Construct a 6-foot tall masonry screen wall along the west boundary of the site consistent with that constructed on the adjacent property to the south as shown on Detail #4, Sheet L1.50 of the landscape plan included in Section VII.B. j. Retail and restaurant uses shall be allowed as accessory uses to the athletic club and may serve members of the club as well as the public. k. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be granted from this site to the property to the south as well as to the out-parcel to the east (#S1105110025). A recorded copy of said easement(s) shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. l. The proposed driveway access via E. Ustick Rd. is not allowed unless a waiver is approved by City Council to UDC 11-3A-3, which limits access via arterial streets when access via a local street is available. A waiver to UDC 11-3A-3 for an access driveway via E. Ustick Rd. was approved by City Council. m. Direct access via N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 and E. Ustick Rd., other than the accesses approved by City Council with this application, is prohibited as set forth in UDC 11- 3H-4B. n. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within a public use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping is required to be provided within the street buffer along N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4C.3. o. All of the frontage improvements (i.e. street buffers, sidewalks, pedestrian lighting, etc.) on this site along E. Ustick Rd. and N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 shall be installed with the first phase of development. IX. REQUIRED FINDINGS FROM THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (11-5B-4E) The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-5B-4.E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The City Council finds the variance will not grant a right or special privilege because the characteristics of the site warrant the variances. Any development of this site would face the same physical constraints because of the intersecting lateral, cross-access and utility easements. The site characteristics create the need for certain improvements to be concentrated in the southwest portion of the site. The residential zoning to the south is not typical in that it stretches across the street to the back side of the common area/property line instead of the centerline of the street. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 236 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 108 of 664 Page 16 B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; The City Council finds the variance will relieve an undue hardship caused by characteristics of the site; the buildable area is constrained by the Milk Lateral, an existing irrigation facility that runs diagonally across this property. As part of the project, the Milk Lateral is being buried and relocated but due to the topography of the property, the lateral cannot be moved any further north than proposed. For ongoing maintenance purposes, no structure can be placed over the lateral; therefore, parking is proposed in that area. The location of the lateral forces the project improvements to the southern portion of the property. An Idaho Power facility along Ustick Rd. on the north side of the property and a cross-access easement to Centrepoint Way on the east side of the property further constrains the buildable area to the southwest corner of the property. Strict adherence to the setbacks in the applicable specific use standards would result in undue hardship to any development of this property by drastically reducing the buildable area of the property and preventing use of the property for the proposed and allowed use. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The City Council finds granting the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare for the following reasons: the residential district to the south is separated by the property by an existing 6-foot tall wooden fence, mature landscaped trees and a local street; the nearest residential lot is approximately 100 feet from the outdoor lap pool and approximately 60 feet from the outdoor turf area; the lap pool and the turf area will not produce material noise or light and the Applicant is taking steps to mitigate noise through the use of canopies and umbrellas and to mitigate light through the use of directional lamps facing downward and away from the property boundary; an additional 6-foot wide landscape buffer will also be added in connection with the project that will further mitigate noise and light to the surrounding area; the project will be fully fenced along the southern boundary of the site and the uses will be fully contained on the property. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 237 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 109 of 664 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 12/20/2018 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0121 Villasport LOCATION: Southwest corner of E. Ustick Rd. and N. Eagle Rd. in the NE ¼ of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E. Parcels: S1105110067; S1105110100 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant requests a modification to the existing Development Agreement (DA) to remove the subject property from the agreement and enter into a new agreement for the proposed development; and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate an indoor/outdoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility and spa from 5:00 4:00 am to 10:00 midnight (12:00 am) pm for indoor activities and 5:00 am to 11:00 pm for outdoor activities (seasonal) in the C-G zoning district abutting a residential use and district as required by UDC 11-2B-3A.4. Note: The Planning & Zoning Commission is the decision making body on the CUP application; and the City Council is the decision making body on the MDA application. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT A Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 238 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 110 of 664 Page 2 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 11.39 Future Land Use Designation MU-R (mixed-use regional) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped [temporary uses have been operating on this site (i.e. fireworks, Christmas tree sales] Proposed Land Use(s) Athletic club (i.e. indoor/outdoor entertainment/recreation facility) and spa (i.e. personal service) Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning NA Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The Milk Lateral runs along north and east boundaries of site Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: July 18, 2018; 6 attendees History (previous approvals) ROS #6418 created the configuration of these parcels approved by the City in 2004. AZ-05-052 (DA #108008770, Sadie Creek Commons); PP-05-053 and CUP-05-049 expired); VAR-05-022 (right-in/right-out access via Eagle Rd.); A-2018-0361 (PBA – currently in process to reconfigure the 2 existing parcels) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 239 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 111 of 664 Page 3 B. Community Metrics Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 240 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 112 of 664 Page 4 Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Staff report (yes/no) Not yet received Requires ACHD Commission Action yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Traffic Impact Study (yes/no) Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access Existing Road Network Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers Proposed Road Improvements Distance to nearest City Park (+ size) Distance to other key services Fire Service Distance to Fire Station 1.2 miles (Fire Station #3) Fire Response Time 3 minutes (under ideal circumstances) Resource Reliability 80% (does not meet target goal of 85%) Risk Identification 4 (current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project) Accessibility Meets all required road widths and turnarounds Special/resource needs Requires an aerial device; the closest truck company is 9 minutes travel time (under ideal conditions). This need can be met in the required timeframe if a truck company is required. In the event of a hazmat event, high angle rescue or water rescue, mutual aid will be required. In the event of a structure fire, an additional truck company will be required which will require additional time delays as they are not available in the City. Water Supply 1500 gallons/minute for 2 hours Police Service Distance to Police Station 3.3 miles Police Response Time 3.59 Priority 3; 7.59 Priority 2; 12.56 Priority 1 Calls for Service 946 – mostly related to narcotic violations of calls for service split by priority 1.4% Priority 3; 67.9% Priority 2; 28.1% Priority 1; 2.6% Priority 0 Accessibility No issues Specialty/resource needs No additional needs required Crimes Crashes 100 crashes within a mile of site (11/1/17 – 10/31/18) Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services Sewer Shed Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s WRRF Declining Balance Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 241 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 113 of 664 Page 5 C. Project Area Maps Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Water Distance to Water Services Pressure Zone Estimated Project Water ERU’s Water Quality Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Impacts/Concerns Grocery Store 0.8 mile COMPASS (Communities in Motion 2040 2.0) 250+/- new jobs Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 242 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 114 of 664 Page 6 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Sadie Creek Commons, LLC – 10789 W. Twain Ave. #200, Las Vegas, NV 89135 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group – 462 E. Shore Drive, Ste. 100, Eagle, ID 83616 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Legal notice published in newspaper 11/30/2018 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 11/27/2018 Nextdoor posting 11/27/2018 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 12/7/2018 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The development agreement modification proposes to remove the subject property from the terms of the existing development agreement [i.e. Inst. #108008770, AZ-05-052 Sadie Creek Commons] and enter into a new development agreement for the proposed development. The previously approved conceptual development plan was for a mixed use development consisting of 150,000 square feet of commercial retail, restaurant and office uses (see Section VII.A). The provisions in the DA pertain to that development plan and specifically this site. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 243 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 115 of 664 Page 7 A new conceptual development plan and building elevations are proposed with the subject application that demonstrates how the property is proposed to develop. The new plan proposes a 99,000+/- square foot 2-story building for an athletic club and spa and a 15,300+/- square foot retail building; associated parking for the proposed uses is also depicted (see Section VII.B). A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is proposed to operate an indoor/outdoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility and spa from 5:00 4:00 am to 10:00 midnight (12:00 am) pm for indoor activities and 5:00 am to 11:00 pm for outdoor activities (seasonal) in accord with UDC 11-2B-3A.4. The UDC limits business hours of operation in the C-G district when the property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours of operation may be requested through a CUP. This property abuts a residential use and district to the south, thus the reason for the request. A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Mixed-Use Regional (MU-R) The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3-5 in the Comprehensive Plan as shown below. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): The proposed development promotes the following action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan: Plan for an encourage services like healthcare, daycare, grocery stores and recreational areas to be built within walking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) Develop indoor/outdoor multiple-use facilities (i.e. recreation center, fairgrounds, etc.) for a variety of recreational, educational, cultural and sports purposes and uses.” (6.01.02D) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 244 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 116 of 664 Page 8 Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) Require screening and landscape buffers on all development requests that are more intense than adjacent residential properties.” (3.06.01G) C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures or improvements on this site. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed athletic club is classified as an “arts, entertainment or recreation facility, outdoor” and the spa is classified as a “personal service” in UDC 11-1A-1; both are listed as principal permitted uses in the C-G district per UDC Table 11-2B-2. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed athletic club is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2, Arts, Entertainment or Recreation Facility, Indoors and Outdoors, as follows: A. General Standards: 1. All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any abutting residential districts. The playing areas of golf courses, including golf tees, fairways, and greens, are an exception to this standard. (Ord. 07-1325, 7-10-2007) The outdoor recreation area as shown on the site plan is within 100’ of the abutting residential district to the south; the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should be revised to depict the recreation area at least 100’ from the residential district in accord with this requirement. 2. No outdoor event or activity center shall be located within fifty feet (50') of any property line and shall operate only between the hours of six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. The site plan depicts the pool areas within 50’ of the northern and southern property lines. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should be revised to comply with this requirement. Note: The proposed property boundary adjustment will alleviate this issue on the north boundary. 3. Accessory uses including, but not limited to, retail, equipment rental, restaurant and drinking establishments, may be allowed if designed to serve patrons of the use only. The Applicant’s narrative states the “VillaCafe” located near the front lobby will serve both members and the public. Although the specific use standards don’t support accessory uses that serve the public, because the C-G district allows retail and restaurant uses as principal permitted uses, Staff is amenable to those uses serving both members and the public as a provision of the DA. 4. Outdoor speaker systems shall comply with section 11-3A-13, "Outdoor Speaker Systems", of this title, which states, “Any outdoor speaker system associated with the use shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from all residential districts. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed within a residential district. These standards may be waived through approval of a conditional use permit.” The Applicant should comply with this requirement. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 245 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 117 of 664 Page 9 B. Additional Standards for Swimming Pools: Any outdoor swimming pool shall be completely enclosed within a six foot (6') non-scalable fence that meets the requirements of the building code in accord with title 10, chapter 1, of this code. A 6-foot tall non-scalable fence should be depicted on the site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that complies with this requirement. D. Additional Standards for Outdoor Stage or Musical Venue: Any use with a capacity of one hundred (100) seats or more or within one thousand feet (1,000') of a residence or a residential district shall be subject to approval of a conditional use permit. (Ord. 05-1170, 8- 30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)” Because a residential district and uses exist to the south within 1,000 feet, an outdoor stage or musical venue is not allowed, unless otherwise approved through a subsequent conditional use permit. F. Outdoor Speaker Systems: Outdoor speaker systems associated with the use are required to be located a minimum of 100 feet from all residential districts, unless waived through approval of a conditional use permit per UDC 11-3A-13. If outdoor speakers are proposed, they should be depicted on the site plan outside of the 100 foot area. G. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Future development should comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G district. H. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed to be provided to the site via two (2) accesses from E. Ustick Rd., an arterial street – one via N. Centrepoint Way, an existing local street; and one via a new driveway in alignment with N. Cajun Ln. to the south. Access is also available from the south from Eagle Rd. via E. Seville Ln. from Cajun Ln. Note: The new access driveway via Ustick Rd. does not lie entirely on this property; therefore, the proposed location relies on approval from the adjacent property owner – in the absence of this, the driveway will need to be shifted to the west to be entirely on this site. The UDC (11-3A-3) limits access to arterial streets when access via a local street is available unless approved by City Council. Because access to this site is available via two (2) local streets (i.e. N. Centrepoint Way and N. Cajun Ln.), Council approval of this access is required. Without Council approval, the access should not be allowed and the site plan should be revised accordingly. A cross-access easement exists to this site from N. Cajun Ln., the private street to the south via an easement depicted on the Bienville Square Subdivision plat (Inst. #106169335; #109001537). A cross-access easement should be granted from this site to the property to the south as well as to the out-parcel to the east (#S1105110025). I. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided on the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B per the dimensions shown in Table 11-3C-5. In commercial districts, a minimum of one vehicle space is required for every 500 square feet of gross floor area. Bicycle parking is also required to be provided at one space for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 246 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 118 of 664 Page 10 Based on the overall square footage of the structures proposed (i.e. 114,300), a minimum of 229 vehicle spaces and 9 bicycle parking spaces are required to be provided. A total of 548 vehicle spaces are proposed with 22 bicycle parking spaces in excess of UDC standards. J. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): A segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system (sidewalk) exists within this site along the west side of N. Centrepoint Way in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. A detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within a public use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping is required to be provided within the street buffer along N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4C.3. K. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): A detached 5-foot wide sidewalk is required along E. Ustick Rd., an arterial street, east of N. Centrepoint Way (a detached sidewalk exists along Ustick west of Centrepoint); attached 5-foot wide sidewalks are required along all local streets, including N. Centrepoint Way in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. Note: An asphalt pathway exists along each side of N. Centrepoint Way; no sidewalk/pathway exists along E. Pickard Ln./St. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is required in lieu of a sidewalk along N. Eagle Rd./SH 55. L. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): All parkways should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. The parkway that exists between the curb and sidewalk along Ustick Rd. west of Centrepoint is currently gravel; this area will need to be improved in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. M. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 and E. Ustick Rd., both entryway corridors; and 10-foot wide street buffers are required along local streets as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3. All street buffers are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. There are no existing trees on the site being removed that require mitigation. N. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Milk Lateral runs along the north and east boundaries of this site. The Applicant proposes to re-route and pipe the facility in accord with UDC 11-3A-6. O. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): There is an existing 6-foot tall solid wood fence along the southern boundary of the site that is owned by the adjacent property owner and is proposed to remain. A 6-foot tall masonry screen wall is proposed along the west boundary adjacent to residential uses to match that on the property to the south as shown on Sheet L1.50 of the landscape plan, detail 4. P. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII-B Below for Public Works comments/conditions. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 247 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 119 of 664 Page 11 Q. Pressurized Irrigation (11-3A-15) An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided within the development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. R. Storm Drainage (11-3A-18) An adequate storm drainage system shall be required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City. S. Structure and Design Standards (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the future athletic club as shown in Section VII.B. Final design of the structure should be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Parking lots for properties greater than 2 acres in size should not have more than 50% of the total off-street parking area for the site located between the building façade and the abutting streets; as an alternative, the parking area should be screened by berms, landscaping, walls, architectural elements or a combination of these elements to produce an appropriate buffer adjacent to public spaces and roadways as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 19B.3. Traffic calming measures should be provided where vehicle circulation is directed in front of the building entries. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of 5 feet in width is required to be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s) and be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. T. Certificate of Zoning Compliance/Design Review A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. Plans submitted with these applications should comply with UDC standards and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement and the conditional use permit applications in accord with the provisions in Section VII.A. VIII. Note: The driveway access via E. Ustick Rd. requires Council approval of a waiver to UDC 11- 3A-3, which limits access via arterial streets when access via a local street is available. In this case, access is available via (2) local streets. If a waiver is not approved, the site plan should be revised accordingly. Council action is needed on this request. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on December 20, 2018. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group; Mike Fassler ii. In opposition: None Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 248 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 120 of 664 Page 12 iii. Commenting: Jared Schofield; Steve Grant; Shaun Wardle; Jeff Vrba; David Park, Jackson Square HOA iv. Written testimony: David Durfee v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen vi. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issues of Public Testimony: i. Objection to hours of operation before 6:00 am; ii. Concerns pertaining to the adequacy of the buffer (trees/landscaping will take a long time to mature) along the west boundary of the site and parking lot lighting impacting adjacent residential uses; iii. Concern pertaining to an increase in traffic in this area and public safety; iv. Objection to the proposed hours of operation – in favor of 9:00 am to 10:00 pm with outdoor speakers limited to 9:00 pm; v. Not in favor of the proposed height of the building, request for a shorter building that would impact adjacent residential neighbors less; vi. Concern pertaining to noise generated from the proposed use and its impact on residential neighbors. c. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. The proposed hours of operation for the outdoor activity center and outdoor speakers; ii. Requirement for the separation between outdoor recreation areas to be measured from the property line of adjacent residential structures rather than from the residential zoning district. d. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. Strike the last sentence in condition #2.1k in Section VIII.A pertaining to construction of an off-site sidewalk along Cajun Way at the recommendation of Staff since there will likely be a driveway in that location in the future. ii. Modify condition #2.1a in Section VIII.A to reflect the Commission’s interpretation of UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 to reflect setback measurement from any residential property line with a home, rather than from a residential district; iii. Modify condition #2.2 in Section VIII.A to adjust the hours of operation as approved by the Commission; iv. Include a new condition requiring the Applicant to work with Planning Staff to create a sound buffer to mitigate some of the noise concerns between the pool area and neighboring homes (#2.9 in Section VIII.A). v. Include a new condition requiring the Applicant to work with Planning Staff and ACHD to create a crosswalk for pedestrian access to the facility from the west parking lot (#2.10 in Section VIII.A). C. City Council: The City Council heard the request for City Council review of the Planning & Zoning Commission’s decision on the conditional use permit on April 2, 2019. At the public hearing, the Council moved to approve the subject CR request. Concurrently, City Council heard a request for a Development Agreement Modification & Variance (H-2018-0121; H-2019- 0032). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 249 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 121 of 664 Page 13 1. Council approved a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3 for an access driveway via E. Ustick Rd. strike condition #2.4 in Section VIII); 2. Modify condition #A.2.1d in Section VIII to allow setback proposed with Variance for outdoor activity centers; change to hours of operation for outdoor activities to 5:00 AM instead of 6:00 AM; and the slide associated with the swimming pool to close at 9:00 PM. 3. Modify condition #A.2.1a in Section VIII to allow the setback for outdoor recreation areas abutting residential districts as shown on the site plan approved with the variance H-2019-0032). 4. Modification to condition #A.2.1c in Section VIII to reflect Council approval of a waiver to not require the outdoor speaker system to be located 100’ from all residential districts; and to include the Applicant’s agreement to limit the hours of operation of the outdoor speaker system from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. 5. Modification to #A.2.2 in Section VIII to reflect approval of outdoor activities commencing at 5:00 AM instead of 6:00 AM. VII. EXHIBITS A. Existing Development Agreement Provisions & Conceptual Development Plan (AZ-05-052, Instrument No. 108008770) Link to full version of Development Agreement: Sadie Creek Promenade AZ-05-052 Applicable Development Agreement Provisions: 4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under City’s Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian Unified Development Code § 11-2B which are herein specified as follows: Construction and development of up to 150,282 square feet of retail/restaurant/ and office uses in a proposed C-G zone on 7.7 acres pertinent to this AZ 05-052 application. The 36.33 acre site, which includes a portion of this project, was approved for annexation with a Development Agreement in April, 2004 under the name of Kissler Annexation file no. AZ 03-018). The DA, instrument no. 104107406, requires that any future use be approved either though a site specific CUP application or a Planned Development. A concept plan for the overall site was submitted with the AZ 05-052 application for informational purposes. This entire project consists of 15.33 acres a preliminary plat and conditional use permit was submitted and approved (PP-05-053, and CUP-05-049) which satisfies the CUP condition of the previous DA agreement. Certificates of Zoning Compliance are required for all buildings in this project. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 250 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 122 of 664 Page 14 5. DEVELOPMENT IN CONDITIONAL USE: Owner/Developer has submitted to City an application for conditional use permit site plan dated September 15, 2005, and shall be required to obtain the City’s approval thereof, in accordance to the City’s Zoning and Development Ordinance criteria, therein, provided, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any buildings or improvements on the Property that require a conditional use permit. No new buildings are approved for construction under this conceptual CUP/PD application. All future buildings shall require approval of design review at staff level prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and/or building permit 6. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 1. That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 2. That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. 2. That the applicant be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. 3. That any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 4. That prior to the issuance of any certificate of zoning compliance all landscaping shall be constructed along the western property boundary and along Ustick Road to the point of connection with Sadie Creek Avenue. These office lots should include either a permanent easement or be redesigned to include landscaping in common lots including masonry block wall on western boundary. 5. That the maximum square footage of one single building shall not exceed 75,141square feet, which is ½ of the maximum requested of 150,282 square feet 6. That all buildings along the western property boundary shall be single story buildings designed to discourage views and access facing the west, unless required for emergency access. Furthermore, these office lots shall have hours of operation consistent with office operations which have been determined to be 6 am – 10 pm. 7. That the applicant shall redesign the site to meet the 300’ standard separation for drive thru uses with this application or variance is obtained. 8. That all access for Sadie Creek Promenade Subdivision shall be taken from Ustick Road at points determined by ACHD. 9. That Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 of the site plan dated September 15, 2005 are for office uses only. Non retail uses shall be located on these lots. All other lots shall be limited to Office/Retail/Restaurant/Drive thru uses and General Commercial uses listed as permitted in UDC Table 11-2B-2. Any uses (excepting Drive Thru) not listed as permitted shall be subject to conditional approval. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 251 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 123 of 664 Page 15 10. That the western most public road referenced to as Sadie Creek Avenue may be renamed as approved by the Ada County Street Naming Commi ttee. The road name has been approved as Centrepoint Way. B. Proposed Concept Plan (dated: 10/18/18), Dimensioned Site Plan (dated: 4/2/19) & Building Elevations (dated: 7/17/18) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 252 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 124 of 664 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 253 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 125 of 664 Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 254 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 126 of 664 Page 18 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING Note: The following section has been removed from the CUP Findings as there is a separate Findings document for the Development Agreement modification application. 1. Development Agreement Modification 1.1 A new Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of the request for a modification to the existing DA to exclude this property from the existing agreement Inst. 108008770). A new DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s), and the developer. The existing DA shall be amended to remove the subject property from the agreement. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the new DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting approval of the development agreement modification. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. The athletic club is required to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2, Arts, Entertainment or Recreation Facility, Indoors and Outdoors. c. No outdoor event or activity center shall be located within fifty feet (50') of any property line and shall operate only between the hours of six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2A.2. d. An outdoor stage or musical venue is prohibited on this site as the site is within 1,000 feet of a residential district and such uses are not allowed, unless approved through a conditional use permit as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2C. e. Outdoor speaker systems associated with the athletic club (i.e. outdoor entertainment/recreation facility) use are required to be located a minimum of 100 feet from all residential districts, unless waived through approval of a conditional use permit per UDC 11-3A-13. f. Construct a 6-foot tall masonry screen wall along the west boundary of the site consistent with that constructed on the adjacent property to the south as shown on Detail #4, Sheet L1.50 of the landscape plan included in Section VII.B. g. Retail and restaurant uses shall be allowed as accessory uses to the athletic club and may serve members of the club as well as the public. h. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be granted for access from this property to N. Cajun Ln./E. Picard Ln. to the south and to the out-parcel to the east (Parcel S1105110025). A recorded copy of said easement(s) shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. i. The proposed driveway access via E. Ustick Rd. is not allowed unless a waiver is approved by City Council to UDC 11-3A-3, which limits access via arterial streets when access via a local street is available. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 255 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 127 of 664 Page 19 j. Direct access via N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 is prohibited as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4B. 2. Conditional Use Permit 2.1 The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised to comply with the following conditions: a. All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any abutting residential districts as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2A.1 as shown on the site plan approved with the variance included in Section VII.B (H-2019-0032). The Commission interpreted the setback measurement to be from any residential property line with a home, rather than from a residential district. b. Depict/label a 6-foot tall masonry screen wall along the west boundary of the site consistent with that shown on Detail #4, Sheet L1.50 of the landscape plan. c. If an outdoor speaker system(s) is proposed, the location of such shall be depicted on the plans at least 100 feet from all residential districts, unless waived through approval of a conditional use permit per UDC 11-3A-13. City Council waived this requirement with the Council Review request; however, the Applicant did agree to limit the operation of the outdoor speaker system from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. d. The outdoor event or activity center, which includes but is not limited to the swimming pools, shall not be located within fifty six feet (50 6') of any property line as shown on the site plan approved with the variance (H-2019-0032) and shall operate only between the hours of six five o'clock (65:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2A.2 with the exception of the water slide associated with the swimming pool shall close at 9:00 P.M. (the pool may stay open until 11:00 P.M.). e. The outdoor swimming pools shall be completely enclosed within a six foot (6') non-scalable fence that meets the requirements of the building code in accord with title 10, chapter 1, of Meridian City Code as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2B. f. Depict a detached 5-foot wide sidewalk along E. Ustick Rd., an arterial street, east of N. Centrepoint Way; and an attached 5-foot wide sidewalk along N. Centrepoint Way, a local street, in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. An attached sidewalk shall also be required along the north/south driveway via Ustick Rd. if the access via Ustick is approved by City Council. g. Parking lot design shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19B.3a, which requires no more than 50% of the total off-street parking area for the site to be located between building facades and abutting streets. h. Traffic calming measures shall be provided where vehicle circulation is directed in front of the building entries. i. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of 5 feet in width is required to be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s) and be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. j. A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along E. Ustick Rd. and N. Eagle Rd., entryway corridors, in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3; landscaping is required Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 256 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 128 of 664 Page 20 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Correct the calculations table to reflect the required width. k. A pedestrian walkway shall be extended from the sidewalk along the east side of N. Cajun Way along the driveway into this site to the main building entrance. Note: There is a 30+/- foot long gap in the sidewalk along N. Cajun Way off-site to the south that should be completed with this development with consent from the adjacent property owner in order to provide a continuous pedestrian connection. l. Depict a 25-foot wide buffer to the residential use along the south boundary of the site on the west side of Centrepoint Way as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C. m. Depict landscaping within the parkway area along Ustick Rd. west of Centrepoint Way in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. 2.2 The hours of operation of the athletic club and spa are limited to the hours between 5:00 4:00 am and 10:00 midnight (12:00 am) pm for indoor activities and 6 5:00 am to 11:00 pm for outdoor activities, with outdoor music limited to the hours between 9:00 am and 10 9:00 pm as approved with this application. 2.3 A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within a public use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping is required to be provided within the street buffer along N. Eagle Rd./SH 55 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4C.3. 2.4 The proposed driveway access via E. Ustick Rd. is not allowed unless a waiver is approved by City Council to UDC 11-3A-3, which limits access via arterial streets when access via a local street is available. Council review of this access took place with the associated MDA application; Council approved a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3 for an access driveway via E. Ustick Rd. 2.5 A cross-access easement shall be granted from this site to the property to the south as well as to the out-parcel to the east (#S1105110025). A copy of the recorded easement(s) shall be submitted with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 2.6 The property boundary adjustment (#A-2018-0361) application shall receive final approval prior to submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 2.7 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. Plans submitted with these applications should comply with UDC standards and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. 2.8 The conditional use permit is approved contingent upon City Council approval of the associated modification to the Development Agreement. 2.9 The Applicant shall work with Planning Staff to create a sound buffer that will mitigate some of the noise concerns between the pool area and neighboring homes. 2.10 The Applicant shall work with Planning Staff and ACHD to create a crosswalk for pedestrian access to the facility from the west parking lot. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 257 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 129 of 664 Page 21 B. Public Works 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat and/or building permit application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.4 Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years. This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.6 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.7 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.8 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.9 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.10 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-1-4B. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.11 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 258 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 130 of 664 Page 22 facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.12 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.13 Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer’s expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor’s work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 2.14 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.15 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.16 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Water Department at (208)888-5242 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources. 2.17 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment procedures and inspections. 2.18 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 9-1-28.C.1). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to development plan approval. 2.19 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 259 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 131 of 664 Page 23 shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. C. Fire Department http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/157920/Page1.aspx D. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=158376 E. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=158270 F. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/158532/Page1.aspx G. Ada County Highway District (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=160216&dbid=0 IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6) Required Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and development regulations of the C-G district if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII (see Analysis Section V for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds that the proposed use will be consistent and harmonious with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation of MU-R for this site if the site is developed and the use conducted in accord with the conditions listed in Section VIII. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in Section VIII of this report, the proposed use of the property should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in Section VIII of this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 260 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 132 of 664 Page 24 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The Commission finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services as applicable. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The Commission finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Commission finds the proposed use will generate additional traffic in the area but should not involve activities that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare of the area. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) The Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use. Further, the Commission finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda April 23, 2019 – Page 261 of 699Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 133 of 664 �/rE IDIZ IAN,'±-- �J CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 E Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Recycled Water User Agreement Between City of Meridian (Public Works) and Extra Space Storage. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.E . Presenter: Laurelei M cVey Estimated Time for P resentation: 1 minute Title of I tem - Public Works: Recycled Water User Agreement between the C ity of M eridian and Extra S pace S torage C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Recycled Water Agreement - with attachments A greements / C ontracts 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate L egal.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 9:50 A M L egal.B aird, Ted Approved 5/23/2019 - 4:24 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 134 of 664 RECORDING REQUESTED BYAND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Broadv✓ay Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2019-045045 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=9 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 05/29/2019 11:37 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE RECYCLED WATER USE, AGREEMENT This RECYCLED WATER USE AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") made this day of 20A, -20+8 -,by and between Extra Space Storage (3959 N Ten Mile Rd, Meridi D) ("User") and the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the state of Idaho (COV"). WkIEREAS, municipalities that typically discharge wastewater to the lower basin of the Boise River have been required by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality ("DEQ") to reduce the discharge of nutrients to the lower basin of the Boise River, and as a partial response, City has identified, as one of City's environmentally -responsible Comprehensive Plan goals, die 'use. of recycled water throughout City (die terms "Recycled", "Reclaimed", and "Reuse" may be used interchangeably, and all refer to the City's Class A Reclaimed Water); WHEREAS, City has worked to implement this Comprehensive Plan goal by establishing a state-of-the-art wastewater treatment and water reclamation facility; WHEREAS, Idaho DEQ has issued a Municipal Wastewater Reuse Permit, identified as Municipal Wastewater Reuse Permit No. M-215-03 (the "Permit"), which allows City to use the City's recycled water and allows City to contract with other parties for the use of the City's recycled water; WHEREAS, the City uses recycled water for land application option for Class A effluent at various locations as specified by allowable uses in the Permit, which will continue to conserve a significant amount of ground water and reduce City's discharge flows into surface waters; WHEREAS, City has constructed and operates a delivery system capable of delivering to User recycled water meeting the quality standards set forth herein; and WHEREAS, User intends to construct and operate an onsite private recycled water system in connection with landscape irrigation (insert other uses here) for the property described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"); NOW, THE REFORE, for and in consideration of the recitals above which are incorporated below, the mutual covenants set forth herein, as well as in consideration of continued receipt of recycled water and in further consideration of such other values as may inure to City and User feonr the delivery and use of recycled water, City hereby agrees to deliver and. User hereby agrees to receive recycled water on the following terms and conditions, 1. No Charge for Reeycled Water. The cost to be paid by User for recycled water delivered by City as provided further herein shall be $0,00 (zero dollars). Whenever recycled water is utilized by the User and then returned to the sanitary sewer (examples: toilet flushing, car wash, eto,), the User will be charged the standard City rates for sewer use for that volume of water. User acknowledges that City may, in the future, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 136 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 137 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 138 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 139 of 664 (m) Counterparts, This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly approved and executed this Recycled Water Use Agreement as of the date first written above. USER: Extra Space Storage TV &s of L �!b 6 rl (Name, Title) I No Ab'da r,'WQr .ry IDONNA PORRITT a Notary Public State of Utah Comm, No. 643147 4_ My Commission Expires on 7 t Feb 3, 2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN: BY. ammy de eerd, Mayor CHARLENE WAY COMMISSION 067390 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF IDAHO MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 3/28/22 STATE OF 1V F1^ ) ss: County of 5o ,1+ 1 r- e- ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this Z191- day of Dy -q, before the undersigned, a Notary Public in the State of4dat".A— personally appeared T'S 5 +-dkes , proven to me to be the person who executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for4dahs-- l/� ►�t— Residing at -,;&A* )-. k L, My Commission Expires: V - o 1 ^ Wiry of w Attest: Yl C lUTAM- son, City Clerk IDAHO SEAL STATE OF ID IO ss County of Ada ) I �IREBY CERTIFY that on this 98.1 day of , 2019 before the undersigned, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and Chris Johnson, known or identified to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument on behalf of the City of Meridian, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seat the day and year in this certificate first above written. UwwilLkPA' Notary Public for Idaho Residing at-.�nAA I AAk , Idaho My commission expires: 3 -LL'g EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property Parcel: 80434417201 Year: 2018 Parcel Status: Active in 2018 Primary Owner. CITADEL STORAGE LLC Zone Code: I -L Total Acres: 9.660 Tax Code Area: 242 Property Description: NE4SE4 SEC 34 4N 1W 417200-14 MGUER972708 98-63-307B Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 141 of 664 EXHIBIT B Site Plan Depicting Point of Delivery of Recycled Water Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 142 of 664 1UNr r4-.4xHIBIT C Recycled Water Signage Text and Location CAUTtON WOOAM W" 00 NM DONK Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 143 of 664 EIDIAN?- H� CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 F Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Finance Department: April 2019 City Financial Report Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.F. Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - F inance Department: April 2019 City Financial Report C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate City Financial Report - A pril 2019 C over Memo 5/22/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate F inance.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 9:48 A M F inance.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 2:47 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 144 of 664 REPORT NAME PAGE # General Fund Balance 2 Enterprise Fund Balance 3 Investment Graphs 4 WATER - Budget to Actual Comparison 5 WWTP - Budget to Actual Comparison 6 Public Works/Billing Budget to Actual Comparison 7 Enterprise Fund - Budget to Actual Comparison 8 Enterprise Fund - Graphs 9 Utility Sales Revenue Comparison 10 General Fund Expenditures - Budget to Actual Comparison 11 General Fund - Graphs 12 General Fund Revenue - Budget to Actual Comparison 13 Community Development - Forecast 14 Community Development - Budget to Actual Comparison 15 Community Development - Graphs 16 Impact Fund - Summary 17 Overtime Graphs 18 Volunteer Hours 19 Vacant Positions 20 Internal Transfers 21 Revenue & Expense Details 22 - 60 Table of Contents FINANCE REPORT April 2019 CITY of MERIDIAN Month 7 of FY2019 (Oct 1 - Sep 30) 1 of 60 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 145 of 664 CITY of MERIDIAN FY2019 General Fund Balance Projection (based on approved Budget) As of 5/17/2019 Unrestricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted BUDGET Based Fund Balance PROJECTION Fund 01 Fund 07 Fund 07 Fund 07 Fund 08 Fund 55 General Fund Parks - Impact Fire - Impact Police - Impact Public Safety Capital Improve. Total Unrestricted Fund Balance As of 9/30/18 39,090,580 $ 4,844,596 $ 6,382,796 $ 1,855,202 $ 1,397,845 $ 10,815,380 $ 64,386,399 $ Current Year Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Revenue 52,656,602 $ 1,504,619 $ 854,092 $ 215,573 $ -$ 2,000 $ 55,232,886 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Ops Expenses 51,297,450 $ -$ 20,000 $ -$ -$ -$ 51,317,450 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Cap Expenses 2,368,268 $ 708,000 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,076,268 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Transfers (2,798,794) $ -$ -$ -$ (308,081) $ (154,040) $ (3,260,915) $ Beg FY19 Current Yr NET Revenues (Expenditures) 1,789,678 $ 796,619 $ 834,092 $ 215,573 $ 308,081 $ 156,040 $ 4,100,083 $ Net Projected Fund Balance 40,880,258 $ 5,641,215 $ 7,216,888 $ 2,070,775 $ 1,705,926 $ 10,971,420 $ 68,486,482 $ FY2019 Amendments Charlie Rountree Field Improvements 58,500 $ 58,500 $ 9 Zoll AED Pro Recall 13,401 $ 13,401 $ CDBG Admin Cap Funding 6,252 $ 6,252 $ Street Light Maintenance and Underground Locating 86,027 $ 86,027 $ Fire Station 6 66,300 $ 1,439,191 $ 1,505,491 $ Fire Station 4 Fire Alarm Panel System Replacement 11,000 $ 11,000 $ Mechanical Program 727,108 $ 727,108 $ Replacement of CID Dodge Avenger Unit# 26 29,000 $ 29,000 $ Field Services Supervisor 10 $ 10 $ Solid Waste Coordinator 10 $ 10 $ SWAC Projects 27,458 $ 27,458 $ IHS Animal Control Contract 9,528 $ 9,528 $ Shooting Range Membership 59,000 $ 59,000 $ -$ Total Amendments 1,093,594 $ -$ 1,439,191 $ -$ -$ -$ 2,532,785 $ Current Yr NET change to fund balance Rev (Exp) 696,084 $ 796,619 $ (605,099) $ 215,573 $ 308,081 $ 156,040 $ 1,567,298 $ Net Fund Balance after Amendments 39,786,664 $ 5,641,215 $ 5,777,697 $ 2,070,775 $ 1,705,926 $ 10,971,420 $ 65,953,697 $ Carryforward Operating 758,471 $ 30,800 $ 18,840 $ 6,170 $ -$ -$ 814,281 $ Carryforward Capital 3,259,539 $ 2,057,257 $ 4,560,196 $ -$ 3,011,953 $ 12,888,945 $ Carryfoward Adjustment (1,974,956) $ (1,876,227) $ (849,310) $ (1,971) $ -$ (1,600) $ (4,704,064) $ FY19 Comm Dev Transfer 3,251,404 $ (3,251,404) $ -$ FY19 Public Safety Fund Transfer -$ -$ -$ Total Carryforwards 5,294,458 $ 211,830 $ 3,729,726 $ 4,199 $ -$ (241,051) $ 8,999,162 $ Net Projected Fund Balance after Amendments & Carryforwards 34,492,206 $ 5,429,385 $ 2,047,971 $ 2,066,576 $ 1,705,926 $ 11,212,472 $ 56,954,535 $ Operating Reserves - 4 months 17,410,315 $ 17,410,315 $ Benefits Reserve 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ Net Fund Balance (Projected using Budget $) after Reserves 15,581,891 $ 5,429,385 $ 2,047,971 $ 2,066,576 $ 1,705,926 $ 11,212,472 $ 38,044,220 $ Unrestricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted ACTUAL NET FUND BALANCE as of 4/30/2019 Fund 01 Fund 07 Fund 07 Fund 07 Fund 08 Fund 55 General Fund Parks - Impact Fire - Impact Police - Impact Public Safety Public Safety Total Unrestricted Fund Balance as of 09/30/18 39,090,580 $ 4,844,596 $ 6,382,796 $ 1,855,202 $ 1,397,845 $ 10,815,380 $ 64,386,399 $ FYTD Actual Revenues 33,116,319 $ 1,911,702 $ 1,449,405 $ 470,623 $ 19,985 $ 154,184 $ 37,122,218 $ FYTD Actual Operating Expenses 28,377,878 $ 22,180 $ 12,882 $ 4,168 $ -$ -$ 28,417,108 $ FYTD Actual Capital Expenses 1,260,967 $ 594,280 $ 555,118 $ -$ -$ 1,397,064 $ 3,807,429 $ FYTD Actual General Fund Transfers (4,856,251) $ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,251,404 $ (1,604,847) $ ACTUAL NET FUND BALANCE as of 4/30/2019 37,711,803 $ 6,139,838 $ 7,264,201 $ 2,321,657 $ 1,417,830 $ 12,823,904 $ 70,888,927 $ NOTE: Budget Based Fund Balance reflects if ALL approved spend for the year occurs by 09/30/19 Actual YTD Fund Balance reflects actual spend to date, no future spend or reserves included 2of2 Gen Fund BalanceMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 146 of 664 CITY of MERIDIAN FY2019 Enterprise Fund Balance Projection (based on approved Budget) As of 5/17/2019 Unrestricted BUDGET Based Fund Balance PROJECTION Fund 60 Enterprise Unrestricted Fund Balance As of 9/30/18 39,509,603 $ Current Year Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Revenue 38,183,220 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Ops Expenses 17,566,249 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Cap Expenses 15,890,500 $ Fiscal Year 2019 Budgeted Transfers 2,798,794 $ Beg FY19 Current Yr NET Revenues(Expenditures) 1,927,677 $ Net Projected Fund Balance 41,437,280 $ FY2019 Amendments Manhole Repair 57,750 $ Well 28 Water Treatment 225,000 $ WRRF Headworks Upgrades with Odor Control 481,546 $ Solid Waste Coordinator 93,430 $ Field Services Supervisor 41,815 $ Total Amendments 899,541 $ Current Yr NET change to fund balance Rev(Exp) 1,028,136 $ Net Fund Balance after Amendments 40,537,739 $ FY2019 Carryforwards Carryforward Operating 822,410 $ Carryforward Capital 28,108,199 $ Carryfoward Adjustment (12,569,986) $ Total Carryforwards 16,360,623 $ Net Projected Fund Balance after Amendments & Carryforwards 24,177,116 $ Operating Reserves - 6 months 10,200,581 $ Depreciation Reserve -$ Emergency Reserve 1,000,000 $ Total Reserves 11,200,581 $ Net Fund Balance (Projected using Budget $) after Reserves 12,976,535 $ ACTUAL NET FUND BALANCE as of 4/30/2019 Actual Fund 60 Unrestricted Fund Balance as of 09/30/18 39,509,603 $ FYTD Actual Revenues 26,465,918 $ FYTD Actual Operating Expenses 9,241,535 $ FYTD Actual Capital Expenses 10,844,102 $ FYTD Actual General Fund Transfers 1,604,847 $ ACTUAL Based NET FUND BALANCE as of 4/30/2019 44,285,037 $ NOTE: Budget Based Fund Balance reflects if ALL approved spend for the year occurs by 09/30/19 Actual YTD Fund Balance reflects actual spend to date, no future spend or reserves included 3of3 Enterprise Fund BalanceMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 147 of 664 City of Meridian Investments and Cash Position FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 City of Meridian Investment Portfolio Govern Bonds $20,528,449 Muncipal Bonds $1,128,274 Investor Cash $6,221,417 FIB MoneyMarket $1,596,566 Cash $2,978,649 Idaho Bond Fund $21,175,492 Idaho State Pool $68,132,651 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50% 4.00% 4.50% Yield by Investment Type $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 $1,000,000 General Enterprise City of Meridian Interest Income by Fund (GF includes restricted and designated funds) Total Budget Budget YTD Actual YTD Prior YTD $- $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 General Enterprise Fund City of Meridian Investment/Cash Balance by Major Fund (GF includes restricted and designated funds) FY2019 FY2018 4 of 60 InvestmentsMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 148 of 664 City of Meridian Water Department Incuding PW Admin Costs - Enterprise Fund Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ WATER OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Revenue Water Sales 9,152,804 $ 5,339,136 $ 4,542,303 $ (796,833) $ -15% 4,264,803 $ 277,500 $ Miscellaneous 270,000 $ 157,500 $ 241,250 $ 83,750 $ 53% 238,975 $ 2,275 $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 589,981 $ 344,155 $ 334,118 $ (10,038) $ -3% 312,106 $ 22,011 $ Total Revenue 10,012,785 $ 5,840,791 $ 5,117,671 $ (723,120) $ -12% 4,815,884 $ 301,787 $ Personnel Costs Administration 351,800 $ 205,217 $ 171,636 $ 33,581 $ 16% 146,560 $ 25,076 $ Operations 612,896 $ 357,523 $ 320,417 $ 37,106 $ 10% 320,754 $ (337) $ Distribution 653,518 $ 381,219 $ 356,862 $ 24,357 $ 6% 370,056 $ (13,194) $ Production 446,305 $ 260,345 $ 228,006 $ 32,339 $ 12% 159,111 $ 68,894 $ Backflow Prevention 127,531 $ 74,393 $ 75,695 $ (1,302) $ -2% 52,897 $ 22,798 $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 2,330,929 $ 1,359,709 $ 1,192,117 $ 167,592 $ 12% 1,080,116 $ 112,001 $ Total Personnel Costs 4,522,979 $ 2,638,405 $ 2,344,732 $ 293,673 $ 11% 2,129,493 $ 215,239 $ Operations Costs Administration 588,664 $ 343,388 $ 293,066 $ 50,321 $ 15% 239,215 $ 53,851 $ Operations 849,764 $ 495,696 $ 609,494 $ (113,798) $ -23% 417,270 $ 192,224 $ Distribution 299,728 $ 174,841 $ 117,463 $ 57,378 $ 33% 124,658 $ (7,195) $ Production 1,266,721 $ 738,921 $ 650,904 $ 88,017 $ 12% 535,152 $ 115,752 $ Backflow Prevention 91,214 $ 53,208 $ 28,358 $ 24,850 $ 47% 29,636 $ (1,278) $ General Fund Transfer 1,283,937 $ 748,963 $ 739,062 $ 9,901 $ 1% 770,164 $ (31,102) $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 941,393 $ 549,146 $ 415,650 $ 133,496 $ 24% 399,427 $ 16,222 $ Total Operations Costs 5,321,422 $ 3,104,163 $ 2,853,997 $ 250,166 $ 8% 2,515,522 $ 338,474 $ Operations Income (Loss) 168,384 $ 98,224 $ (81,057) $ (179,281) $ 170,869 $ (251,926) $ Capital Outlay Operations Administration 50,000 $ 29,167 $ 39,989 $ (10,822) $ -37% 13,847 $ 26,142 $ Operations -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,005 $ (19,005) $ Distribution -$ -$ -$ -$ 138,566 $ (138,566) $ Production 80,000 $ 46,667 $ -$ 46,667 $ 100% -$ -$ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 17,750 $ 10,354 $ 11,502 $ (1,148) $ -11% 25,648 $ (14,146) $ Total Capital Outlay 147,750 $ 86,187 $ 51,491 $ 34,696 $ 40% 197,066 $ (145,575) $ Net Income (Loss) from Operations 20,634 $ 12,036 $ (132,548) $ (144,585) $ (26,197) $ WATER CONSTRUCTION Revenue Residential Assessments 2,843,093 $ 1,658,471 $ 3,100,201 $ 1,441,730 $ 87% 2,738,524 $ 361,677 $ Commercial Assessments 510,485 $ 297,783 $ 252,702 $ (45,081) $ -15% 325,830 $ (73,128) $ Interest 100,000 $ 58,333 $ 191,656 $ 133,322 $ 229% 150,427 $ 41,228 $ Miscellaneous -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,410 $ (2,410) $ Total Revenue 3,453,578 $ 2,014,587 $ 3,544,559 $ 1,529,972 $ 76% 3,217,191 $ 327,368 $ Operations Costs 18,000 $ 10,500 $ 5,930 $ 4,570 $ 44% 5,855 $ 75 $ Capital Construction Projects 6,968,082 $ 4,064,715 $ 2,113,498 $ 1,951,217 $ 48% 2,884,491 $ (770,993) $ Net Income (Loss) from Construction (3,532,504) $ (2,060,627) $ 1,425,131 $ 3,485,758 $ 326,846 $ Water Department Net Income (Loss) (3,511,870) $ (2,048,591) $ 1,292,583 $ 3,341,174 $ 300,648 $ Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date Water Meters $593K 5 of 60 WaterMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 149 of 664 City of Meridian Waste Water Including PW Admin Costs - Enterprise Fund Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ WASTE WATER OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Revenue Utility Sales 15,945,396 $ 9,301,481 $ 9,112,988 $ (188,493) $ -2% 8,777,205 $ 335,783 $ Miscellaneous -$ -$ 18,443 $ 18,443 $ 12,244 $ 6,199 $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 589,981 $ 344,155 $ 334,118 $ (10,038) $ -3% 312,106 $ 22,011 $ Total Revenue 16,535,377 $ 9,645,636 $ 9,465,549 $ (180,087) $ -2% 9,101,556 $ 363,993 $ Personnel Costs Administration 378,631 $ 220,868 $ 191,292 $ 29,576 $ 13% 111,043 $ 80,249 $ Treatment Plant 1,506,229 $ 878,633 $ 797,501 $ 81,132 $ 9% 795,616 $ 1,885 $ Collection Lines 552,760 $ 322,443 $ 256,421 $ 66,023 $ 20% 267,723 $ (11,303) $ Pretreatment Division 164,902 $ 96,193 $ 87,863 $ 8,330 $ 9% 83,941 $ 3,922 $ Lab 462,174 $ 269,602 $ 258,303 $ 11,299 $ 4% 238,240 $ 20,063 $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 2,330,929 $ 1,359,709 $ 1,192,117 $ 167,592 $ 12% 1,080,116 $ 112,001 $ Total Personnel Costs 5,395,625 $ 3,147,448 $ 2,783,496 $ 363,952 $ 12% 2,576,679 $ 206,817 $ Operations Costs Administration 351,425 $ 204,998 $ 161,744 $ 43,254 $ 21% 167,939 $ (6,196) $ Treatment Plant 2,148,909 $ 1,253,530 $ 1,097,525 $ 156,005 $ 12% 1,000,751 $ 96,774 $ Collection Lines 525,905 $ 306,778 $ 201,299 $ 105,479 $ 34% 197,699 $ 3,600 $ Pretreatment Division 18,885 $ 11,016 $ 4,380 $ 6,636 $ 60% 1,982 $ 2,398 $ Lab 223,730 $ 130,509 $ 99,986 $ 30,523 $ 23% 107,037 $ (7,051) $ General Fund Transfer 1,283,937 $ 748,963 $ 748,657 $ 306 $ 0% 779,937 $ (31,280) $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 941,393 $ 549,146 $ 415,650 $ 133,496 $ 24% 399,427 $ 16,222 $ Total Operations Costs 5,494,184 $ 3,204,941 $ 2,729,240 $ 475,701 $ 15% 2,654,773 $ 74,468 $ Operations Income (Loss) 5,645,567 $ 3,293,247 $ 3,952,813 $ 659,566 $ 20% 3,870,104 $ 82,709 $ Capital Outlay Operations Administration 15,500 $ 9,042 $ 15,413 $ (6,371) $ -70% 26,669 $ (11,256) $ Treatment Plant -$ -$ -$ -$ 55,846 $ (55,846) $ Collection Lines 62,000 $ 36,167 $ 31,887 $ 4,280 $ 12% 26,780 $ 5,107 $ 1/2 Billing/Public Works 17,750 $ 10,354 $ 11,502 $ (1,148) $ -11% 25,648 $ (14,146) $ Total Capital Outlay 95,250 $ 55,563 $ 58,801 $ (3,239) $ -6% 134,944 $ (76,142) $ Net Income (Loss) from Operations 5,550,317 $ 3,237,685 $ 3,894,012 $ 656,327 $ 3,735,161 $ WASTE WATER CONSTRUCTION Revenue Residential Assessments 5,596,845 $ 3,264,826 $ 6,408,600 $ 3,143,774 $ 96% 5,458,652 $ 949,948 $ Commercial Assessments 958,121 $ 558,904 $ 629,286 $ 70,382 $ 13% 706,777 $ (77,491) $ EPA Compliance Revenue 1,576,515 $ 919,634 $ 930,027 $ 10,393 $ 1% 879,884 $ 50,143 $ Interest 50,000 $ 29,167 $ 370,227 $ 341,060 $ 1169% 297,837 $ 72,389 $ Miscellaneous -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,244 $ (2,244) $ Total Revenue 8,181,481 $ 4,772,531 $ 8,338,140 $ 3,565,609 $ 75% 7,345,393 $ 992,746 $ Operations Costs 35,000 $ 20,417 $ 11,860 $ 8,557 $ 42% 11,709 $ 151 $ -$ Capital Construction Projects 25,228,748 $ 14,716,770 $ 8,620,312 $ 6,096,458 $ 41% 18,231,668 $ (9,611,356) $ Net Income (Loss) from Construction (17,082,267) $ (9,964,656) $ (294,032) $ (9,670,624) $ (10,897,983) $ Waste Water Department Net Income (Loss) (11,531,950)$ (6,726,971)$ 3,599,980$ 10,326,951$ (7,162,822)$ Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date 6 of 60 WRRF Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 150 of 664 City of Meridian Enterprise Overhead - Public Works/Utility Billing/Environmental Divisions Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PTYD Variance $ Revenue PW Review Fees 400,000 $ 233,333 $ 227,491 $ (5,843) $ -3% 240,635 $ (13,144) $ Utility Billing Fees 779,961 $ 454,977 $ 440,745 $ (14,232) $ -3% 383,578 $ 57,167 $ Total Revenue 1,179,961 $ 688,311 $ 668,235 $ (20,075) $ -3% 624,213 $ 44,023 $ Personnel Costs 4,661,858 $ 2,719,417 $ 2,384,233 $ 335,184 $ 12% 2,160,232 $ 224,002 $ Operating Expense 1,882,786 $ 1,098,292 $ 831,299 $ 266,992 $ 24% 798,855 $ 32,445 $ Transfers 230,920 $ 134,703 $ 117,128 $ 17,576 $ 13% 104,340 $ 12,788 $ Total OE 2,113,706 $ 1,232,995 $ 948,427 $ 284,568 $ 23% 903,194 $ 45,232 $ Total PC & OE 6,775,564 $ 3,952,412 $ 3,332,660 $ 619,752 $ 16% 3,063,426 $ 269,234 $ Operating Income (Loss) (5,595,603) $ (3,264,102) $ (2,664,425) $ 599,677 $ (2,439,213) $ Capital Outlay 35,500 $ 29,300 $ 23,004 $ 6,295 $ 21% 51,296 $ (28,292) $ Net Income (Loss) (5,631,103) $ (3,293,401) $ (2,687,429) $ 605,972 $ (2,490,510) $ Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date 7 of 60 PWbilling Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 151 of 664 City of Meridian Total Enterprise Fund Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Unrestricted Net Position at 9/30/2018 39,509,603 $ Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ TOTAL UTILITY OPERATIONS Operations Revenue Water Sales 9,152,804 $ 5,339,136 $ 4,542,303 $ (796,833) $ -14.9% 4,264,803 $ 277,500 $ Wastewater Sales 15,945,396 $ 9,301,481 $ 9,112,988 $ (188,493) $ -2.0% 8,777,205 $ 335,783 $ Public Works/Utility Billing 1,179,961 $ 688,311 $ 668,235 $ (20,075) $ -2.9% 624,213 $ 44,023 $ Miscellaneous 270,000 $ 157,500 $ 259,693 $ 102,193 $ 64.9% 251,219 $ 8,474 $ Total Revenue 26,548,161 $ 15,486,427 $ 14,583,220 $ (903,207) $ -5.8% 13,917,440 $ 665,780 $ Personnel Costs Water Division 2,192,050 $ 1,278,696 $ 1,152,615 $ 126,081 $ 9.9% 1,049,377 $ 103,238 $ Wastewater Division 3,064,696 $ 1,787,739 $ 1,591,379 $ 196,360 $ 11.0% 1,496,563 $ 94,816 $ Public Works/Utility Billing 4,661,858 $ 2,719,417 $ 2,384,233 $ 335,184 $ 12.3% 2,160,232 $ 224,002 $ Total Personnel Costs 9,918,604 $ 5,785,853 $ 5,128,227 $ 657,625 $ 11.4% 4,706,172 $ 422,056 $ Operations Costs Water Division 3,096,092 $ 1,806,054 $ 1,699,285 $ 106,769 $ 5.9% 1,345,931 $ 353,354 $ Wastewater Division 3,326,604 $ 1,940,519 $ 1,564,934 $ 375,586 $ 19.4% 1,475,409 $ 89,525 $ Public Works/Utility Billing 1,882,786 $ 1,098,292 $ 831,299 $ 266,992 $ 24.3% 798,855 $ 32,445 $ Total Operating Costs 8,305,482 $ 4,844,865 $ 4,095,518 $ 749,347 $ 15.5% 3,620,194 $ 475,324 $ Total PC & OE 18,224,086 $ 10,630,717 $ 9,223,745 $ 1,406,972 $ 13.2% 8,326,366 $ 897,379 $ Capital Operations 243,000 $ 141,750 $ 110,292 $ 31,458 $ 22.2% 332,010 $ (221,718) $ General Fund Transfer 2,798,794 $ 1,632,630 $ 1,604,847 $ 27,783 $ 1.7% 1,654,441 $ (49,594) $ Operations Income (Loss) 5,282,281 $ 3,081,330 $ 3,754,628 $ 673,298 $ (1,654,441) $ CONSTRUCTION Construction Revenue Residential Assessments 7,173,946 $ 4,184,802 $ 6,542,630 $ 2,357,828 $ 56.3% 5,548,464 $ 994,166 $ Commercial Assessments 1,468,606 $ 856,687 $ 881,988 $ 25,301 $ 3.0% 1,032,606 $ (150,618) $ Multi-Family Assessments 1,265,992 $ 738,495 $ 2,966,171 $ 2,227,676 $ 301.7% 2,648,712 $ 317,459 $ EPA Compliance Revenue 1,576,515 $ 919,634 $ 930,027 $ 10,393 $ 1.1% 879,884 $ 50,143 $ Miscellaneous -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,654 $ (4,654) $ Interest 150,000 $ 87,500 $ 561,882 $ 474,382 $ 542.2% 448,265 $ 113,618 $ Total Construction Revenue 11,635,059 $ 6,787,118 $ 11,882,698 $ 5,095,581 $ 75.1% 10,562,584 $ 1,320,114 $ Operations Costs Construction 53,000 $ 30,917 $ 17,790 $ 13,127 $ 42.5% 17,564 $ 226 $ Capital Construction Projects 32,196,830 $ 18,781,484 $ 10,733,810 $ 8,047,675 $ 42.8% 21,116,158 $ (10,382,348) $ Construction Income (Loss) (20,614,770) $ (12,025,283) $ 1,131,099 $ 13,156,382 $ (10,571,137) $ Enterprise Fund Net Income (Loss) (15,332,489) $ (8,943,953) $ 4,885,727 $ Fund Balance 24,177,114 $ 30,565,650 $ 44,285,038 $ 8 of 60 Enterprise Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 152 of 664 City of Meridian Enterprise Fund Graphs FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 "OPERATIONS" is comprised of: PC = Personnel Cost +OE = Operating Exp +T = Transfers +CO = Capital Outlay = OPERATIONS $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 YTD Utility Connection / Assessment Revenue Water Connection Revenue Sewer Connection Revenue Comparison is for same month each year 9 of 60 EnterGraphs Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 153 of 664 10 of 60 Utility Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 154 of 664 City of Meridian General Fund Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ POLICE PC 17,030,994 $ 9,934,747 $ 9,050,699 $ 884,048 $ 9% 7,793,737 $ 1,256,962 $ OE 2,812,443 $ 1,640,592 $ 1,595,805 $ 44,787 $ 3% 1,527,836 $ 67,969 $ Total PC and OE 19,843,437 $ 11,575,338 $ 10,646,504 $ 928,835 $ 8% 9,321,573 $ 1,324,931 $ CO 361,182 $ 210,690 $ 259,881 $ (49,191) $ -23% 389,006 $ (129,125) $ FIRE PC 11,365,718 $ 6,630,002 $ 5,854,087 $ 775,915 $ 12% 5,715,219 $ 138,868 $ OE 1,505,490 $ 878,203 $ 820,351 $ 57,851 $ 7% 829,789 $ (9,437) $ Total PC and OE 12,871,208 $ 7,508,205 $ 6,674,438 $ 833,767 $ 11% 6,545,008 $ 129,431 $ CO 5,436,170 $ 3,171,099 $ 594,041 $ 2,577,059 $ 81% 134,664 $ 459,376 $ Interfund Transfers 94,480 $ 55,113 $ 46,465 $ 8,648 $ 16% 39,585 $ 6,880 $ PARKS PC 3,383,728 $ 1,973,841 $ 1,454,414 $ 519,428 $ 26% 1,349,017 $ 105,397 $ OE 2,432,116 $ 1,418,735 $ 1,198,793 $ 219,942 $ 16% 943,888 $ 254,905 $ Total PC & OE 5,815,844 $ 3,392,576 $ 2,653,207 $ 739,369 $ 22% 2,292,904 $ 360,302 $ CO 6,693,586 $ 3,904,592 $ 2,519,239 $ 1,385,353 $ 35% 1,689,354 $ 829,885 $ Interfund Transfers 61,194 $ 35,696 $ 30,095 $ 5,601 $ 16% 25,639 $ 4,456 $ ADMINISTRATION PC 5,543,166 $ 3,233,513 $ 3,085,679 $ 147,835 $ 5% 2,819,361 $ 266,317 $ OE 4,066,340 $ 2,372,032 $ 2,121,031 $ 251,001 $ 11% 1,776,722 $ 344,309 $ Total PC & OE 9,609,506 $ 5,605,545 $ 5,206,709 $ 398,836 $ 7% 4,596,083 $ 610,626 $ CO 630,662 $ 367,886 $ 132,144 $ 235,742 $ 64% 470,068 $ (337,924) $ Interfund Transfers (3,013,138) $ (1,757,664) $ (1,708,393) $ (49,271) $ 3% (1,741,212) $ 32,819 $ TOTAL GENERAL FUND PC 37,323,606 $ 21,772,104 $ 19,444,878 $ 2,327,226 $ 11% 17,677,334 $ 1,767,544 $ OE 10,816,389 $ 6,309,561 $ 5,735,980 $ 573,581 $ 9% 5,078,234 $ 657,746 $ Total PC and OE 48,139,995 $ 28,081,665 $ 25,180,858 $ 2,900,807 $ 10% 22,755,568 $ 2,425,290 $ CO 13,121,600 $ 7,654,267 $ 3,505,304 $ 4,148,963 $ 54% 2,683,092 $ 822,212 $ Interfund Transfers (2,857,464) $ (1,666,854) $ (1,631,833) $ (35,022) $ 2% (1,675,987) $ 44,155 $ PC = Personnel Costs OE = Operating Expenses CO = Capital Outlay NOTE: ~ (01 thru 55 funds) General Fund, Impact Fund, Grant Fund, and Capital Projects Fund ~ Parks trending to underspend Personnel Cost due to seasonal hire in summer months Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date 11 of 60 GeneralFund Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 155 of 664 12 of 60 GenFundGraphs Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 156 of 664 City of Meridian Total General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ Property Tax 33,540,850 $ 19,565,496 $ 20,678,687 $ (1,113,191) $ -6% 18,983,719 $ 1,694,968 $ Total Tax Revenue 33,540,850 $ 19,565,496 $ 20,678,687 $ (1,113,191) $ -6% 18,983,719 $ 1,694,968 $ Liquor License 75,000 $ 43,750 $ 78,425 $ (34,675) $ -79% 73,088 $ 5,338 $ Fire Inspections & Permits -$ -$ 6,531 $ (6,531) $ 7,125 $ (594) $ Dog License 50,000 $ 29,167 $ 28,660 $ 507 $ 2% 23,341 $ 5,319 $ Misc. License & Permits 15,000 $ 8,750 $ 7,875 $ 875 $ 10% 8,931 $ (1,055) $ Total License & Permit Revenue 140,000 $ 81,667 $ 121,491 $ (39,824) $ -49% 112,484 $ 9,007 $ Grant Revenue 1,539,258 $ 897,900 $ 367,901 $ 530,000 $ 59% 297,460 $ 70,441 $ State Revenue Sharing 6,671,294 $ 3,891,588 $ 1,836,240 $ 2,055,348 $ 53% 2,830,084 $ (993,844) $ State Liquor Revenue 995,406 $ 580,654 $ 474,642 $ 106,012 $ 18% 406,288 $ 68,354 $ Rural Fire 1,294,489 $ 755,119 $ 658,225 $ 96,894 $ 13% 1,060,184 $ (401,959) $ Meridian Development Corp 25,000 $ 14,583 $ 68,846 $ (54,263) $ -372% 31,000 $ 37,846 $ School Resources 423,516 $ 247,051 $ 234,153 $ 12,898 $ 5% 213,732 $ 20,421 $ Total Intergovernmental Revenue 10,948,963 $ 6,386,895 $ 3,640,007 $ 2,746,888 $ 43% 4,838,747 $ (1,198,740) $ Gas Franchise 700,000 $ 408,333 $ 671,799 $ (263,466) $ -65% 751,921 $ (80,122) $ Cable TV Franchise 200,000 $ 116,667 $ 56,493 $ 60,173 $ 52% 55,488 $ 1,006 $ Electricity Franchise 654,639 $ 381,873 $ 278,923 $ 102,950 $ 27% 287,259 $ (8,336) $ Total Franchise Revenue 1,554,639 $ 906,873 $ 1,007,216 $ (100,343) $ -11% 1,094,668 $ (87,452) $ Court Revenue 332,500 $ 193,958 $ 214,040 $ (20,081) $ -10% 243,802 $ (29,763) $ Fines, False Alarm, Restitution & Seizure 5,000$ 2,917 $ 34,667 $ (31,750) $ -1089% 38,822 $ (4,155) $ Total Fines & Forfeitures Revenue 337,500 $ 196,875 $ 248,707 $ (51,832) $ -26% 282,624 $ (33,917) $ Charges for Services by Department Fire 1,125 $ 656 $ 36,210 $ (35,553) $ -5418% 139,299 $ (103,089) $ Police 5,500 $ 3,208 $ 72,015 $ (68,806) $ -2145% 72,432 $ (417) $ Parks 978,990 $ 571,078 $ 736,535 $ (165,457) $ -29% 564,853 $ 171,682 $ Admin 109,000 $ 63,583 $ 106,694 $ (43,110) $ -68% 78,700 $ 27,993 $ Total Charges for Services Revenue 1,094,615 $ 638,525 $ 951,453 $ (312,927) $ -49% 855,283 $ 96,169 $ Impact Fees Impact Fees - Multifamily 314,349 $ 183,370 $ 1,020,602 $ (837,232) $ -457% 735,190 $ 285,412 $ Impact Fee - Commercial 80,000 $ 46,667 $ 315,883 $ (269,216) $ -577% 284,549 $ 31,334 $ Impact Fee - Residential 2,164,935 $ 1,262,879 $ 2,303,414 $ (1,040,535) $ -82% 1,754,793 $ 548,621 $ Total Impact Fee Revenue 2,559,284 $ 1,492,916 $ 3,639,899 $ (2,146,983) $ -144% 2,774,532 $ 865,367 $ Total Donations 170,950 $ 99,721 $ 137,057 $ (37,336) $ -37% 48,529 $ 88,528 $ Interest & Investment Earnings 217,000 $ 126,583 $ 939,323 $ (812,740) $ -642% 471,270 $ 468,053 $ Total Miscellaneous Revenues 500 $ 292 $ 634,989 $ (634,697) $ -217593% 24,573 $ 610,416 $ Total Revenue 50,564,301 $ 29,495,843 $ 31,998,828 $ (2,502,985) $ -8% 29,486,429 $ 2,512,399 $ Total General Fund Revenue DOES NOT include Community Development Permit Fee Revenue NOTE: REVENUE is reported in reverse sign; credit variance reflects actual revenue has exceeded budget expectations Budget To Actual Prior Year to Date Pine Ave Landscaping Reimbursement $48.7K False Alarms & Parking Citations Wkr Comp & NFA Flight Reimbursements ICAC, FBI & DEA Reimbursements Sale Old City Hall 13 of 60 Revenue Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 157 of 664 City of Meridian Community Development Services Year End Change to Fund Balance Forecast FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD Projected TOTAL DEV. SVCS. REVENUE Commercial Permits 1,345,570 $ 784,916 $ 1,011,718 $ 1,734,373 $ All other Permits 4,793,938 $ 2,796,464 $ 3,822,597 $ 6,000,000 $ Planning Revenue 413,657 $ 241,300 $ 287,316 $ 492,541 $ Miscellaneous Revenue -$ -$ 1,760 $ 3,017 $ Total Revenues 6,553,165 $ 3,822,680 $ 5,123,391 $ 8,229,931 $ TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICE FUND Revenue 6,553,165 $ 3,822,680 $ 5,123,391 $ 8,229,931 $ PC 3,758,950 $ 2,192,721 $ 1,384,480 $ 2,373,394 $ OE 2,296,517 $ 1,339,635 $ 1,851,770 $ 3,174,463 $ Net Operating to Fund Balance 497,699 $ 290,324 $ 1,887,140 $ 2,682,074 $ CO & Interfund Transfers 564,353 $ 329,206 $ 329,111 $ 564,190 $ Total Change to Fund Balance (66,654) $ (38,882) $ 1,558,029 $ 2,117,883 $ FY2003 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $585,467 FY2004 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $799,548 FY2005 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $1,897,123 FY2006 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $2,815,539 FY2007 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $2,172,405 FY2008 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $0 FY2009 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $0 FY2010 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $0 FY2011 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $600,722 FY2012 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $2,044,914 FY2013 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $1,592,539 FY2014 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $1,391,676 FY2015 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $1,652,245 FY2016 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $2,275,054 FY2017 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $2,641,404 FY2018 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund $3,251,404 TOTAL $23,720,040 Projected Transfer 14 of 60 CommDevForecast Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 158 of 664 City of Meridian Community Development Services Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PYTD Variance $ ADMINISTRATION Personnel Costs 231,196 $ 134,864 $ 133,314 $ 1,550 $ 1% 78,277 $ 55,037 $ Operating Expenses 104,594 $ 61,013 $ 38,151 $ 22,862 $ 37% 36,441 $ 1,711 $ Total PC & OE 335,790 $ 195,878 $ 171,466 $ 24,412 $ 12% 114,718 $ 56,747 $ Interfund Transfers 93,898 $ 54,774 $ 46,179 $ 8,595 $ 16% 39,342 $ 6,837 $ Fund Balance Transfer 154,040 $ 3,251,404 $ 2,641,404 $ PLANNING Personnel Costs 838,217 $ 488,960 $ 408,301 $ 80,659 $ 16% 368,964 $ 39,337 $ Operating Expenses 240,599 $ 140,349 $ 164,337 $ (23,988) $ -17% 23,658 $ 140,680 $ Total PC and OE 1,078,816 $ 629,309 $ 572,638 $ 56,671 $ 9% 392,622 $ 180,016 $ BUILDING Personnel Costs 2,558,140 $ 1,492,248 $ 769,662 $ 722,587 $ 48% 269,553 $ 500,109 $ Operating Expenses 1,787,223 $ 1,042,547 $ 1,633,183 $ (590,636) $ -57% 1,507,915 $ 125,269 $ Total PC & OE 4,345,363 $ 2,534,796 $ 2,402,845 $ 131,951 $ 5% 1,777,468 $ 625,377 $ Capital Outlay 505,683 $ 294,982 $ 302,125 $ (7,143) $ -2% -$ 302,125 $ Interfund Transfers (63,182) $ (36,856) $ (34,634) $ (2,222) $ 6% (34,060) $ (574) $ ECONOMIC DEVLP Personnel Costs 131,397 $ 76,648 $ 73,203 $ 3,445 $ 4% 68,470 $ 4,734 $ Operating Expenses 164,100 $ 95,725 $ 16,098 $ 79,627 $ 83% 17,690 $ (1,592) $ Total PC & OE 295,497 $ 172,373 $ 89,301 $ 83,072 $ 48% 86,160 $ 3,142 $ Interfund Transfers 27,953 $ 16,306 $ 15,441 $ 865 $ 5% 16,265 $ (824) $ TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICE FUND Personnel Costs 3,758,950 $ 2,192,721 $ 1,384,480 $ 808,241 $ 37% 785,264 $ 599,216 $ Operating Expenses 2,296,517 $ 1,339,635 $ 1,851,770 $ (512,135) $ -38% 1,585,703 $ 266,067 $ Total PC and OE 6,055,467 $ 3,532,356 $ 3,236,250 $ 296,106 $ 8% 2,370,968 $ 865,283 $ Capital Outlay 505,683 $ 294,982 $ 302,125 $ (7,143) $ -2% -$ 302,125 $ Interfund Transfers 58,669 $ 34,224 $ 26,986 $ 7,238 $ 21% 21,546 $ 5,439 $ Fund Balance Transfer 154,040 $ 3,251,404 $ 2,641,404 $ NOTE: Interfund Transfers = 25.42% of City Hall costs transfer to Community Development Services Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date Contracted Inspections $1,485K YTD 9 Positions remain open City of Meridian Building Permits Revenue Budget to Actual Year to Date Comparisons FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Residential Permits Total Budget Total Budget YTD Actual YTD YTD Variance $ YTD Variance % PYTD Actual PTYD Variance $ Building Permits 2,174,430 $ 1,268,418 $ 1,591,482 $ (323,064) $ -25% 1,413,253 $ (178,229) $ Plumbing Permits 540,296 $ 315,173 $ 425,999 $ (110,826) $ -35% 383,198 $ (42,801) $ Mechanical Permits 657,776 $ 383,703 $ 498,478 $ (114,776) $ -30% 435,276 $ (63,202) $ Electrical Permits 422,811 $ 246,640 $ 367,289 $ (120,650) $ -49% 296,494 $ (70,795) $ Fire Inspection Permits 457,614 $ 266,942 $ 377,889 $ (110,948) $ -42% 281,506 $ (96,383) $ Total Residential Permits 4,252,927 $ 2,480,874 $ 3,261,137 $ (780,263) $ -31% 2,809,727 $ (451,410) $ Multi-Family Permits 540,683 $ 315,398 $ 561,135 $ (245,737) $ -78% 379,581 $ (181,554) $ Commerical Permits 1,345,570 $ 784,916 $ 1,011,718 $ (226,802) $ -29% 803,374 $ (208,344) $ Total Building Permit Revenue 6,139,180 $ 3,581,188 $ 4,833,990 $ (1,252,802) $ -35% 3,992,682 $ (841,308) $ Budget to Actual Prior Year to Date 15 of 60 CommDevMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 159 of 664 16 of 60 CommDevGraphs Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 160 of 664 City of Meridian IMPACT FUND BALANCE as of 04/30/2019 Account # Account Description Total Budget - Original Total Budget - Revised Current Year Actual Budget Remaining 2110 - Police Department REVENUES 34777 Impact Rev - Multifamily 29,336 $ -$ 112,838 $ (83,502) $ 34780 Commercial Impact Revenue 20,000 $ -$ 78,312 $ (58,312) $ 34781 Residential Impact Revenue 166,237 $ -$ 254,666 $ (88,429) $ 36100 Interest Earnings -$ -$ 24,808 $ (24,808) $ Total REVENUES 215,573 $ -$ 470,623 $ (255,050) $ 55000 Professional Services 6,170 $ (1,972) $ 4,168 $ 31 $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6,170 $ (1,972) $ 4,168 $ 31 $ 2210 - Fire Department REVENUES 34777 Impact Rev - Multifamily 119,114 $ -$ 344,586 $ (225,472) $ 34780 Commercial Impact Revenue 60,000 $ -$ 237,571 $ (177,571) $ 34781 Residential Impact Revenue 674,978 $ -$ 777,702 $ (102,724) $ 36100 Interest Earnings -$ -$ 89,546 $ (89,546) $ Total REVENUES 854,092 $ -$ 1,449,405 $ (595,313) $ 54000 Equipment & Supplies -$ 20,000 $ -$ 20,000 $ 55000 Professional Services 18,840 $ (6,093) $ 12,882 $ (135) $ 92000 Cap Outlay - Bldgs & Structures 3,899,201 $ 1,220,576 $ 533,741 $ 4,586,036 $ 94120 Capital - Fire Trucks 660,995 $ (624,602) $ 21,377 $ 15,016 $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,579,036 $ 609,881 $ 568,000 $ 4,620,917 $ 5200 - Parks & Recreation REVENUES 34777 Impact Rev - Multifamily 165,899 $ -$ 563,178 $ (397,279) $ 34781 Residential Impact Revenue 1,323,720 $ -$ 1,271,046 $ 52,674 $ 36100 Interest Earnings 15,000 $ -$ 77,478 $ (62,478) $ Total REVENUES 1,504,619 $ -$ 1,911,702 $ (407,083) $ 55000 Professional Services 30,800 $ (9,856) $ 20,839 $ 105 $ 55102 Investment Services -$ -$ 1,341 $ (1,341) $ 93415 Borup Property construction 155,161 $ (86,419) $ 23,966 $ 44,776 $ 96927 Discovery Park 2,610,096 $ (1,779,951) $ 570,314 $ 259,831 $ 96929 Hillsdale Park Construction -$ -$ -$ TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,796,057 $ (1,876,227) $ 616,460 $ 303,370 $ TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES for FY2019 7,381,263 $ Dept FY2019 beginning fund balance FY2019 net change YTD Fund Balance YTD Police Department $ 1,855,202 466,455 $ 2,321,657 $ Fire Department $ 6,382,796 881,405 $ 7,264,201 $ Parks & Recreation $ 4,844,596 1,295,242 $ 6,139,838 $ TOTAL IMPACT FUND BALANCE 13,082,594 $ 2,643,102 $ 15,725,696 $ 17 of 60 ImpactFundMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 161 of 664 18 of 60 OT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 162 of 664 City of Meridian Volunteer Hours FY2019 for Month Ending 04/30/2019 Prior MONTH Parks General Police Fire Mayor Comm Dev Clerk Total Year October 703 41 113 428 366 62 44 1,757 2,015 November 1,190 84 71 65 237 184 33 1,864 1,122 December 727 65 76 50 188 143 30 1,279 1,271 January 385 76 114 131 282 103 36 1,127 875 February 359 125 79 352 272 157 29 1,373 1,287 March 437 71 72 34 98 88 43 843 1,052 April 681 121 97 30 214 64 44 1,251 1,432 May June July August September TOTAL 4,482 583 622 1,090 1,657 801 259 9,494 9,054 GRAND TOTAL YTD 9,494 19 of 60 VolunteersMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 163 of 664 City of Meridian Vacancy Report May 16, 2019 Position Position Position Position Position Number Position Number Position Number Position Number FTE FTE FTE FTE Fund Fund Fund Fund Department Department Department Department HR Status HR Status HR Status HR Status Position Position Position Position Vacant Date Vacant Date Vacant Date Vacant Date Position Posted Position Posted Position Posted Position Posted Date Date Date Date Position Start Position Start Position Start Position Start Date Date Date Date GIS Analyst 152 1 Enterprise PW Interviews Scheduled 4/26/2019 4/1/2019 Not yet filled Staff Engineer 288 1 Enterprise PW Interviews Scheduled 1/21/2019 1/25/2019 Not yet filled PW Communications Specialist 359 1 Enterprise PW Interviews Scheduled 3/21/2019 3/18/2019 Not yet filled Safety Program Coordinator 460 1 Enterprise PW Interviews Scheduled 4/19/2019 4/11/2019 Not yet filled Development Analyst I 522 1 Enterprise PW No Request to Fill New Positon 10/01/2017 Not Yet Posted Not yet filled Water Maint. Supervisor 6 1 Enterprise Water Offer Being Crafted by Department 4/1/2019 4/9/2019 Not yet filled Water Operator II 425 1 Enterprise Water Interviews Scheduled 1/25/2019 1/24/2019 Not yet filled Field Service Supervisor 571 1 Enterprise Water Offer Being Crafted by Department New Position as of 02/05/2019 2/13/2019 Not yet filled Collection System Technician I 450 1 Enterprise WRRF Interviews Scheduled 1/25/2019 1/25/2019 Not yet filled WWTP Operator II 563 1 Enterprise WRRF Offer Extended ; Not Yet Accepted New Position as of 10/01/2018 8/29/2018 Not yet filled Building Inspector I 532 1 General Building Position Closed; On hold per department New Position 05/08/2018 5/9/2018 Not yet filled Building Plans Examiner II 538 1 General Building Accepting Applications Interviews in Progress New Position 05/08/2018 5/9/2018 Not yet filled Electrical Plans Examiner 539 1 General Building Position Closed; On hold per department New Position 05/08/2018 5/9/2018 Not yet filled Administrative Services Supervisor 546 1 General Building Candidate Withdrew, Interviews Scheduled 11/7/2018 1/18/2019 Not yet filled Mechanical Inspection Supervisor 566 1 General Building Accepting Applications New Position as of 11/07/2018 11/11/2018 Not yet filled Mechanical Inspector 569 1 General Building Accepting Applications; Interviews in Progress New Position as of 11/07/2018 11/11/2018 Not yet filled Mechanical Inspector 570 1 General Building Accepting Applications; Interviews in Progress New Position as of 11/07/2018 11/11/2018 Not yet filled City Clerk 87 1 General City Clerk Accepting Applications; Chris Johnson, Interim 4/12/2019 3/26/2019 Not yet filled Economic Development Administrator 389 1 General Economic Development Position to be Posted 4/26/2019 Not Yet Posted Not yet filled Human Resources Generalist 550 1 General Human Resources Accepting Applications; Interviews in Progress New Position as of 10/01/2018 12/18/2019 Not yet filled Executive Assistant to the Mayor 128 1 General Mayor Accepting Applications; Interviews in Progress 4/19/2019 4/10/2019 Not yet filled Police Officer 219 1 General Police Background in Progress 11/29/2018 11/11/2018 Not yet filled Police Officer 337 1 General Police Background in Progress 2/28/2019 3/9/2019 Not yet filled Police Officer 457 1 General Police Background in Progress 1/16/2019 11/11/2018 Not yet filled Records Retention Analyst 479 1 General Police Applications Under Review 4/19/2019 4/1/2019 Not yet filled Data Clerk 482 1 General Police Background in Progress 2/4/2019 1/30/2019 Not yet filled Code Enforcement Officer 517 1 General Police Interviews Scheduled 4/4/2019 4/1/2019 Not yet filled Public Information Safety Officer 553 1 General Police Position Closed; On hold per department New Position as of 10/01/2018 8/29/2018 Not yet filled Crime Data Specialist - NIBRS 556 1 General Police Applicant Withdrew; Position Re-Posted New Position as of 10/01/2018 5/11/2019 Not yet filled Community Service Officer 560 1 General Police Background in Progress New Position as of 10/01/2018 10/19/2018 Not yet filled TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE 30 30 30 30 20 of 60 VacantPositionsMeridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 164 of 664 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n In t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r s FY 2 0 1 9 Ef f e c t i v e D a t e Ge n e r a l F u n d Enterprise Fund tr a n s f e r e x p e n s e t o E N T E R P R I S E F U N D ( w a t e r & s e w e r fu n d ) 15 % o f M a y o r ' s O f f i c e p e r s o n n e l c o s t s (e x c e p t M a y o r w a g e & b e n e f i t s ) t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 0 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 15 % o f C l e r k s e x p e n s e s t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 46 % o f F i n a n c e e x p e n s e s t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 46 % o f H R e x p e n s e s t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 46 % o f I T e x p e n s e s t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 46 % o f L e g a l e x p e n s e s t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 46 % o f I T C a p i t a l e x p e n s e t r a n s f e r t o E n t e r p r i s e F u d FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e tr a n s f e r C i t y H a l l c o s t s t o t h e f o l l o w i n g : 13 % F i r e D e p a r t m e n t i n t h e G e n e r a l F u n d FY 2 0 0 9 t r a n s f e r s a l l i n t h i s f u n d 8. 4 2 % P a r k s & R e c r e a t i o n i n t h e G e n e r a l F u n d FY 2 0 0 9 t r a n s f e r s a l l i n t h i s f u n d 12 . 9 2 % C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e G e n e r a l F u n d FY 2 0 0 9 t r a n s f e r s a l l i n t h i s f u n d 23 . 0 8 % P u b l i c W o r k s i n t h e E n t e r p r i s e F u n d FY 2 0 0 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e Pe r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r s : Bl d g D e p t M g r 5 0 % f r o m B u i l d i n g D e p a r t m e n t t o P u b l i c W o r k s F Y 2 0 0 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e Ca p i t a l P r o j e c t s M g r 2 5 % f r o m O t h e r G o v t t o P u b l i c W or k s FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e Co m m u n i c a t i o n s M g r 2 5 % f r o m O t h e r G o v t t o P u b l i c W o rk s FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e Ma y o r ' s A d m i n A s s t 5 0 % f r o m M a y o r ' s O f f i c e t o E c o n o m ic D e v e l o p m e n t F Y 2 0 1 5 t r a n s f e r s a l l i n t h i s f u n d St r a t e g i c A n a l y s t 2 5 % f r o m O t h e r G o v t t o P u b l i c W o r k s FY 2 0 1 9 ( r e d u c e s e x p e n s e ) i n c r e a s e s e x p e n s e 21 o f 6 0 Transfers Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 6 5 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Co u n c i l 1 1 2 0 - C o u n c i l Co u n c i l PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Co u n c i l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e W a g e s 60 , 0 0 0 0 5 , 0 8 3 3 5 , 5 8 3 2 4 , 4 1 7 4 0 . 6 9 % 3 6 , 0 4 2 Co u n c i l F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 4, 5 9 0 0 2 8 1 2 , 0 4 4 2 , 5 4 6 5 5 . 4 7 % 2 , 2 0 8 Co u n c i l P E R S I 7, 1 6 4 0 5 7 5 4 , 0 2 8 3 , 1 3 6 4 3 . 7 7 % 4 , 0 8 0 Co u n c i l W o r k e r s ' C o m p 10 8 0 0 2 1 8 7 8 0 . 9 7 % 2 4 Co u n c i l E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 9 1 , 1 8 8 0 0 6 6 0 9 0 , 5 2 8 9 9 . 2 7 % 4 8 , 2 8 3 Co u n c i l M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 , 7 1 1 4 4 , 2 1 9 (4 4 , 2 1 9 ) 0.00% 0 Co u n c i l H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 (4 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Co u n c i l V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 8 5 5 8 5 (585)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 8 8 4 , 0 0 0 (4 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Co u n c i l L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 7 4 0 4 (404)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 3 8 0 (80)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 6 9 8 (98)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 24 14 2 (142)0.00%0 Co u n c i l T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 16 3 , 0 5 0 0 13 , 4 4 4 95 , 8 6 3 67 , 1 8 7 41.21%90,636 Co u n c i l Co u n c i l OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Co u n c i l O f f i c e E x p e n s e 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 4 Co u n c i l E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 3 6 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 1 5 Co u n c i l E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 0 0 7 3 7 3 (73)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co u n c i l P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 25 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co u n c i l R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 26 4 0 2 7 1 9 1 7 3 2 7 . 5 6 % 1 3 2 Co u n c i l B u s i n e s s M e a l s 3, 2 5 0 0 1 1 8 1 , 5 2 3 1 , 7 2 7 5 3 . 1 2 % 1 , 9 4 2 Co u n c i l M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 0 Co u n c i l E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 6 , 8 4 0 0 3 0 1 , 2 7 0 5 , 5 7 0 8 1 . 4 3 % 1 0 5 Co u n c i l T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 2 , 3 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 8 9 1 , 2 1 1 5 2 . 6 4 % 0 Co u n c i l T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 6, 5 0 8 0 0 2 , 0 3 2 4 , 4 7 6 6 8 . 7 7 % 0 Co u n c i l T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 1, 5 4 6 0 0 5 9 4 9 5 2 6 1 . 5 7 % (31) Co u n c i l A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 9 0 Co u n c i l P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 0 0 0 4 6 (46)0.00% 0 Co u n c i l H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 90 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co u n c i l E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%278 Co u n c i l T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 22 , 0 0 8 0 24 8 6, 8 1 9 15 , 1 8 8 69.01%3,654 Co u n c i l Co u n c i l DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 18 5 , 0 5 8 0 13 , 6 9 2 10 2 , 6 8 2 82 , 3 7 6 44.51%94,290 Co u n c i l Co u n c i l Co u n c i l TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 18 5 , 0 5 8 0 13 , 6 9 2 10 2 , 6 8 2 82 , 3 7 6 44.51%94,290 22 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 6 6 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ci t y C l e r k 1 1 4 0 - C i t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k RE V E N U E S Ci t y C l e r k L i q u o r L i c e n s e R e v e n u e s 7 5 , 0 0 0 0 5 0 , 6 3 8 7 8 , 4 2 5 (3 , 4 2 5 ) (4.56)% 73,088 Ci t y C l e r k M i s c L i c e n s e s / P e r m i t s R e v e n u e s 1 5 , 0 0 0 0 2 , 6 3 4 7 , 8 7 5 7 , 1 2 5 4 7 . 4 9 % 8 , 9 3 1 Ci t y C l e r k P a s s p o r t R e v e n u e s 70 , 0 0 0 0 6 , 8 6 0 4 8 , 2 6 5 2 1 , 7 3 5 3 1 . 0 4 % 3 7 , 0 5 5 Ci t y C l e r k M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 60 18 0 (180)0.00%20 Ci t y C l e r k T o t a l R E V E N U E S 16 0 , 0 0 0 0 60 , 1 9 2 13 4 , 7 4 5 25 , 2 5 5 15.78%119,093 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Ci t y C l e r k W a g e s 30 4 , 3 9 6 0 2 7 , 3 0 2 1 7 7 , 5 2 4 1 2 6 , 8 7 2 4 1 . 6 7 % 1 6 9 , 3 8 3 Ci t y C l e r k O v e r t i m e W a g e s 1, 0 9 9 0 5 5 9 5 5 9 5 4 0 4 9 . 1 1 % 2 7 0 Ci t y C l e r k F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 23 , 3 7 1 0 2 , 0 3 0 1 2 , 9 8 7 1 0 , 3 8 4 4 4 . 4 2 % 1 2 , 7 4 1 Ci t y C l e r k P E R S I 35 , 6 7 2 0 2 , 9 4 1 1 9 , 9 4 7 1 5 , 7 2 6 4 4 . 0 8 % 1 8 , 6 3 0 Ci t y C l e r k W o r k e r s ' C o m p 90 5 0 0 3 7 5 5 3 0 5 8 . 5 9 % 4 3 5 Ci t y C l e r k E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 1 0 6 , 3 8 6 0 0 1 , 0 8 5 1 0 5 , 3 0 1 9 8 . 9 7 % 4 7 , 5 7 6 Ci t y C l e r k M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 , 4 9 7 4 1 , 4 9 4 (4 1 , 4 9 4 ) 0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 (1 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 7 8 5 2 3 (523)0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 2 5 3 , 3 8 6 (3 , 3 8 6 ) 0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 7 8 4 7 0 (470)0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 7 3 9 8 (398)0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 8 1 4 8 4 (484)0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 28 16 5 (165)0.00%0 Ci t y C l e r k T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 47 1 , 8 2 9 0 40 , 1 8 7 26 0 , 3 9 8 21 1 , 4 3 1 44.81%249,036 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Ci t y C l e r k O f f i c e E x p e n s e 3, 8 0 0 0 1 6 3 2 , 5 1 4 1 , 2 8 6 3 3 . 8 5 % 1 , 6 5 4 Ci t y C l e r k C o p i e r E x p e n s e 1, 8 2 4 0 1 2 1 1 , 0 1 1 8 1 3 4 4 . 5 5 % 2 , 5 0 0 Ci t y C l e r k E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 4 2 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 1 Ci t y C l e r k C o d i f i c a t i o n E x p e n s e s 6, 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 9 5 , 1 3 1 8 5 . 5 1 % 6 , 4 9 3 Ci t y C l e r k S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 17 , 9 6 0 0 0 9 , 7 0 9 8 , 2 5 1 4 5 . 9 4 % 2 , 5 1 9 Ci t y C l e r k E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 5 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 4 5 0 9 0 . 0 0 % 6 4 Ci t y C l e r k S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 4 5 Ci t y C l e r k F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 2 , 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 6 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 7, 5 0 0 0 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k B a c k g r o u n d / E m p l o y m e n t T e s t i n g 6 , 0 0 0 0 5 6 5 8 6 0 5 , 1 4 1 8 5 . 6 7 % 1 , 3 3 2 Ci t y C l e r k C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 20 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 9 8 1 1 , 3 9 8 8 , 6 0 2 4 3 . 0 1 % 1 3 , 9 6 6 Ci t y C l e r k P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 7, 0 0 0 0 0 4 , 2 4 6 2 , 7 5 4 3 9 . 3 4 % 4 , 1 3 0 Ci t y C l e r k B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 5 , 8 4 1 0 0 2 , 5 1 2 3 , 3 2 9 5 6 . 9 8 % 8 0 Ci t y C l e r k T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 3 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 1 1 1 , 8 8 9 6 2 . 9 8 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 2, 5 5 0 0 0 9 4 4 1 , 6 0 6 6 2 . 9 7 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 1, 2 5 6 0 0 2 9 7 9 5 9 7 6 . 3 5 % 0 Ci t y C l e r k L e g a l N o t i c e s 1, 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 , 4 0 6 (406)(40.56)% 949 Ci t y C l e r k P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 7 9 Ci t y C l e r k I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 0 Ci t y C l e r k D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 6 4 0 0 0 2 4 0 4 0 0 6 2 . 5 0 % 3 0 Ci t y C l e r k H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 10 5 0 0 1 0 1 4 3 . 7 6 % 8 5 Ci t y C l e r k E l e c t i o n s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 23 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 6 7 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ci t y C l e r k B a n k & M e r c h a n t C h a r g e s 0 0 1 1 (1)0.00% 0 Ci t y C l e r k E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%38 Ci t y C l e r k T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 88 , 6 9 6 0 2, 2 1 1 37 , 2 6 7 51 , 4 2 9 57.98%35,054 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Ci t y C l e r k C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 7, 5 0 0 0 0 7, 9 2 0 (420)(5.59)%0 Ci t y C l e r k T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 7, 5 0 0 0 0 7, 9 2 0 (420)(5.60)%0 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 56 8 , 0 2 5 0 42 , 3 9 8 30 5 , 5 8 4 26 2 , 4 4 1 46.20%284,090 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k Tr a n s f e r s Ci t y C l e r k P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (7 0 , 7 7 4 ) 0 (6 , 0 2 8 ) ( 3 9 , 0 9 8 ) ( 3 1 , 6 7 6 ) 44.75% 0 Ci t y C l e r k O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (1 3 , 3 0 5 ) 0 (3 3 2 ) (7 , 2 7 1 ) (6 , 0 3 4 ) 45.35%0 Ci t y C l e r k T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (8 4 , 0 7 9 ) 0 (6 , 3 6 0 ) (4 6 , 3 6 9 ) (3 7 , 7 1 0 ) 44.85%0 Ci t y C l e r k Ci t y C l e r k TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 48 3 , 9 4 6 0 36 , 0 3 8 25 9 , 2 1 5 22 4 , 7 3 1 46.43%284,090 24 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 6 8 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ma y o r 1 3 1 0 - M a y o r ' s O f f i c e Ma y o r RE V E N U E S Ma y o r R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 Ma y o r C o m m u n i t y E v e n t R e v / S p o n s o r s h i p 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 3 2 , 4 5 0 (1 2 , 4 5 0 ) (62.24)% 28,360 Ma y o r D o n a t i o n s ( p l u s p r o j e c t c o d e ) 0 0 1, 0 0 0 8, 0 0 0 (8 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00%25,152 Ma y o r T o t a l R E V E N U E S 20 , 0 0 0 0 2, 5 0 0 40 , 4 5 0 (2 0 , 4 5 0 ) (102.25)%53,514 Ma y o r Ma y o r PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Ma y o r A d m i n i s t r a t i v e W a g e s 90 , 9 5 8 0 7 , 5 8 0 5 3 , 0 5 8 3 7 , 9 0 0 4 1 . 6 6 % 5 3 , 0 5 8 Ma y o r W a g e s 22 4 , 7 3 4 0 2 1 , 9 3 3 1 3 3 , 4 0 9 9 1 , 3 2 5 4 0 . 6 3 % 1 3 0 , 5 6 8 Ma y o r O v e r t i m e W a g e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 2 0 Ma y o r F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 24 , 1 5 0 0 2 , 1 9 3 1 3 , 7 2 5 1 0 , 4 2 5 4 3 . 1 6 % 1 3 , 4 2 0 Ma y o r P E R S I 37 , 6 9 4 0 2 , 9 8 1 2 0 , 7 4 8 1 6 , 9 4 6 4 4 . 9 5 % 2 0 , 6 2 0 Ma y o r W o r k e r s ' C o m p 1, 1 3 0 0 0 1 8 4 9 4 6 8 3 . 6 7 % 2 8 2 Ma y o r E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 7 5 , 9 9 0 0 0 6 5 7 7 5 , 3 3 3 9 9 . 1 3 % 4 4 , 3 9 0 Ma y o r M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 , 6 7 6 3 9 , 4 9 5 (3 9 , 4 9 5 ) 0.00% 0 Ma y o r V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 7 3 5 1 3 (513)0.00% 0 Ma y o r D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 6 2 3 , 1 7 5 (3 , 1 7 5 ) 0.00% 0 Ma y o r L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 6 3 3 5 (335)0.00% 0 Ma y o r S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 5 3 9 1 (391)0.00% 0 Ma y o r L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 8 4 5 0 2 (502)0.00% 0 Ma y o r E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 20 11 8 (118)0.00%0 Ma y o r T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 45 4 , 6 5 6 0 41 , 1 2 2 26 6 , 3 1 0 18 8 , 3 4 6 41.43%262,456 Ma y o r Ma y o r OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Ma y o r O f f i c e E x p e n s e 2, 1 5 0 0 8 7 4 9 9 1 , 6 5 1 7 6 . 7 6 % 1 , 0 4 1 Ma y o r C o p i e r E x p e n s e 2, 4 0 0 0 3 6 3 1 , 8 2 1 5 7 9 2 4 . 1 0 % 1 , 0 5 3 Ma y o r E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 6 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 7 7 7 9 . 4 1 % 1 1 6 Ma y o r F u e l s - G a s 1, 1 0 0 0 1 1 8 4 7 9 6 2 1 5 6 . 4 6 % 3 9 1 Ma y o r C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 1, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 9 8 Ma y o r C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 8 , 3 0 0 0 7 9 7 1 5 , 7 2 3 (7 , 4 2 3 ) (89.43)% 16,539 Ma y o r V e h i c l e R e p a i r 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ma y o r V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 50 0 0 0 2 3 4 7 7 9 5 . 4 0 % 1 5 6 Ma y o r S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 29 5 0 0 3 1 4 (19)(6.40)% 299 Ma y o r M i s c C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 (1 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 100 Ma y o r E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 5 0 0 0 0 1 9 4 8 1 9 6 . 1 9 % 0 Ma y o r F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ma y o r C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 1 , 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 3 3 Ma y o r P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 5, 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ma y o r C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ma y o r P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 1, 2 5 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 , 0 4 0 8 3 . 2 3 % 1 4 4 Ma y o r R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 26 4 0 2 7 1 9 1 7 3 2 7 . 5 6 % 1 2 8 Ma y o r C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 78 0 0 5 2 3 6 3 4 1 7 5 3 . 4 4 % 1 , 0 8 2 Ma y o r B u s i n e s s M e a l s 2, 8 5 0 0 1 0 6 5 4 2 , 1 9 6 7 7 . 0 5 % 6 9 1 Ma y o r M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 4 7 5 8 . 8 9 % 1 2 0 Ma y o r E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 7 , 9 7 3 0 1 5 2 , 6 0 5 5 , 3 6 8 6 7 . 3 2 % 2 , 3 9 0 Ma y o r T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 6 , 1 5 0 0 0 4 , 5 0 7 1 , 6 4 3 2 6 . 7 1 % 7 , 8 1 1 Ma y o r T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 7, 5 9 0 0 0 7 , 9 7 2 (382)(5.03)% 6,990 Ma y o r T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 1, 8 3 0 0 0 1 , 5 3 9 2 9 1 1 5 . 8 8 % 1 , 7 8 0 Ma y o r A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 25 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 7 1 25 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 6 9 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ma y o r P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 60 0 0 0 3 2 8 2 7 2 4 5 . 2 9 % 4 9 0 Ma y o r I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 0 0 0 5 0 (50)0.00% 0 Ma y o r B l d g & S t r u c t u r e s R e n t a l & L e a s e 3 5 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 4 4 Ma y o r D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 5 3 4 0 0 7 5 1 (217)(40.57)% 638 Ma y o r H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 75 0 0 6 1 1 4 1 8 . 7 6 % 7 8 Ma y o r V o l u n t e e r e x p e n s e 55 0 0 9 6 1 9 8 3 5 2 6 4 . 0 7 % 1 7 3 Ma y o r S u s p e n s e ( n o r e c e i p t s ) 0 0 0 24 (24)0.00%0 Ma y o r T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 55 , 2 9 1 0 1, 5 6 6 40 , 0 5 8 15 , 2 3 4 27.55%44,057 Ma y o r Ma y o r DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 50 9 , 9 4 7 0 42 , 6 8 8 30 6 , 3 6 8 20 3 , 5 8 0 39.92%306,514 Ma y o r Ma y o r Tr a n s f e r s Ma y o r P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (7 7 , 5 3 0 ) 0 (6 , 8 2 1 ) ( 4 4 , 2 2 6 ) ( 3 3 , 3 0 4 ) 42.95%(45,583) Ma y o r O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (3 , 9 3 8 ) 0 0 0 (3 , 9 3 8 ) 100.00%0 Ma y o r T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (8 1 , 4 6 8 ) 0 (6 , 8 2 1 ) (4 4 , 2 2 6 ) (3 7 , 2 4 2 ) 45.71%(45,583) Ma y o r Ma y o r TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 42 8 , 4 7 9 0 35 , 8 6 7 26 2 , 1 4 2 16 6 , 3 3 8 38.82%260,931 26 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 0 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Fi n a n c e 1 5 0 0 - F i n a n c e D e p a r t m e n t Fi n a n c e RE V E N U E S Fi n a n c e R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 15 (15)0.00%0 Fi n a n c e T o t a l R E V E N U E S 0 0 0 15 (15)0.00%0 Fi n a n c e Fi n a n c e PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Fi n a n c e W a g e s 72 6 , 1 6 6 0 5 9 , 6 8 9 4 2 0 , 0 0 2 3 0 6 , 1 6 4 4 2 . 1 6 % 3 7 1 , 5 8 0 Fi n a n c e O v e r t i m e W a g e s 0 0 6 6 9 3 , 3 1 3 (3 , 3 1 3 ) 0.00% 103 Fi n a n c e F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 55 , 5 5 2 0 4 , 4 2 8 3 1 , 0 1 7 2 4 , 5 3 5 4 4 . 1 6 % 2 7 , 1 7 6 Fi n a n c e P E R S I 86 , 7 0 4 0 6 , 8 3 3 4 7 , 9 2 0 3 8 , 7 8 4 4 4 . 7 3 % 4 2 , 0 7 5 Fi n a n c e W o r k e r s ' C o m p 2, 8 5 2 0 0 4 8 1 2 , 3 7 1 8 3 . 1 3 % 4 1 5 Fi n a n c e E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 1 6 7 , 1 7 8 0 0 1 , 7 3 2 1 6 5 , 4 4 6 9 8 . 9 6 % 7 7 , 4 2 8 Fi n a n c e M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 1 , 5 6 0 7 9 , 6 4 1 (7 9 , 6 4 1 ) 0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 1 5 0 1 , 0 3 0 (1 , 0 3 0 ) 0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 9 5 9 6 , 4 7 9 (6 , 4 7 9 ) 0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 3 5 8 1 2 (812)0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 4 9 8 8 4 (884)0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 8 9 1 , 1 1 8 (1 , 1 1 8 ) 0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 44 26 0 (260)0.00%0 Fi n a n c e T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 1, 0 3 8 , 4 5 2 0 84 , 8 0 5 59 4 , 6 8 8 44 3 , 7 6 4 42.73%518,776 Fi n a n c e Fi n a n c e OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Fi n a n c e O f f i c e E x p e n s e 5, 4 0 0 0 2 0 4 1 , 6 1 9 3 , 7 8 1 7 0 . 0 2 % 2 , 1 1 0 Fi n a n c e E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 6 6 0 0 6 7 8 3 5 7 7 8 7 . 4 5 % 2 0 4 Fi n a n c e S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 97 , 7 4 5 0 0 4 6 , 1 9 2 5 1 , 5 5 3 5 2 . 7 4 % 2 6 , 4 2 9 Fi n a n c e E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 4 5 0 0 5 1 8 4 2 6 6 5 9 . 1 0 % 9 1 1 Fi n a n c e F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 0 , 1 7 3 Fi n a n c e C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 4 , 6 5 0 0 0 0 4 , 6 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 8 5 0 Fi n a n c e A u d i t & A c c o u n t i n g S e r v i c e s 5 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 , 3 0 0 (2 , 3 0 0 ) (4.59)% 48,400 Fi n a n c e I n v e s t m e n t S e r v i c e s 18 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 3 8 5 9 , 6 1 7 8 , 3 8 3 4 6 . 5 7 % 9 , 4 9 7 Fi n a n c e P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 2, 8 0 0 0 0 1 , 5 4 4 1 , 2 5 6 4 4 . 8 4 % 1 , 4 7 6 Fi n a n c e C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 0 Fi n a n c e B u s i n e s s M e a l s 64 0 0 0 2 6 6 1 4 9 6 . 0 1 % 1 6 9 Fi n a n c e M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 2 0 0 0 3 7 8 1 2 2 6 1 . 0 0 % 5 5 Fi n a n c e E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 1 2 , 9 5 5 0 1 , 0 0 0 6 , 9 1 2 6 , 0 4 3 4 6 . 6 4 % 4 , 0 5 5 Fi n a n c e T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 3 , 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 , 7 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi n a n c e T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 5, 3 5 0 0 0 0 5 , 3 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi n a n c e T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 2, 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi n a n c e A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 0 0 0 1 0 (10)0.00% 0 Fi n a n c e L e g a l N o t i c e s 6, 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi n a n c e P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 5, 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 3 4 3 2 , 6 5 7 5 3 . 1 3 % 2 , 9 3 7 Fi n a n c e D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 2 , 3 4 8 0 0 1 , 9 5 3 3 9 5 1 6 . 8 2 % 1 , 4 5 3 Fi n a n c e H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 16 5 0 0 1 2 8 3 7 2 2 . 3 2 % 1 6 5 Fi n a n c e B a n k & M e r c h a n t C h a r g e s 0 0 0 10 5 (105)0.00%86 Fi n a n c e T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 21 8 , 5 6 3 0 2, 6 6 5 12 3 , 0 9 4 95 , 4 6 9 43.68%109,018 Fi n a n c e 27 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 1 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Fi n a n c e DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 2 5 7 , 0 1 5 0 87 , 4 7 0 71 7 , 7 8 2 53 9 , 2 3 3 42.89%627,794 Fi n a n c e Fi n a n c e Tr a n s f e r s Fi n a n c e P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (4 7 7 , 6 8 8 ) 0 (3 9 , 0 1 0 ) ( 2 7 3 , 5 5 7 ) ( 2 0 4 , 1 3 1 ) 42.73%(259,388) Fi n a n c e O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (1 0 0 , 5 3 9 ) 0 (5 8 9 ) (5 4 , 1 8 3 ) (4 6 , 3 5 6 ) 46.10%(29,933) Fi n a n c e T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (5 7 8 , 2 2 7 ) 0 (3 9 , 5 9 9 ) (3 2 7 , 7 4 0 ) (2 5 0 , 4 8 7 ) 43.32%(289,321) Fi n a n c e Fi n a n c e TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 67 8 , 7 8 8 0 47 , 8 7 1 39 0 , 0 4 2 28 8 , 7 4 6 42.53%338,474 28 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 2 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual IT 1 5 1 0 - I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y IT RE V E N U E S IT R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 8 , 7 0 4 (8 , 7 0 4 ) 0.00% 0 IT C a s h D o n a t i o n f o r C a p i t a l O u t l a y 0 0 0 (8 , 7 0 0 ) 8, 7 0 0 0.00%0 IT T o t a l R E V E N U E S 0 0 0 4 (4)0.00%0 IT IT PE R S O N N E L C O S T S IT W a g e s 1, 0 3 2 , 7 9 2 0 8 2 , 9 2 5 5 9 5 , 0 2 1 4 3 7 , 7 7 1 4 2 . 3 8 % 5 5 7 , 7 4 4 IT W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 1 9 , 2 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 9 6 , 6 0 6 1 2 , 5 9 5 6 5 . 5 9 % 1 0 , 1 0 1 IT O v e r t i m e W a g e s 22 , 2 3 0 0 1 , 4 7 3 9 , 2 0 5 1 3 , 0 2 5 5 8 . 5 9 % 8 , 6 8 4 IT F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 82 , 1 7 8 0 6 , 1 9 9 4 4 , 2 1 9 3 7 , 9 5 9 4 6 . 1 9 % 4 1 , 4 6 7 IT P E R S I 12 5 , 9 7 0 0 9 , 5 5 4 6 8 , 3 4 3 5 7 , 6 2 7 4 5 . 7 4 % 6 3 , 9 4 9 IT W o r k e r s ' C o m p 4, 6 1 9 0 0 1 , 1 0 2 3 , 5 1 7 7 6 . 1 4 % 1 , 0 6 1 IT E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 2 4 3 , 1 6 8 0 0 2 , 2 6 7 2 4 0 , 9 0 1 9 9 . 0 6 % 1 3 6 , 4 9 4 IT M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 8 , 2 1 6 1 2 8 , 8 7 6 (1 2 8 , 8 7 6 ) 0.00% 0 IT H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 (2 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 IT V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 2 2 2 1 , 5 8 1 (1 , 5 8 1 ) 0.00% 0 IT D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 , 4 4 0 1 0 , 0 4 9 (1 0 , 0 4 9 ) 0.00% 0 IT L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 8 1 1 , 0 9 0 (1 , 0 9 0 ) 0.00% 0 IT S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 0 6 1 , 2 7 5 (1 , 2 7 5 ) 0.00% 0 IT L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 5 8 1 , 5 9 3 (1 , 5 9 3 ) 0.00% 0 IT E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 67 40 2 (402)0.00%0 IT T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 1, 5 3 0 , 1 5 7 0 12 1 , 7 5 0 87 3 , 6 2 8 65 6 , 5 2 9 42.91%819,500 IT IT OP E R A T I N G C O S T S IT O f f i c e E x p e n s e 1, 0 0 0 0 4 4 6 2 4 3 7 6 3 7 . 5 9 % 5 5 0 IT C o p i e r E x p e n s e 2, 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 1 5 7 (157)(7.82)% 1,513 IT E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 1 , 1 4 0 0 0 2 5 7 8 8 3 7 7 . 4 6 % 2 6 9 IT S a f e t y E x p e n s e 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 IT F u e l s - G a s 70 0 0 4 4 3 2 4 3 7 6 5 3 . 7 2 % 2 9 5 IT B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 6, 0 0 0 (6 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 IT V e h i c l e R e p a i r 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 6 6 IT V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 50 0 0 0 2 8 4 7 2 9 4 . 3 9 % 0 IT S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 1 5 2 , 9 9 6 0 1 3 , 9 1 0 1 3 1 , 6 8 9 2 1 , 3 0 7 1 3 . 9 2 % 1 0 8 , 2 8 5 IT E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 10 0 0 0 1 0 9 0 9 0 . 0 1 % 9 7 IT E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 7 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 6 9 4 0 , 9 5 7 2 9 , 0 4 3 4 1 . 4 9 % 3 , 3 7 8 IT S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 20 2 , 0 6 1 0 6 , 9 0 9 1 4 5 , 7 9 7 5 6 , 2 6 4 2 7 . 8 4 % 1 2 0 , 8 1 4 IT F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 3 6 IT C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 4 , 1 5 0 0 0 1 , 4 6 8 2 , 6 8 3 6 4 . 6 3 % 0 IT P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 5 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 5 0 . 0 0 % 0 IT T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 16 , 8 0 0 0 1 , 2 2 8 1 0 , 1 8 8 6 , 6 1 2 3 9 . 3 5 % 8 , 8 6 5 IT P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 20 0 0 5 8 1 7 6 2 4 1 2 . 0 3 % 5 4 IT R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 1, 4 4 0 0 1 0 5 7 5 0 6 9 0 4 7 . 8 9 % 9 2 9 IT C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 4, 8 0 0 0 3 2 1 2 , 5 4 5 2 , 2 5 5 4 6 . 9 8 % 2 , 1 7 0 IT B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 IT M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 7 5 0 0 8 6 8 9 0 . 0 0 % 3 7 IT E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 3 6 , 4 1 2 0 1 , 2 9 1 1 0 , 4 2 2 2 5 , 9 9 0 7 1 . 3 7 % 1 3 , 8 8 4 IT T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 8 , 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 9 5 1 7 , 0 4 9 8 8 . 1 1 % 1 , 8 9 6 IT T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 5, 6 0 0 0 1 , 0 3 8 2 , 0 6 3 3 , 5 3 7 6 3 . 1 5 % 1 , 4 1 3 IT T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 2, 4 0 0 0 3 4 2 7 6 0 1 , 6 4 0 6 8 . 3 3 % 4 6 5 29 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 3 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual IT D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 5 0 0 0 1 0 6 1 2 2 3 7 8 7 5 . 6 6 % 1 5 0 IT H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 28 5 0 0 24 7 38 13.39%285 IT T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 56 8 , 3 5 9 (6 , 0 0 0 ) 25 , 7 1 5 37 6 , 5 4 1 18 5 , 8 1 8 33.04%266,453 IT IT Ca p i t a l O u t l a y IT C a p i t a l - C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s 1 2 2 , 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 , 2 3 6 1 4 , 2 6 4 1 1 . 6 4 % 3 9 7 , 0 5 7 IT C a p i t a l - C o m m u n i c a t i o n E q u i p m e n t 7 5 , 6 0 0 (2 6 , 1 1 0 ) 0 0 49 , 4 9 0 100.00%0 IT T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 19 8 , 1 0 0 (2 6 , 1 1 0 ) 0 10 8 , 2 3 6 63 , 7 5 3 37.07%397,057 IT IT DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 2, 2 9 6 , 6 1 7 (3 2 , 1 1 0 ) 14 7 , 4 6 6 1, 3 5 8 , 4 0 5 90 6 , 1 0 1 40.01%1,483,011 IT IT Tr a n s f e r s IT P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (7 0 3 , 8 7 2 ) 0 (5 6 , 0 0 5 ) ( 4 0 1 , 8 6 9 ) ( 3 0 2 , 0 0 3 ) 42.90%(409,750) IT O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (3 3 9 , 4 1 6 ) 0 (1 1 , 8 2 9 ) (2 3 9 , 2 3 0 ) (1 0 0 , 1 8 6 ) 29.51%(341,694) IT T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (1 , 0 4 3 , 2 8 8 ) 0 (6 7 , 8 3 4 ) (6 4 1 , 0 9 9 ) (4 0 2 , 1 8 9 ) 38.55%(751,444) IT IT TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 2 5 3 , 3 2 8 (3 2 , 1 1 0 ) 79 , 6 3 1 71 7 , 3 0 7 50 3 , 9 1 1 41.26%731,567 30 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 4 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Le g a l 1 5 2 0 - L e g a l D e p t Le g a l PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Le g a l W a g e s 53 6 , 6 7 3 0 4 4 , 2 1 3 3 0 7 , 4 7 4 2 2 9 , 1 9 9 4 2 . 7 0 % 2 9 6 , 2 6 6 Le g a l F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 41 , 0 5 5 0 3 , 3 0 1 2 2 , 7 2 0 1 8 , 3 3 5 4 4 . 6 5 % 2 1 , 6 5 3 Le g a l P E R S I 64 , 0 4 8 0 5 , 0 0 5 3 4 , 8 0 6 2 9 , 2 4 2 4 5 . 6 5 % 3 3 , 5 3 7 Le g a l W o r k e r s ' C o m p 95 7 0 0 2 0 6 7 5 1 7 8 . 4 3 % 2 1 5 Le g a l E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 7 5 , 9 9 0 0 0 8 5 5 7 5 , 1 3 5 9 8 . 8 7 % 4 1 , 0 9 0 Le g a l M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 , 5 0 9 3 2 , 1 2 5 (3 2 , 1 2 5 ) 0.00% 0 Le g a l V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 6 4 4 5 2 (452)0.00% 0 Le g a l D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 0 6 2 , 8 6 3 (2 , 8 6 3 ) 0.00% 0 Le g a l L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 8 4 1 0 (410)0.00% 0 Le g a l S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 9 0 5 4 2 (542)0.00% 0 Le g a l L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 2 4 7 4 4 (744)0.00% 0 Le g a l E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 20 11 8 (118)0.00%0 Le g a l T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 71 8 , 7 2 3 0 57 , 8 0 1 40 3 , 3 1 5 31 5 , 4 0 7 43.88%392,762 Le g a l Le g a l OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Le g a l O f f i c e E x p e n s e 2, 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 7 2 , 3 5 3 9 4 . 1 2 % 3 5 8 Le g a l E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 7 Le g a l S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 1, 1 8 0 0 0 1 , 2 5 5 (75)(6.39)% 1,196 Le g a l E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 6 0 Le g a l F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Le g a l C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 2 , 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Le g a l P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 2 , 5 0 0 Le g a l L e g a l S e r v i c e s 30 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 , 4 9 6 9 , 5 0 4 3 1 . 6 8 % 5 3 , 5 1 0 Le g a l P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 15 0 0 0 2 4 1 2 6 8 3 . 9 6 % 3 8 Le g a l R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 48 0 0 7 3 4 8 1 (1)(0.16)% 154 Le g a l C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 1, 0 0 8 0 8 4 5 8 8 4 2 0 4 1 . 6 6 % 5 8 8 Le g a l B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 3 8 6 2 6 2 . 2 9 % 3 2 Le g a l M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 3 6 1 1 6 (16)(15.74)% 39 Le g a l E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 4 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 3 3 2 , 8 2 9 1 , 1 7 1 2 9 . 2 6 % 1 , 0 2 5 Le g a l T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 5 9 Le g a l T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 1, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 8 3 8 Le g a l T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 6 7 Le g a l P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Le g a l D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 1 0 , 1 6 2 0 7 3 9 4 , 7 0 9 5 , 4 5 3 5 3 . 6 6 % 4 , 9 8 1 Le g a l H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 75 0 0 7 3 2 3 . 0 9 % 7 3 Le g a l P e n a l t i e s / S e t t l e m e n t s / F o r f e i t u r e s 0 0 62 , 1 4 3 62 , 1 4 3 (6 2 , 1 4 3 ) 0.00%0 Le g a l T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 65 , 7 5 5 0 64 , 2 0 8 92 , 8 9 8 (2 7 , 1 4 3 ) (41.28)%97,084 Le g a l Le g a l DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 78 4 , 4 7 8 0 12 2 , 0 0 9 49 6 , 2 1 3 28 8 , 2 6 4 36.74%489,845 Le g a l Le g a l Tr a n s f e r s Le g a l P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (3 3 0 , 6 1 3 ) 0 (2 6 , 5 8 8 ) ( 1 8 5 , 5 2 5 ) ( 1 4 5 , 0 8 8 ) 43.88%(196,381) Le g a l O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (3 0 , 2 4 7 ) 0 (2 9 , 5 3 6 ) (3 3 , 1 4 5 ) 2, 8 9 8 (9.58)%(22,138) Le g a l T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (3 6 0 , 8 6 0 ) 0 (5 6 , 1 2 4 ) (2 1 8 , 6 7 0 ) (1 4 2 , 1 8 9 ) 39.40%(218,519) Le g a l Le g a l TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 42 3 , 6 1 8 0 65 , 8 8 5 27 7 , 5 4 3 14 6 , 0 7 5 34.48%271,327 31 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 5 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual HR 1 5 4 0 - H u m a n R e s o u r c e s HR RE V E N U E S HR R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 14 48 (48)0.00%645 HR T o t a l R E V E N U E S 0 0 14 48 (48)0.00%645 HR HR PE R S O N N E L C O S T S HR W a g e s 34 7 , 6 1 8 0 2 5 , 4 4 1 1 6 9 , 1 8 5 1 7 8 , 4 3 3 5 1 . 3 3 % 1 5 8 , 9 9 3 HR W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR O v e r t i m e W a g e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 3 HR F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 28 , 1 2 2 0 1 , 8 7 0 1 2 , 2 1 3 1 5 , 9 0 9 5 6 . 5 7 % 1 1 , 2 7 6 HR P E R S I 41 , 2 3 3 0 2 , 8 8 0 1 9 , 1 0 9 2 2 , 1 2 4 5 3 . 6 5 % 1 8 , 0 0 6 HR W o r k e r s ' C o m p 2, 0 8 8 0 0 1 8 1 1 , 9 0 7 9 1 . 3 3 % 1 6 8 HR E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 1 6 6 , 1 8 8 0 1 1 , 2 2 0 3 6 , 8 5 8 1 2 9 , 3 3 0 7 7 . 8 2 % 8 3 , 4 2 5 HR M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 , 9 0 9 3 5 , 5 8 0 (3 5 , 5 8 0 ) 0.00% 0 HR V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 6 0 4 3 6 (436)0.00% 0 HR D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 0 9 2 , 2 2 5 (2 , 2 2 5 ) 0.00% 0 HR L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 7 3 2 8 (328)0.00% 0 HR S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 3 3 4 2 (342)0.00% 0 HR L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 8 4 3 6 (436)0.00% 0 HR E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 20 13 4 (134)0.00%0 HR T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 60 5 , 2 4 9 0 46 , 8 8 8 27 7 , 0 2 6 32 8 , 2 2 3 54.23%271,941 HR HR OP E R A T I N G C O S T S HR O f f i c e E x p e n s e 5, 0 0 0 0 2 8 2 2 , 0 9 6 2 , 9 0 4 5 8 . 0 8 % 2 , 4 3 0 HR C o p i e r E x p e n s e 4, 8 0 0 0 5 6 7 3 , 4 6 1 1 , 3 3 9 2 7 . 8 9 % 2 , 1 3 2 HR E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 3 6 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 5 HR S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 18 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 , 9 8 6 3 , 0 1 4 1 6 . 7 4 % 1 4 , 2 7 1 HR E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 6 9 HR F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 6 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 7 , 4 5 0 0 0 0 7 , 4 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 6 0 , 1 5 0 0 0 4 , 7 0 5 5 5 , 4 4 5 9 2 . 1 7 % 3 , 9 2 0 HR C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 0 0 0 5 , 2 9 7 (5 , 2 9 7 ) 0.00% 0 HR B a c k g r o u n d / E m p l o y m e n t T e s t i n g 1 1 , 5 0 0 0 1 , 4 2 1 7 , 5 0 7 3 , 9 9 3 3 4 . 7 2 % 6 , 0 7 3 HR T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 45 0 0 0 0 4 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 40 0 0 0 8 9 3 1 1 7 7 . 7 7 % 1 5 6 HR R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 48 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 2, 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 7 0 1 , 8 3 0 7 0 . 3 8 % 7 7 0 HR B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 8 5 8 4 . 9 9 % 1 2 HR E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 1 4 , 0 9 9 0 0 1 , 4 9 8 1 2 , 6 0 0 8 9 . 3 7 % 2 , 4 4 2 HR T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 HR C i t y T r a i n i n g C l a s s e s 5 5 , 8 2 8 0 3 8 1 2 2 , 0 7 2 3 3 , 7 5 6 6 0 . 4 6 % 2 9 , 5 3 1 HR W e l l n e s s P r o g r a m 17 , 0 0 0 0 8 5 1 8 , 7 5 1 8 , 2 4 9 4 8 . 5 2 % 1 2 , 4 4 0 HR A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 6 , 2 1 4 2 1 , 6 8 4 (1 , 6 8 4 ) (8.41)% 14,109 HR P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 1, 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 7 6 (176)(17.56)% 508 HR D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 9 , 2 8 2 0 0 4 , 3 4 1 4 , 9 4 1 5 3 . 2 3 % 7 , 6 8 3 HR H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 90 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 5 HR E m p l o y e e E d u c a t i o n R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 4 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 , 1 4 9 8 5 1 6 . 0 7 % 9 , 0 6 5 32 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 6 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual HR E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 5 , 5 0 0 0 0 1, 6 8 0 3, 8 2 0 69.45%503 HR T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 25 6 , 1 8 9 0 9, 8 2 5 11 3 , 2 7 6 14 2 , 9 1 3 55.78%106,464 HR HR Ca p i t a l O u t l a y HR C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 7, 5 0 0 0 0 0 7, 5 0 0 100.00%0 HR T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 7, 5 0 0 0 0 0 7, 5 0 0 100.00%0 HR HR DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 86 8 , 9 3 8 0 56 , 7 1 3 39 0 , 3 0 2 47 8 , 6 3 6 55.08%378,405 HR HR Tr a n s f e r s HR P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (2 4 3 , 9 1 5 ) 0 (2 1 , 5 6 8 ) ( 1 2 6 , 3 5 7 ) ( 1 1 7 , 5 5 8 ) 48.19%(135,971) HR O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (1 1 2 , 7 8 7 ) 0 (4 , 5 1 9 ) (5 1 , 5 1 4 ) (6 1 , 2 7 3 ) 54.32%(53,209) HR T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (3 5 6 , 7 0 2 ) 0 (2 6 , 0 8 8 ) (1 7 7 , 8 7 1 ) (1 7 8 , 8 3 1 ) 50.13%(189,179) HR HR TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 51 2 , 2 3 6 0 30 , 6 2 5 21 2 , 4 3 1 29 9 , 8 0 5 58.52%189,226 33 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 7 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ot h G o v / S t L i t e 1 8 4 0 - O t h e r G o v t / S t L i g h t i n g Ot h G o v / S t L i t e RE V E N U E S Ot h G o v / S t L i t e G e n e r a l P r o p e r t y T a x R e v e n u e 3 3 , 5 4 0 , 8 5 0 0 1 6 3 , 1 4 4 2 0 , 6 7 8 , 6 8 7 1 2 , 8 6 2 , 1 6 3 3 8 . 3 4 % 1 8 , 9 8 3 , 7 1 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e G a s F r a n c h i s e R e v e n u e 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 1 , 7 9 9 2 8 , 2 0 1 4 . 0 2 % 7 5 1 , 9 2 1 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e C a b l e T V F r a n c h i s e R e v e n u e 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 , 4 9 3 1 4 3 , 5 0 7 7 1 . 7 5 % 5 5 , 4 8 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E l e c t r i c i t y F r a n c h i s e R e v e n u e 6 5 4 , 6 3 9 0 1 4 6 , 5 1 0 2 7 8 , 9 2 3 3 7 5 , 7 1 6 5 7 . 3 9 % 2 8 7 , 2 5 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e G r a n t R e v e n u e s 0 9 8 2 , 8 4 9 4 , 1 8 9 3 4 7 , 3 7 1 6 3 5 , 4 7 9 6 4 . 6 5 % 2 6 5 , 1 8 3 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 5 7 7 4 , 1 4 6 (4 , 1 4 6 ) 0.00% 40 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S t a t e R e v e n u e S h a r i n g R e v e n u e 6 , 6 7 1 , 2 9 4 0 0 1 , 8 3 6 , 2 4 0 4 , 8 3 5 , 0 5 4 7 2 . 4 7 % 2 , 8 3 0 , 0 8 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S t a t e L i q u o r A p p o r t i o n m e n t R e v e n u e 9 9 5 , 4 0 6 0 2 3 7 , 3 2 1 4 7 4 , 6 4 2 5 2 0 , 7 6 4 5 2 . 3 1 % 4 0 6 , 2 8 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R e s t i t u t i o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 0 1 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M e r i d i a n D o w n t o w n D e v e l o p m e n t 0 0 0 1 0 , 1 4 3 (1 0 , 1 4 3 ) 0.00% 26,000 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R e c y c l e d R e v e n u e 0 5 0 0 1 1 7 6 4 4 (144)(28.87)% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R e n t a l I n c o m e 0 0 0 5 0 0 (500)0.00% 150 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e D o n a t i o n s ( p l u s p r o j e c t c o d e ) 1 8 , 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 , 4 1 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M A C A r t s C o m m i s s i o n R e v e n u e s 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 7 2 5 1 8 , 2 7 5 9 1 . 3 7 % 1 , 9 5 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 20 2 , 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 , 3 3 6 7 2 7 , 5 0 7 (5 2 5 , 5 0 7 ) (260.15)% 362,018 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 0 56 4 , 5 7 5 (5 6 4 , 5 7 5 ) 0.00%0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l R E V E N U E S 42 , 9 9 2 , 5 9 9 99 3 , 3 4 9 67 2 , 1 9 4 25 , 6 5 3 , 3 9 6 18 , 3 3 2 , 5 5 3 41.68%23,970,305 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Ot h G o v / S t L i t e W a g e s 22 6 , 2 8 4 0 1 7 , 7 0 1 1 3 2 , 0 3 1 9 4 , 2 5 3 4 1 . 6 5 % 1 0 5 , 4 5 3 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 6 , 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 2 , 6 1 6 3 , 3 8 4 5 6 . 4 0 % 2 , 7 4 6 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 17 , 7 7 0 0 1 , 3 5 2 9 , 9 7 0 7 , 8 0 0 4 3 . 8 9 % 8 , 2 0 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P E R S I 27 , 0 1 9 0 2 , 0 0 4 1 4 , 6 5 7 1 2 , 3 6 2 4 5 . 7 5 % 1 1 , 9 3 7 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e W o r k e r s ' C o m p 3, 6 1 4 0 0 7 2 1 2 , 8 9 3 8 0 . 0 4 % 5 4 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 4 5 , 5 9 4 0 0 4 2 4 4 5 , 1 7 0 9 9 . 0 6 % 2 2 , 3 4 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 6 4 6 2 3 , 4 4 5 (2 3 , 4 4 5 ) 0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 (2 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 3 2 2 7 8 (278)0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 1 7 1 , 8 3 1 (1 , 8 3 1 ) 0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 3 1 9 1 (191)0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 3 2 7 8 (278)0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 0 3 3 8 (338)0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 16 94 (94)0.00%0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 32 6 , 2 8 1 0 24 , 4 2 2 18 8 , 8 7 4 13 7 , 4 0 7 42.11%151,234 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Ot h G o v / S t L i t e O f f i c e E x p e n s e 1, 2 5 0 0 1 0 6 0 0 6 5 0 5 2 . 0 2 % 6 1 3 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e C o p i e r E x p e n s e 7, 0 0 0 0 1 , 6 8 0 4 , 8 3 0 2 , 1 7 0 3 0 . 9 9 % 5 , 2 1 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 2 4 0 0 0 4 7 1 9 3 8 0 . 5 7 % 5 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 6, 1 5 0 0 0 1 3 8 6 , 0 1 3 9 7 . 7 6 % 8 , 0 7 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 1 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S t r e e t L i g h t / S i g n s R e p a i r s / M a i n t e n a n c e 5 5 , 0 0 0 8 6 , 0 2 7 1 4 , 9 3 5 5 6 , 4 5 7 8 4 , 5 7 0 5 9 . 9 6 % 2 3 , 3 7 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e G r o u n d s M a i n t e n a n c e 30 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 2, 8 2 0 0 1 8 8 1 , 6 9 8 1 , 1 2 2 3 9 . 7 7 % 2 0 , 5 6 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 1 , 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 2 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 1 7 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n 1 4 , 4 0 0 0 1 , 0 2 5 9 , 5 2 9 4 , 8 7 1 3 3 . 8 2 % 1 , 2 1 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M i s c C o n t r i b u t i o n s 40 , 5 0 0 (2 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 3 6 9 2 0 , 1 3 1 9 8 . 2 0 % 5 1 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s 2 7 5 , 0 2 0 0 0 2 7 5 , 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 9 4 , 9 3 8 34 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 8 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ot h G o v / S t L i t e S e n i o r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 , 6 1 3 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R e c y c l e F u n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s 2 0 , 8 2 0 2 7 , 9 5 8 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 3 3 , 7 7 8 6 9 . 2 4 % 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e A l l u m b a u g h H o u s e 64 , 2 2 9 0 1 6 , 0 7 2 3 2 , 1 4 4 3 2 , 0 8 5 4 9 . 9 5 % 4 6 , 4 0 1 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 61 , 2 0 0 9 8 , 9 0 9 0 5 6 , 4 8 5 1 0 3 , 6 2 4 6 4 . 7 2 % 3 8 , 1 3 2 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 2 5 0 0 0 1 9 5 5 5 2 1 . 9 8 % 9 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 3 7 , 7 3 0 0 0 0 3 7 , 7 3 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 , 4 0 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e A r t s C o m m i s s i o n E x p e n s e s 2 8 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 6 9 0 6 , 9 4 0 9 , 3 4 9 2 9 , 8 4 1 7 6 . 1 4 % 1 3 , 5 4 7 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 0 0 0 8 (8)0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 0 0 0 3 4 4 (344)0.00% 481 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 6, 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 1 , 6 7 7 4 , 3 2 3 7 2 . 0 5 % 1 , 6 4 1 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 24 0 0 2 7 1 9 1 4 9 2 0 . 3 1 % 1 3 5 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 60 0 0 7 3 3 8 9 2 1 1 3 5 . 2 2 % 3 6 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 7 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 3 5 0 0 0 3 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 3 , 6 9 1 0 2 , 5 1 5 4 , 1 1 9 (428)(11.59)% 800 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 , 5 0 0 0 1 , 2 9 7 1 , 6 1 3 (113)(7.52)% 247 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 1, 7 0 0 0 1 , 1 5 1 1 , 4 0 9 2 9 1 1 7 . 0 9 % 4 0 3 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 78 4 0 5 0 6 6 5 8 1 2 6 1 6 . 0 6 % 2 2 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 9 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 8 , 8 7 0 9 8 . 5 5 % 2 , 5 8 1 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 25 0 0 0 1 , 4 4 8 (1 , 1 9 8 ) (479.38)% 45 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 0 0 5 1 6 1 5 , 6 1 3 (1 5 , 6 1 3 ) 0.00%(4,441) Ot h G o v / S t L i t e E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 3 2 5 , 6 6 0 1 , 3 0 0 0 1 7 1 , 9 7 2 1 5 4 , 9 8 8 4 7 . 4 0 % 1 7 1 , 2 9 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 0 5 0 0 6 2 3 5 8 1 4 2 2 8 . 4 3 % 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 7 4 , 1 7 0 0 8 , 2 9 9 6 2 , 7 6 2 1 1 , 4 0 8 1 5 . 3 8 % 6 0 , 7 9 6 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 40 0 0 0 3 7 5 2 5 6 . 3 1 % 3 6 7 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e A D A C o m p l i a n c e 10 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 1 0 8 , 8 9 0 8 8 . 9 0 % 2 , 1 7 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 60 0 0 5 7 3 5 . 0 1 % 3 9 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e M i s c e l l a n e o u s E x p e n s e 4, 9 5 4 7 0 0 0 5 , 0 2 4 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 6 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e V o l u n t e e r e x p e n s e 2, 5 0 0 0 0 2 7 1 2 , 2 2 9 8 9 . 1 7 % 4 2 2 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e F i x e d A s s e t s - G a i n o r L o s s 0 0 0 3 , 5 0 0 (3 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e G r a n t E x p e n d i t u r e s 0 9 8 8 , 4 1 1 8 , 6 2 8 3 5 5 , 3 7 8 6 3 3 , 0 3 3 6 4 . 0 4 % 2 7 5 , 8 4 8 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 1, 0 7 9 , 2 5 3 1, 1 9 3 , 8 6 5 64 , 2 2 8 1, 1 0 5 , 2 4 2 1, 1 6 7 , 8 7 6 51.38%873,303 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Ot h G o v / S t L i t e C a p i t a l - S i g n s / A r t 96 , 6 2 0 0 0 3 , 0 0 0 9 3 , 6 2 0 9 6 . 8 9 % 5 1 , 9 6 4 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e C a p i t a l - C o m m u n i c a t i o n E q u i p m e n t 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 (3 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 17 0 , 0 0 0 100.00%0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 29 6 , 6 2 0 (3 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 3, 0 0 0 26 3 , 6 2 0 98.87%51,964 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 7 0 2 , 1 5 4 1, 1 6 3 , 8 6 5 88 , 6 5 0 1, 2 9 7 , 1 1 6 1, 5 6 8 , 9 0 3 54.74%1,076,501 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Tr a n s f e r s Ot h G o v / S t L i t e P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (8 1 , 5 7 0 ) 0 (6 , 1 0 6 ) ( 4 7 , 1 8 5 ) ( 3 4 , 3 8 5 ) 42.15%(72,321) Ot h G o v / S t L i t e O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (9 , 6 3 3 ) 0 0 0 (9 , 6 3 3 ) 100.00%0 Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (9 1 , 2 0 3 ) 0 (6 , 1 0 6 ) (4 7 , 1 8 5 ) (4 4 , 0 1 8 ) 48.26%(72,321) Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e In t e r f u n d C a s h T r a n s f e r s Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T r a n s f e r o f E q u i t y (1 5 4 , 0 4 0 ) 0 (3 , 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 ) (3 , 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 ) 3, 0 9 7 , 3 6 4 (2,010.75)%(2,641,404) Ot h G o v / S t L i t e T o t a l I n t e r f u n d C a s h T r a n s f e r s (1 5 4 , 0 4 0 ) 0 (3 , 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 ) (3 , 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 ) 3, 0 9 7 , 3 6 4 (2,010.75)%(2,641,404) Ot h G o v / S t L i t e Ot h G o v / S t L i t e TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 4 5 6 , 9 1 1 1, 1 6 3 , 8 6 5 (3 , 1 6 8 , 8 5 9 ) (2 , 0 0 1 , 4 7 3 ) 4, 6 2 2 , 2 4 9 176.36%(1,637,224) 35 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 7 9 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ci t y H a l l 1 8 5 0 - C i t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l RE V E N U E S Ci t y H a l l R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 8 1 Ci t y H a l l R e n t a l I n c o m e 19 , 0 0 0 0 1, 8 8 1 12 , 5 6 7 6, 4 3 3 33.85%11,767 Ci t y H a l l T o t a l R E V E N U E S 19 , 0 0 0 0 1, 8 8 1 12 , 5 6 7 6, 4 3 3 33.86%12,448 Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Ci t y H a l l W a g e s 15 3 , 2 7 3 0 1 3 , 1 9 8 8 7 , 8 1 4 6 5 , 4 5 9 4 2 . 7 0 % 4 3 , 1 1 4 Ci t y H a l l O v e r t i m e W a g e s 67 8 0 4 9 5 7 0 1 0 8 1 5 . 9 7 % 8 8 2 Ci t y H a l l F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 11 , 7 7 7 0 9 9 8 6 , 6 3 6 5 , 1 4 1 4 3 . 6 5 % 3 , 2 8 5 Ci t y H a l l P E R S I 18 , 3 8 2 0 1 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 5 8 , 3 7 7 4 5 . 5 7 % 4 , 9 8 0 Ci t y H a l l W o r k e r s ' C o m p 5, 0 6 5 0 0 9 3 4 4 , 1 3 1 8 1 . 5 6 % 3 6 1 Ci t y H a l l E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 4 5 , 5 9 4 0 0 4 3 2 4 5 , 1 6 2 9 9 . 0 5 % 1 0 , 3 9 7 Ci t y H a l l M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 4 7 0 1 7 , 0 0 8 (1 7 , 0 0 8 ) 0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 3 2 2 2 2 (222)0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 8 2 1 , 2 4 7 (1 , 2 4 7 ) 0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 4 2 0 1 (201)0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 3 1 9 7 (197)0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 0 2 4 0 (240)0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 12 71 (71)0.00%0 Ci t y H a l l T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 23 4 , 7 6 9 0 18 , 5 4 6 12 5 , 5 7 6 10 9 , 1 9 3 46.51%63,020 Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Ci t y H a l l O f f i c e E x p e n s e 85 0 0 0 3 9 3 4 5 7 5 3 . 7 2 % 9 6 Ci t y H a l l E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 1 8 0 0 0 3 9 1 4 1 7 8 . 1 0 % 1 9 Ci t y H a l l J a n i t o r i a l 12 7 , 5 9 1 0 2 5 , 7 0 1 6 8 , 0 8 4 5 9 , 5 0 7 4 6 . 6 3 % 6 9 , 1 6 9 Ci t y H a l l S a f e t y E x p e n s e 85 0 0 2 4 7 8 4 3 7 0 . 8 3 % 2 2 4 Ci t y H a l l S h o p S u p p l i e s 2, 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 1 , 8 9 7 9 4 . 8 2 % 3 8 2 Ci t y H a l l F u e l s - G a s 1, 0 0 0 0 5 7 6 2 2 3 7 8 3 7 . 8 3 % 3 9 7 Ci t y H a l l C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 7 Ci t y H a l l M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 0 0 0 1 2 4 (124)0.00% 79 Ci t y H a l l B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 2 0 0 , 1 6 2 (8 , 0 0 0 ) 18 , 1 1 2 5 7 , 9 4 0 1 3 4 , 2 2 3 6 9 . 8 4 % 5 8 , 3 0 3 Ci t y H a l l P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 2 , 5 0 0 0 0 2 9 5 2 , 2 0 5 8 8 . 1 9 % 1 , 4 0 0 Ci t y H a l l V e h i c l e R e p a i r 2, 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y H a l l V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 2, 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 7 7 1 , 2 7 6 7 2 4 3 6 . 2 2 % 9 7 0 Ci t y H a l l E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Ci t y H a l l A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 1 7 , 6 2 7 0 0 3 0 5 1 7 , 3 2 2 9 8 . 2 6 % 1 2 , 0 1 5 Ci t y H a l l E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 4, 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 3 , 9 5 1 9 8 . 7 7 % 4 4 2 Ci t y H a l l E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 3 7 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 7 9 . 9 9 % 0 Ci t y H a l l F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 3 0 , 7 2 0 (3 0 , 7 2 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 0 0 Ci t y H a l l C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 3 , 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 , 3 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 6 3 Ci t y H a l l P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 0 0 0 1 5 (15)0.00% 0 Ci t y H a l l T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 1, 9 3 5 0 1 9 9 1 , 2 8 7 6 4 8 3 3 . 4 8 % 1 , 2 4 0 Ci t y H a l l P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 3, 8 6 9 0 0 4 , 1 9 0 (321)(8.29)% 3,212 Ci t y H a l l R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 1, 0 0 8 0 7 3 4 7 9 5 2 9 5 2 . 4 3 % 3 1 6 Ci t y H a l l C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 1, 8 0 0 0 1 1 6 8 4 7 9 5 3 5 2 . 9 4 % 5 6 5 Ci t y H a l l E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 8 0 0 0 0 7 2 8 7 2 8 . 9 6 % 3 2 4 Ci t y H a l l P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 50 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 8 0 Ci t y H a l l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 2 3 , 3 6 1 0 1 0 , 3 8 0 2 0 , 7 6 1 2 , 6 0 0 1 1 . 1 3 % 1 9 , 7 9 8 Ci t y H a l l E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 9 6 , 6 6 3 0 6 , 1 3 3 4 6 , 2 9 1 5 0 , 3 7 2 5 2 . 1 1 % 4 8 , 4 5 2 36 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 0 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Ci t y H a l l I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 15 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 8 5 7 , 4 6 1 7 , 5 3 9 5 0 . 2 6 % 8 , 3 9 9 Ci t y H a l l B l d g & S t r u c t u r e s R e n t a l & L e a s e 2 1 , 5 4 9 0 0 1 2 , 9 2 8 8 , 6 2 1 4 0 . 0 0 % 1 3 , 8 9 7 Ci t y H a l l D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 3 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 5 9 1 9 . 5 8 % 4 6 Ci t y H a l l I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 40 0 0 0 1 5 6 2 4 4 6 0 . 9 2 % 1 5 3 Ci t y H a l l H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 45 0 0 45 0 0.00%45 Ci t y H a l l T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 56 3 , 0 8 0 (3 8 , 7 2 0 ) 63 , 1 8 2 22 5 , 8 3 6 29 8 , 5 2 4 56.93%241,634 Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Ci t y H a l l B u i l d i n g I m p r o v e m e n t s 2 2 1 , 6 9 0 (9 2 , 3 9 0 ) 0 7 , 3 7 1 1 2 1 , 9 2 9 9 4 . 2 9 % 0 Ci t y H a l l C I P - M u n i c i p a l C e n t e r 4 9 , 3 5 3 (1 , 6 0 0 ) 0 5, 6 1 8 42 , 1 3 5 88.23%21,047 Ci t y H a l l T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 27 1 , 0 4 3 (9 3 , 9 9 1 ) 0 12 , 9 8 8 16 4 , 0 6 4 92.66%21,047 Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 0 6 8 , 8 9 2 (1 3 2 , 7 1 1 ) 81 , 7 2 8 36 4 , 4 0 1 57 1 , 7 8 1 61.07%325,701 Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l Tr a n s f e r s Ci t y H a l l P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (1 3 4 , 8 0 5 ) 0 (1 0 , 6 4 9 ) ( 7 2 , 1 0 6 ) ( 6 2 , 6 9 9 ) 46.51%(36,186) Ci t y H a l l O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (2 8 2 , 5 0 6 ) 0 (3 6 , 2 7 9 ) (1 3 3 , 1 2 7 ) (1 4 9 , 3 7 9 ) 52.87%(138,660) Ci t y H a l l T o t a l T r a n s f e r s (4 1 7 , 3 1 1 ) 0 (4 6 , 9 2 8 ) (2 0 5 , 2 3 3 ) (2 1 2 , 0 7 8 ) 50.82%(174,846) Ci t y H a l l Ci t y H a l l TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 65 1 , 5 8 1 (1 3 2 , 7 1 1 ) 34 , 8 0 0 15 9 , 1 6 7 35 9 , 7 0 3 69.32%150,855 37 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 1 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Co m D e v 1 9 1 0 - C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t D e p t s Co m D e v RE V E N U E S Co m D e v B l d g P e r m i t s - R e s i d e n t i a l R e v e n u e 2 , 1 7 4 , 4 3 0 0 3 3 6 , 0 6 2 1 , 5 9 1 , 4 8 2 5 8 2 , 9 4 8 2 6 . 8 0 % 1 , 4 1 3 , 2 5 3 Co m D e v P l u m b i n g P e r m i t R e v e n u e s 5 4 0 , 2 9 6 0 7 2 , 3 0 8 4 2 5 , 9 9 9 1 1 4 , 2 9 7 2 1 . 1 5 % 3 8 3 , 1 9 8 Co m D e v M e c h a n i c a l P e r m i t R e v e n u e s 6 5 7 , 7 7 6 0 8 7 , 2 5 9 4 9 8 , 4 7 8 1 5 9 , 2 9 8 2 4 . 2 1 % 4 3 5 , 2 7 6 Co m D e v E l e c t r i c a l P e r m i t R e v e n u e s 4 2 2 , 8 1 1 0 5 4 , 9 6 1 3 6 7 , 2 8 9 5 5 , 5 2 2 1 3 . 1 3 % 2 9 6 , 4 9 4 Co m D e v F i r e I n s p e c t i o n & P e r m i t F e e s 4 5 7 , 6 1 4 0 5 3 , 2 5 3 3 7 7 , 8 8 9 7 9 , 7 2 5 1 7 . 4 2 % 2 8 1 , 5 0 6 Co m D e v B l d g P e r m i t s - M u l t i f a m i l y R e v e n u e 5 4 0 , 6 8 3 0 7 8 , 2 4 7 5 6 1 , 1 3 5 (2 0 , 4 5 2 ) (3.78)% 379,581 Co m D e v B l d g P e r m i t s - C o m m e r c i a l R e v e n u e 1 , 3 4 5 , 5 7 0 0 1 0 8 , 2 4 2 1 , 0 1 1 , 7 1 8 3 3 3 , 8 5 2 2 4 . 8 1 % 8 0 3 , 3 7 4 Co m D e v F l o o d P l a i n P e r m i t R e v e n u e 3 2 8 0 0 3 2 5 3 0 . 9 0 % 3 5 0 Co m D e v F i l i n g F e e s - R e v e n u e s 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 8 , 2 4 4 2 7 6 , 1 0 9 1 2 3 , 8 9 1 3 0 . 9 7 % 2 8 5 , 8 3 1 Co m D e v G r a n t R e v e n u e s 0 1 3 , 6 5 7 6 , 4 5 1 1 1 , 2 0 7 2 , 4 5 1 1 7 . 9 4 % 2 6 , 8 7 2 Co m D e v R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 (1 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 9,404 Co m D e v M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 40 26 0 (260)0.00%160 Co m D e v T o t a l R E V E N U E S 6, 5 3 9 , 5 0 8 13 , 6 5 7 81 5 , 0 6 7 5, 1 2 3 , 3 9 1 1, 4 2 9 , 7 7 5 21.82%4,315,299 Co m D e v Co m D e v PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Co m D e v W a g e s 2, 2 5 2 , 2 7 6 2 9 8 , 7 7 1 1 9 9 , 3 2 4 9 7 1 , 5 7 2 1 , 5 7 9 , 4 7 5 6 1 . 9 1 % 5 4 1 , 5 1 7 Co m D e v W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 8 , 2 8 6 Co m D e v O v e r t i m e W a g e s 10 , 4 0 0 2 , 5 0 0 3 3 4 2 , 1 7 2 1 0 , 7 2 8 8 3 . 1 6 % 5 8 Co m D e v F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 17 3 , 0 9 4 2 3 , 0 4 7 1 4 , 8 1 1 7 1 , 4 0 5 1 2 4 , 7 3 6 6 3 . 5 9 % 4 0 , 9 7 0 Co m D e v P E R S I 27 4 , 0 8 7 3 5 , 9 7 2 1 9 , 4 2 6 1 0 6 , 8 2 1 2 0 3 , 2 3 8 6 5 . 5 4 % 6 3 , 3 1 5 Co m D e v W o r k e r s ' C o m p 9, 9 0 8 1 0 , 1 8 3 0 2 , 6 5 0 1 7 , 4 4 1 8 6 . 8 0 % 7 5 1 Co m D e v E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 5 9 2 , 7 2 2 7 5 , 9 9 0 0 3 , 2 9 3 6 6 5 , 4 1 9 9 9 . 5 0 % 1 2 0 , 3 6 8 Co m D e v M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 4 , 0 8 4 1 9 9 , 1 1 6 (1 9 9 , 1 1 6 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 (2 , 0 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 4 2 8 2 , 5 3 1 (2 , 5 3 1 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 6 3 5 1 5 , 4 9 3 (1 5 , 4 9 3 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 0 4 2 , 0 1 2 (2 , 0 1 2 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 2 1 2 , 1 1 1 (2 , 1 1 1 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 2 1 2 , 6 2 1 (2 , 6 2 1 ) 0.00% 0 Co m D e v E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 13 5 68 2 (682)0.00%0 Co m D e v T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 3, 3 1 2 , 4 8 7 44 6 , 4 6 3 27 2 , 5 2 1 1, 3 8 4 , 4 8 0 2, 3 7 4 , 4 7 0 63.17%785,264 Co m D e v Co m D e v OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Co m D e v O f f i c e E x p e n s e 11 , 9 0 0 2 , 1 0 4 3 7 8 3 , 2 4 3 1 0 , 7 6 1 7 6 . 8 4 % 1 , 8 1 7 Co m D e v C o p i e r E x p e n s e 9, 4 9 6 0 4 6 5 4 , 6 2 2 4 , 8 7 4 5 1 . 3 2 % 3 , 6 7 8 Co m D e v E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 2 , 3 4 0 7 0 0 1 7 8 4 8 3 2 , 5 5 7 8 4 . 1 0 % 3 Co m D e v S a f e t y E x p e n s e 2, 6 0 0 (1 0 0 ) 0 1 , 9 4 8 5 5 2 2 2 . 0 9 % 0 Co m D e v F u e l s - G a s 34 , 7 0 0 1 4 , 2 5 0 1 , 2 9 4 5 , 8 1 0 4 3 , 1 4 0 8 8 . 1 3 % 1 5 1 Co m D e v C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 4, 4 0 0 1 , 4 0 0 3 3 5 4 , 6 2 2 1 , 1 7 8 2 0 . 3 1 % 0 Co m D e v B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 3, 0 0 0 (3 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co m D e v V e h i c l e R e p a i r 6, 5 0 0 4 , 5 0 0 0 1 4 7 1 0 , 8 5 3 9 8 . 6 6 % 0 Co m D e v V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 6, 5 0 0 2 , 5 0 0 3 8 9 2 , 5 1 9 6 , 4 8 1 7 2 . 0 0 % 7 0 Co m D e v S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 1 0 3 , 0 1 9 0 2 , 7 9 7 2 1 , 3 2 8 8 1 , 6 9 2 7 9 . 2 9 % 2 0 , 7 6 1 Co m D e v E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 3, 2 5 0 (6 6 ) 18 1 1 , 3 6 3 1 , 8 2 1 5 7 . 1 8 % 0 Co m D e v E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 8 , 2 0 0 (6 0 0 ) 99 3 5 , 4 0 1 2 , 1 9 9 2 8 . 9 3 % 1 3 6 Co m D e v S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 19 , 2 6 4 1 8 , 3 3 7 0 2 6 , 7 1 9 1 0 , 8 8 2 2 8 . 9 4 % 1 , 1 9 1 Co m D e v F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 1 0 , 4 0 8 2 0 , 1 4 6 1 , 7 1 9 1 7 , 3 0 7 1 3 , 2 4 7 4 3 . 3 5 % 1 , 0 7 6 Co m D e v C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 2 1 , 4 0 7 (4 , 9 8 3 ) 0 4 , 3 3 9 1 2 , 0 8 5 7 3 . 5 7 % 6 9 0 38 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 2 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Co m D e v P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 2 6 4 , 4 7 1 (3 5 , 5 3 7 ) 9, 0 7 7 1 3 0 , 8 6 0 9 8 , 0 7 3 4 2 . 8 3 % 3 , 0 0 0 Co m D e v C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 39 , 0 0 0 5 2 , 0 0 0 4 , 5 8 5 3 0 , 1 8 2 6 0 , 8 1 8 6 6 . 8 3 % 2 3 , 8 9 4 Co m D e v B u i l d i n g I n s p e c t i o n s 0 1 9 1 , 6 6 5 2 4 , 2 0 2 7 1 0 , 6 7 8 (5 1 9 , 0 1 3 ) (270.79)% 547,647 Co m D e v M e c h a n i c a l I n s p e c t i o n s 4 2 7 , 5 5 4 0 0 1 3 9 , 1 3 1 2 8 8 , 4 2 3 6 7 . 4 5 % 2 6 4 , 5 7 5 Co m D e v E l e c t r i c a l I n s p e c t i o n s 0 3 3 , 3 3 5 9 , 2 7 3 9 3 , 7 5 9 (6 0 , 4 2 4 ) (181.26)% 224,002 Co m D e v P l u m b i n g I n s p e c t i o n s 3 2 4 , 1 7 8 0 4 3 , 3 8 5 2 5 6 , 6 7 1 6 7 , 5 0 7 2 0 . 8 2 % 2 3 1 , 1 5 0 Co m D e v F i r e I n s p e c t i o n s 33 4 , 0 5 8 0 3 9 , 8 3 8 2 8 4 , 8 7 7 4 9 , 1 8 1 1 4 . 7 2 % 2 0 8 , 0 7 1 Co m D e v C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 23 0 , 0 0 0 (2 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 61 6 5 , 4 7 8 (478)(9.55)% 4,154 Co m D e v T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 3, 3 7 2 1 , 2 8 4 0 8 7 5 3 , 7 8 1 8 1 . 2 0 % 0 Co m D e v P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 60 0 0 0 3 2 9 2 7 1 4 5 . 0 9 % 3 0 8 Co m D e v R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 3 0 , 7 2 0 2 , 4 0 0 7 3 5 4 , 8 2 0 2 8 , 3 0 0 8 5 . 4 4 % 3 , 0 9 6 Co m D e v C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 18 , 8 4 0 3 , 6 0 0 7 7 3 4 , 5 1 1 1 7 , 9 2 9 7 9 . 8 9 % 1 , 2 7 8 Co m D e v R e c r u i t m e n t E x p e n s e s 39 , 0 6 3 (1 0 , 5 7 3 ) 0 1 5 , 4 9 1 1 2 , 9 9 8 4 5 . 6 2 % 0 Co m D e v B u s i n e s s M e a l s 1, 6 4 0 (1 4 4 ) 0 7 2 1 , 4 2 4 9 5 . 1 7 % 3 3 6 Co m D e v M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 0 6 9 . 9 8 % 1 4 Co m D e v E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 4 1 , 3 6 0 5 , 0 0 0 5 , 8 7 6 2 3 , 5 3 0 2 2 , 8 3 0 4 9 . 2 4 % 2 , 2 4 3 Co m D e v T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 9 , 9 3 5 2 , 5 0 0 2 8 3 2 , 8 5 0 1 9 , 5 8 5 8 7 . 2 9 % 2 , 1 5 6 Co m D e v T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 22 , 6 5 0 2 , 5 0 0 1 , 3 0 0 6 , 1 8 6 1 8 , 9 6 4 7 5 . 4 0 % 6 4 4 Co m D e v T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 14 , 9 7 0 4 , 9 0 0 3 4 2 3 , 0 4 5 1 6 , 8 2 5 8 4 . 6 7 % 9 4 0 Co m D e v A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 1 2 , 3 7 7 8 0 5 1 5 1 1 2 , 4 0 6 9 9 . 5 8 % 4 , 9 0 9 Co m D e v L e g a l N o t i c e s 12 , 0 0 0 0 9 9 3 6 , 0 0 8 5 , 9 9 2 4 9 . 9 3 % 6 , 9 7 8 Co m D e v P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 7, 0 0 0 0 3 2 4 5 , 4 4 0 1 , 5 6 0 2 2 . 2 9 % 3 , 5 3 4 Co m D e v D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 3 1 , 1 6 9 4 5 0 3 7 3 1 5 , 0 6 5 1 6 , 5 5 4 5 2 . 3 5 % 1 4 , 3 5 9 Co m D e v C o m m i s s i o n E x p e n s e 1, 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 , 4 0 0 9 2 . 6 9 % 0 Co m D e v H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 58 5 7 5 0 4 5 0 2 1 0 3 1 . 8 4 % 4 1 3 Co m D e v M e r i d i a n D e v e l o p m e n t 75 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co m D e v B a n k & M e r c h a n t C h a r g e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Co m D e v G r a n t E x p e n d i t u r e s 0 13 , 6 5 7 0 11 , 4 1 9 2, 2 3 8 16.38%8,428 Co m D e v T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 2, 1 9 9 , 1 3 6 97 , 3 8 1 15 0 , 7 5 4 1, 8 5 1 , 7 7 0 44 4 , 7 4 6 19.37%1,585,703 Co m D e v Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Co m D e v C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 23 3 , 3 5 6 8 1 , 9 0 1 6 9 , 1 5 3 2 3 6 , 6 9 8 7 8 , 5 5 8 2 4 . 9 1 % 0 Co m D e v C a p i t a l - S o f t w a r e 19 1 , 6 0 0 (1 , 1 7 3 ) 0 65 , 4 2 7 12 5 , 0 0 0 65.64%0 Co m D e v T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 42 4 , 9 5 6 80 , 7 2 7 69 , 1 5 3 30 2 , 1 2 5 20 3 , 5 5 8 40.25%0 Co m D e v Co m D e v DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 5, 9 3 6 , 5 7 9 62 4 , 5 7 1 49 2 , 4 2 7 3, 5 3 8 , 3 7 5 3, 0 2 2 , 7 7 5 46.07%2,370,968 Co m D e v Co m D e v Tr a n s f e r s Co m D e v P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T (6 3 , 1 8 2 ) 0 (4 , 9 7 7 ) ( 3 4 , 6 3 4 ) ( 2 8 , 5 4 8 ) 45.18%(34,060) Co m D e v P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 5 8 , 2 8 5 0 4 , 6 4 5 3 1 , 6 6 5 2 6 , 6 2 0 4 5 . 6 7 % 2 4 , 4 0 7 Co m D e v O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 6 3 , 5 6 6 0 8, 1 6 3 29 , 9 5 5 33 , 6 1 1 52.87%31,200 Co m D e v T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 58 , 6 6 9 0 7, 8 3 1 26 , 9 8 6 31 , 6 8 3 54.00%21,546 Co m D e v Co m D e v In t e r f u n d C a s h T r a n s f e r s Co m D e v T r a n s f e r o f E q u i t y 15 4 , 0 4 0 0 3, 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 3, 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 (3 , 0 9 7 , 3 6 4 ) (2,010.75)%2,641,404 Co m D e v T o t a l I n t e r f u n d C a s h T r a n s f e r s 1 5 4 , 0 4 0 0 3, 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 3, 2 5 1 , 4 0 4 (3 , 0 9 7 , 3 6 4 ) (2,010.75)%2,641,404 Co m D e v Co m D e v TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 6, 1 4 9 , 2 8 8 62 4 , 5 7 1 3, 7 5 1 , 6 6 2 6, 8 1 6 , 7 6 5 (4 2 , 9 0 6 ) (0.63)%5,033,918 39 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 3 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Po l i c e 2 1 1 0 - P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t Po l i c e RE V E N U E S Po l i c e D o g L i c e n s e R e v e n u e s 50 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 6 7 9 2 8 , 6 6 0 2 1 , 3 4 1 4 2 . 6 8 % 2 3 , 3 4 1 Po l i c e F a l s e A l a r m F e e s 0 0 1 , 8 6 5 1 3 , 9 1 0 (1 3 , 9 1 0 ) 0.00% 14,685 Po l i c e G r a n t R e v e n u e s 0 8 2 , 9 1 6 6 , 1 3 7 2 0 , 5 3 0 6 2 , 3 8 6 7 5 . 2 4 % 2 8 , 1 4 2 Po l i c e R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 1 3 , 2 5 2 6 6 , 4 7 1 (6 6 , 4 7 1 ) 0.00% 69,732 Po l i c e C o u r t R e v e n u e 33 2 , 5 0 0 0 3 7 , 9 3 7 2 1 4 , 0 4 0 1 1 8 , 4 6 0 3 5 . 6 2 % 2 4 3 , 8 0 2 Po l i c e R e s t i t u t i o n 0 0 2 9 7 2 , 9 2 4 (2 , 9 2 4 ) 0.00% 2,502 Po l i c e F e d e r a l D r u g S e i z u r e R e v e n u e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 , 0 8 4 Po l i c e S t a t e D r u g S e i z u r e R e v e n u e 0 0 0 2 8 0 (280)0.00% 6,424 Po l i c e S c h o o l R e s o u r c e R e v e n u e 4 2 3 , 5 1 6 0 0 2 3 4 , 1 5 3 1 8 9 , 3 6 3 4 4 . 7 1 % 2 1 3 , 7 3 2 Po l i c e R e n t a l I n c o m e 3, 0 0 0 0 9 4 3 3 , 0 4 4 (44)(1.45)% 2,700 Po l i c e I m p a c t R e v - M u l t i f a m i l y 2 9 , 3 3 6 0 1 7 , 6 1 7 1 1 2 , 8 3 8 (8 3 , 5 0 2 ) (284.63)% 73,060 Po l i c e I m p a c t R e v - C o m m e r c i a l 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 8 0 0 7 8 , 3 1 2 (5 8 , 3 1 1 ) (291.55)% 60,497 Po l i c e I m p a c t R e v - R e s i d e n t i a l 1 6 6 , 2 3 7 0 5 1 , 7 3 6 2 5 4 , 6 6 6 (8 8 , 4 2 9 ) (53.19)% 153,954 Po l i c e D o n a t i o n s ( p l u s p r o j e c t c o d e ) 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 4 5 9 5 9 , 9 0 5 9 9 . 0 5 % 8 , 9 7 7 Po l i c e T r a i n i n g C l a s s R e v e n u e 0 2 , 5 0 0 0 2 , 5 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Po l i c e M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 3 9 1 2 5 , 7 8 6 (2 5 , 7 8 6 ) 0.00% 1,487 Po l i c e F i n e s , F o r f e i t R e v e n u e s 5 , 0 0 0 0 2 , 0 7 5 1 7 , 5 2 0 (1 2 , 5 2 0 ) (250.39)% 11,676 Po l i c e I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 0 0 4 , 1 7 6 2 4 , 8 0 8 (2 4 , 8 0 8 ) 0.00% 5,051 Po l i c e S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 9, 9 3 8 12 , 4 3 8 (1 2 , 4 3 8 ) 0.00%5,940 Po l i c e T o t a l R E V E N U E S 1, 0 2 9 , 5 8 9 95 , 4 1 6 15 3 , 8 8 5 1, 1 1 2 , 9 7 2 12 , 0 3 3 1.07%928,785 Po l i c e Po l i c e PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Po l i c e W a g e s 11 , 0 9 5 , 5 9 3 1 5 , 0 0 0 8 5 6 , 1 8 5 6 , 0 2 3 , 2 4 3 5 , 0 8 7 , 3 5 0 4 5 . 7 8 % 5 , 1 1 3 , 7 9 5 Po l i c e K - 9 W a g e s 50 , 6 2 5 0 4 , 3 2 6 2 9 , 4 5 5 2 1 , 1 7 0 4 1 . 8 1 % 2 5 , 5 5 3 Po l i c e W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 1 9 , 5 1 4 0 1 , 5 5 7 1 0 , 6 5 7 8 , 8 5 7 4 5 . 3 8 % 1 0 , 5 9 9 Po l i c e O v e r t i m e W a g e s 64 0 , 9 8 9 3 2 , 3 0 1 6 2 , 9 2 4 4 0 1 , 3 6 0 2 7 1 , 9 3 0 4 0 . 3 8 % 3 6 4 , 1 2 1 Po l i c e U n i f o r m A l l o w a n c e 13 5 , 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 , 4 4 3 1 8 , 4 5 7 1 3 . 5 8 % 1 1 1 , 8 5 0 Po l i c e F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 91 3 , 6 1 1 2 , 4 7 2 6 8 , 4 5 5 4 8 7 , 0 6 0 4 2 9 , 0 2 3 4 6 . 8 3 % 4 1 2 , 7 8 2 Po l i c e P E R S I 1, 4 5 8 , 7 6 5 3 , 8 5 6 1 0 7 , 1 9 2 7 4 7 , 5 0 4 7 1 5 , 1 1 7 4 8 . 8 9 % 6 3 8 , 7 0 2 Po l i c e W o r k e r s ' C o m p 38 1 , 5 7 7 1 , 0 9 1 0 6 4 , 9 9 4 3 1 7 , 6 7 4 8 3 . 0 1 % 5 3 , 8 8 9 Po l i c e E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 2 , 2 7 9 , 7 0 0 0 0 1 9 , 4 5 0 2 , 2 6 0 , 2 5 0 9 9 . 1 4 % 1 , 0 6 0 , 9 5 6 Po l i c e U n e m p l o y m e n t 0 0 0 2 , 0 6 3 (2 , 0 6 3 ) 0.00% 1,492 Po l i c e M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 4 3 , 8 9 5 9 9 8 , 3 1 7 (9 9 8 , 3 1 7 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 1 3 , 5 0 0 (1 3 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 1 , 8 8 2 1 3 , 0 9 1 (1 3 , 0 9 1 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 2 , 0 2 0 8 2 , 3 3 3 (8 2 , 3 3 3 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 , 5 0 4 9 , 0 8 3 (9 , 0 8 3 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 0 7 3 1 2 , 3 4 5 (1 2 , 3 4 5 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 6 2 3 1 5 , 5 8 7 (1 5 , 5 8 7 ) 0.00% 0 Po l i c e E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 53 5 3, 2 1 2 (3 , 2 1 2 ) 0.00%0 Po l i c e T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 16 , 9 7 6 , 2 7 4 54 , 7 2 0 1, 2 6 5 , 1 7 2 9, 0 5 0 , 6 9 9 7, 9 8 0 , 2 9 5 46.86%7,793,737 Po l i c e Po l i c e OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Po l i c e O f f i c e E x p e n s e 32 , 5 2 6 0 3 , 0 0 5 1 6 , 5 2 7 1 5 , 9 9 9 4 9 . 1 8 % 1 4 , 0 4 3 Po l i c e C o p i e r E x p e n s e 21 , 3 0 6 0 1 , 7 6 7 1 1 , 0 5 2 1 0 , 2 5 4 4 8 . 1 2 % 1 2 , 6 9 4 Po l i c e E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 9 , 7 7 5 0 7 5 4 3 , 9 7 4 5 , 8 0 1 5 9 . 3 4 % 3 , 3 5 4 Po l i c e J a n i t o r i a l 60 , 3 9 0 0 1 4 , 2 5 4 3 3 , 2 6 4 2 7 , 1 2 6 4 4 . 9 1 % 3 2 , 6 0 8 Po l i c e S a f e t y E x p e n s e 3, 6 8 4 0 2 0 2 , 8 4 7 8 3 7 2 2 . 7 2 % 1 , 7 0 8 40 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 4 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Po l i c e S h o p S u p p l i e s 2, 0 0 0 0 3 8 2 2 , 0 4 1 (41)(2.02)% 1,861 Po l i c e F u e l s - G a s 28 8 , 0 0 0 0 1 8 , 7 5 6 1 1 4 , 1 5 5 1 7 3 , 8 4 5 6 0 . 3 6 % 8 6 , 3 5 2 Po l i c e C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 10 7 , 4 8 0 0 9 , 8 7 6 6 0 , 0 0 6 4 7 , 4 7 4 4 4 . 1 7 % 4 8 , 7 7 1 Po l i c e M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 4, 0 5 0 0 3 2 9 5 , 4 9 4 (1 , 4 4 4 ) (35.64)% 19,414 Po l i c e D a t a A c c e s s E x p e n s e 1, 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Po l i c e I n v e s t i g a t i o n E x p e n s e s 1 1 , 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 4 , 8 5 3 6 , 1 4 7 5 5 . 8 8 % 6 , 5 2 5 Po l i c e K - 9 E x p e n s e s 6, 0 0 0 7 , 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 1 , 9 0 2 1 , 0 9 8 8 . 4 4 % 8 , 5 0 7 Po l i c e C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 1 1 , 9 0 0 3 9 4 1 , 3 2 8 2 , 1 3 0 1 0 , 1 6 4 8 2 . 6 7 % 3 , 4 3 1 Po l i c e B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 42 , 7 5 4 0 2 , 1 6 2 3 8 , 8 6 4 3 , 8 9 0 9 . 0 9 % 8 4 , 8 2 4 Po l i c e P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 3 , 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 , 4 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 , 9 4 5 Po l i c e V e h i c l e R e p a i r 76 , 0 0 0 0 6 , 5 0 9 4 9 , 7 0 5 2 6 , 2 9 5 3 4 . 5 9 % 3 3 , 6 6 9 Po l i c e V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 11 2 , 4 5 0 0 9 , 9 8 4 5 7 , 2 7 5 5 5 , 1 7 5 4 9 . 0 6 % 3 8 , 8 3 6 Po l i c e E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 5 0 0 0 0 5 9 7 (97)(19.46)% 1,210 Po l i c e S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 2 2 8 , 1 8 1 (5 , 7 6 0 ) 2, 5 0 0 1 5 1 , 8 1 8 7 0 , 6 0 3 3 1 . 7 4 % 1 3 2 , 5 2 3 Po l i c e A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 4 , 4 9 1 0 0 1 1 5 4 , 3 7 6 9 7 . 4 3 % 3 , 2 3 2 Po l i c e M i s c C o n t r i b u t i o n s 2, 5 0 0 0 9 6 9 6 2 , 4 0 4 9 6 . 1 5 % 5 4 1 Po l i c e F l a g / B a n n e r E x p e n s e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 0 9 Po l i c e E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 60 , 3 4 5 8 8 1 , 2 6 1 3 2 , 9 2 5 2 7 , 5 0 8 4 5 . 5 1 % 5 0 , 6 0 1 Po l i c e A m m u n i t i o n & F i r e a r m s 8 4 , 6 0 0 0 9 , 1 1 6 5 3 , 9 3 2 3 0 , 6 6 8 3 6 . 2 5 % 6 7 , 9 0 9 Po l i c e S W A T E q u i p m e n t 19 , 0 0 0 (1 1 , 0 0 0 ) 68 2 4 , 4 8 3 3 , 5 1 7 4 3 . 9 6 % 2 5 , 4 0 9 Po l i c e E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 1 5 , 3 8 7 0 6 5 2 , 4 5 8 1 2 , 9 2 9 8 4 . 0 2 % 4 , 7 1 8 Po l i c e S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 11 , 1 0 8 5 , 7 6 0 0 9 , 2 9 2 7 , 5 7 6 4 4 . 9 1 % 1 , 3 6 9 Po l i c e F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 1 6 , 4 4 3 0 (1 5 0 ) 4, 4 2 5 1 2 , 0 1 8 7 3 . 0 8 % 8 , 6 4 2 Po l i c e C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 3 2 , 2 5 0 0 0 0 3 2 , 2 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 , 4 0 4 Po l i c e P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 3 3 , 1 7 0 (1 , 0 7 2 ) 1, 4 6 3 2 0 , 7 4 9 1 1 , 3 5 0 3 5 . 3 5 % 2 8 , 4 9 9 Po l i c e L e g a l S e r v i c e s - P r o s e c u t i o n 4 3 0 , 1 8 7 0 3 5 , 9 7 1 2 5 1 , 7 9 4 1 7 8 , 3 9 3 4 1 . 4 6 % 2 0 9 , 8 2 8 Po l i c e P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 8 2 Po l i c e B a c k g r o u n d / E m p l o y m e n t T e s t i n g 7 , 6 0 0 0 6 6 2 7 , 2 0 1 3 9 9 5 . 2 4 % 6 , 7 0 8 Po l i c e C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 38 1 , 1 3 2 9 , 5 2 8 3 2 , 5 5 5 2 2 7 , 8 8 5 1 6 2 , 7 7 5 4 1 . 6 6 % 2 2 2 , 3 2 7 Po l i c e T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 15 , 1 5 2 0 6 6 3 4 , 6 4 2 1 0 , 5 1 0 6 9 . 3 6 % 6 , 1 5 6 Po l i c e P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 10 , 6 0 0 0 6 2 4 6 , 3 8 6 4 , 2 1 4 3 9 . 7 5 % 6 , 8 3 8 Po l i c e R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 4 6 , 2 8 6 0 2 2 , 3 6 8 3 6 , 5 7 1 9 , 7 1 5 2 0 . 9 8 % 1 7 , 5 5 5 Po l i c e I L E T S N e t w o r k 12 , 5 0 0 0 3 , 1 2 5 9 , 3 7 5 3 , 1 2 5 2 5 . 0 0 % 1 2 , 5 0 0 Po l i c e C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 87 , 3 6 0 0 6 , 6 4 0 3 9 , 7 6 8 4 7 , 5 9 2 5 4 . 4 7 % 3 8 , 2 7 0 Po l i c e B u s i n e s s M e a l s 3, 5 0 0 0 8 8 1 , 5 7 7 1 , 9 2 3 5 4 . 9 3 % 1 , 0 1 4 Po l i c e M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 , 9 5 0 0 1 9 5 8 5 9 1 , 0 9 1 5 5 . 9 4 % 5 7 2 Po l i c e E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 7 6 , 7 0 8 6 4 , 5 0 0 9 , 0 7 5 7 7 , 0 0 1 6 4 , 2 0 7 4 5 . 4 6 % 6 7 , 8 4 8 Po l i c e T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 2 2 , 6 2 0 0 2 , 8 1 5 1 2 , 5 1 9 1 0 , 1 0 1 4 4 . 6 5 % 9 , 2 5 3 Po l i c e T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 43 , 6 2 5 0 2 , 0 4 2 1 9 , 8 9 6 2 3 , 7 2 9 5 4 . 3 9 % 1 5 , 0 7 1 Po l i c e T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 22 , 6 2 0 0 1 , 2 7 0 1 1 , 8 8 5 1 0 , 7 3 5 4 7 . 4 5 % 6 , 3 7 4 Po l i c e A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 1 3 , 0 0 0 0 4 , 2 8 7 1 3 , 3 7 3 (373)(2.87)% 9,037 Po l i c e L e g a l N o t i c e s 0 0 0 9 8 (98)0.00% 65 Po l i c e P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 20 , 5 0 0 0 1 3 5 , 2 0 2 1 5 , 2 9 8 7 4 . 6 2 % 6 , 5 8 1 Po l i c e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 1 3 2 , 9 7 6 0 5 7 , 6 9 1 1 2 5 , 3 1 7 7 , 6 5 9 5 . 7 5 % 1 1 2 , 5 9 9 Po l i c e E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 5 5 , 0 0 0 0 2 , 8 7 1 2 2 , 2 1 3 3 2 , 7 8 7 5 9 . 6 1 % 2 2 , 9 3 8 Po l i c e I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 20 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 3 7 , 2 8 3 1 2 , 7 1 7 6 3 . 5 8 % 8 , 1 6 0 Po l i c e S a n i t a r y S e r v i c e s 30 0 0 0 2 3 2 7 7 9 2 . 3 3 % 0 Po l i c e E q u i p m e n t R e n t a l & L e a s e 6 2 5 0 0 0 6 2 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Po l i c e D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 1 1 , 0 0 8 0 2 7 0 5 , 0 6 7 5 , 9 4 1 5 3 . 9 7 % 4 , 9 5 4 Po l i c e I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 3, 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 3 5 9 6 4 1 2 1 . 3 7 % 2 , 6 0 7 Po l i c e H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 2, 2 6 5 0 0 2 , 0 9 9 1 6 6 7 . 3 3 % 1 , 7 8 4 41 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 5 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Po l i c e P r o p e r t y A b a t e m e n t 5, 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 2 5 Po l i c e S u s p e n s e ( n o r e c e i p t s ) 0 0 (5 , 2 1 3 ) 40 3 (403)0.00% 0 Po l i c e E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 0 4 5 (45)0.00% 84 Po l i c e D r u g S e i z u r e E n f o r c e m n t E x p 1 5 , 0 0 0 0 1, 3 8 3 9, 9 8 5 5, 0 1 5 33.43%7,997 Po l i c e T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 2, 7 4 3 , 0 0 5 69 , 4 3 8 26 5 , 3 0 6 1, 5 9 5 , 8 0 5 1, 2 1 6 , 6 3 8 43.26%1,527,836 Po l i c e Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Po l i c e C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 22 8 , 2 6 8 2 9 , 0 0 0 0 2 3 5 , 6 4 6 2 1 , 6 2 2 8 . 4 0 % 3 6 9 , 0 0 6 Po l i c e C a p i t a l - E l e c t r o n i c s 0 2 6 , 8 1 4 0 0 2 6 , 8 1 4 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Po l i c e C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 77 , 1 0 0 (7 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 1 3 , 0 1 2 (5 , 9 1 2 ) (83.27)% 20,000 Po l i c e P u b l i c S a f e t y T r a i n i n g C t r 6 2 , 0 0 0 8, 0 0 0 0 11 , 2 2 2 58 , 7 7 8 83.96%0 Po l i c e T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 36 7 , 3 6 8 (6 , 1 8 6 ) 0 25 9 , 8 8 1 10 1 , 3 0 2 28.05%389,006 Po l i c e Po l i c e DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 20 , 0 8 6 , 6 4 7 11 7 , 9 7 2 1, 5 3 0 , 4 7 8 10 , 9 0 6 , 3 8 4 9, 2 9 8 , 2 3 5 46.02%9,710,578 Po l i c e TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 20 , 0 8 6 , 6 4 7 11 7 , 9 7 2 1, 5 3 0 , 4 7 8 10 , 9 0 6 , 3 8 4 9, 2 9 8 , 2 3 5 46.02%9,710,578 42 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 6 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Fi r e 2 2 1 0 - F i r e D e p a r t m e n t Fi r e RE V E N U E S Fi r e F i r e I n s p e c t i o n & P e r m i t F e e s 0 0 2 5 0 6 , 5 3 1 (6 , 5 3 1 ) 0.00% 7,125 Fi r e G r a n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 , 1 3 5 Fi r e R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 1 , 1 2 5 6 , 6 6 5 3 6 , 2 1 0 (3 5 , 0 8 5 ) (3,118.63)% 139,299 Fi r e R e s t i t u t i o n 0 0 0 3 3 (33)0.00% 26 Fi r e R u r a l F i r e & M i s c R e v e n u e 1 , 2 9 4 , 4 8 9 0 9 9 , 5 0 1 6 5 8 , 2 2 5 6 3 6 , 2 6 4 4 9 . 1 5 % 1 , 0 6 0 , 1 8 4 Fi r e I m p a c t R e v - M u l t i f a m i l y 1 1 9 , 1 1 4 0 5 3 , 7 9 9 3 4 4 , 5 8 6 (2 2 5 , 4 7 2 ) (189.29)% 267,919 Fi r e I m p a c t R e v - C o m m e r c i a l 6 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 8 2 2 3 7 , 5 7 1 (1 7 7 , 5 7 1 ) (295.95)% 224,051 Fi r e I m p a c t R e v - R e s i d e n t i a l 6 7 4 , 9 7 8 0 1 5 7 , 9 9 2 7 7 7 , 7 0 2 (1 0 2 , 7 2 4 ) (15.21)% 561,810 Fi r e D o n a t i o n s ( p l u s p r o j e c t c o d e ) 0 0 0 1 2 , 4 0 5 (1 2 , 4 0 5 ) 0.00% 11,646 Fi r e M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 8 4 7 8 4 7 (847)0.00% 2,415 Fi r e I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 0 0 1 7 , 6 0 8 1 0 9 , 5 3 1 (1 0 9 , 5 3 1 ) 0.00% 21,369 Fi r e S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 27 , 9 8 7 27 , 9 8 7 (2 7 , 9 8 7 ) 0.00%14,432 Fi r e T o t a l R E V E N U E S 2, 1 4 8 , 5 8 1 1, 1 2 5 37 5 , 7 3 0 2, 2 1 1 , 6 2 8 (6 1 , 9 2 2 ) (2.88)%2,314,410 Fi r e Fi r e PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Fi r e W a g e s 7, 4 5 1 , 6 8 6 0 5 8 7 , 5 5 9 3 , 8 6 2 , 2 4 8 3 , 5 8 9 , 4 3 8 4 8 . 1 6 % 3 , 7 4 4 , 6 6 6 Fi r e W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 1 8 , 0 1 8 0 1 , 6 0 8 5 , 9 3 3 1 2 , 0 8 5 6 7 . 0 7 % 2 , 4 2 1 Fi r e O v e r t i m e W a g e s 61 6 , 7 9 2 0 5 5 , 0 1 3 3 8 6 , 3 6 9 2 3 0 , 4 2 3 3 7 . 3 5 % 4 2 1 , 0 6 2 Fi r e F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 61 8 , 6 1 7 0 4 7 , 7 7 3 3 1 3 , 4 5 1 3 0 5 , 1 6 6 4 9 . 3 3 % 3 0 6 , 7 5 0 Fi r e P E R S I 98 8 , 9 7 0 0 7 4 , 8 6 1 4 9 5 , 0 5 8 4 9 3 , 9 1 2 4 9 . 9 4 % 4 8 1 , 6 8 5 Fi r e W o r k e r s ' C o m p 31 9 , 0 1 3 0 0 5 1 , 6 6 1 2 6 7 , 3 5 2 8 3 . 8 0 % 5 2 , 9 9 6 Fi r e E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 1 , 3 5 2 , 6 2 2 0 0 1 3 , 0 9 7 1 , 3 3 9 , 5 2 5 9 9 . 0 3 % 7 0 5 , 2 5 1 Fi r e U n e m p l o y m e n t 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 8 9 Fi r e M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 9 9 , 0 1 4 6 1 5 , 9 8 5 (6 1 5 , 9 8 5 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 3 2 , 1 7 5 (3 2 , 1 7 5 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 1 2 0 8 1 8 (818)0.00% 0 Fi r e D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 7 , 8 3 2 5 1 , 1 0 9 (5 1 , 1 0 9 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 , 0 9 9 5 , 8 1 7 (5 , 8 1 7 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 , 4 7 2 8 , 1 9 8 (8 , 1 9 8 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 1 , 8 2 3 1 0 , 1 6 6 (1 0 , 1 6 6 ) 0.00% 0 Fi r e E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 36 0 2, 0 0 4 (2 , 0 0 4 ) 0.00%0 Fi r e T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 11 , 3 6 5 , 7 1 8 0 87 8 , 5 3 4 5, 8 5 4 , 0 8 7 5, 5 1 1 , 6 3 1 48.49%5,715,219 Fi r e Fi r e OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Fi r e O f f i c e E x p e n s e 8, 3 5 0 0 8 9 7 5 , 8 9 6 2 , 4 5 4 2 9 . 3 9 % 4 , 7 2 2 Fi r e C o p i e r E x p e n s e 8, 6 7 1 0 5 7 1 4 , 0 9 3 4 , 5 7 8 5 2 . 8 0 % 4 , 2 3 4 Fi r e E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 5 , 7 0 0 0 7 7 0 3 , 4 2 7 2 , 2 7 3 3 9 . 8 7 % 2 , 6 0 8 Fi r e J a n i t o r i a l 12 , 2 8 3 0 1 , 2 2 3 6 , 9 5 9 5 , 3 2 3 4 3 . 3 3 % 5 , 3 2 8 Fi r e S a f e t y E x p e n s e 20 0 0 0 1 6 9 3 1 1 5 . 3 8 % 0 Fi r e S h o p S u p p l i e s 5, 2 0 0 0 9 6 2 2 , 2 3 2 2 , 9 6 8 5 7 . 0 8 % 2 , 2 9 5 Fi r e D i s p a t c h S e r v i c e 94 , 2 0 8 0 2 3 , 5 5 2 7 0 , 6 5 5 2 3 , 5 5 3 2 5 . 0 0 % 6 5 , 3 4 2 Fi r e F u e l s - G a s 95 , 6 5 0 0 7 , 6 6 2 4 2 , 3 5 3 5 3 , 2 9 7 5 5 . 7 2 % 3 4 , 3 9 3 Fi r e F u e l s - D i e s e l / P r o p a n e 2 , 2 5 0 0 0 1 , 5 9 4 6 5 6 2 9 . 1 6 % 7 1 5 Fi r e C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 69 , 5 0 0 0 6 , 8 6 1 5 1 , 4 1 5 1 8 , 0 8 5 2 6 . 0 2 % 7 2 , 4 9 3 Fi r e S C B A / B o t t l e s / C o T e s t e r 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 0 3 5 1 3 , 0 0 3 6 , 9 9 7 3 4 . 9 8 % 5 , 4 7 9 Fi r e M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 15 , 0 0 0 1 4 , 5 2 6 7 3 6 , 5 1 1 2 3 , 0 1 5 7 7 . 9 4 % 7 , 2 1 1 Fi r e J P A M e d i c a l S v c & S u p p l i e s 3 4 , 2 6 0 0 0 3 4 , 2 5 7 3 0 . 0 0 % 3 3 , 5 0 0 Fi r e C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 1 , 5 0 0 0 0 2 7 6 1 , 2 2 4 8 1 . 6 2 % 3 8 6 43 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 7 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Fi r e B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 1 2 5 , 0 4 7 1 1 , 0 0 0 7 , 4 2 2 2 9 , 7 7 9 1 0 6 , 2 6 8 7 8 . 1 1 % 3 4 , 2 8 7 Fi r e P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 1 , 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 6 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi r e V e h i c l e R e p a i r 71 , 8 0 0 0 1 8 , 9 9 6 8 1 , 1 8 5 (9 , 3 8 5 ) (13.07)% 36,591 Fi r e V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 53 , 5 0 0 0 9 1 1 3 0 , 6 2 3 2 2 , 8 7 7 4 2 . 7 6 % 2 0 , 2 5 8 Fi r e E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 3 9 , 0 4 0 0 0 1 4 , 3 9 5 2 4 , 6 4 5 6 3 . 1 2 % 1 5 , 1 8 7 Fi r e G r o u n d s M a i n t e n a n c e 62 5 0 0 0 6 2 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi r e S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 67 , 5 5 7 0 2 , 5 0 6 3 7 , 9 7 1 2 9 , 5 8 7 4 3 . 7 9 % 2 4 , 5 8 4 Fi r e A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 9 , 1 8 7 0 0 5 8 7 8 , 6 0 0 9 3 . 6 0 % 6 , 0 2 1 Fi r e F l a g / B a n n e r E x p e n s e 1, 0 5 0 0 0 7 9 3 2 5 8 2 4 . 5 2 % 4 0 3 Fi r e E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 91 , 4 5 0 0 7 , 5 3 8 2 8 , 2 6 5 6 3 , 1 8 5 6 9 . 0 9 % 1 1 6 , 8 6 3 Fi r e T u r n o u t E q u i p m e n t 10 0 , 0 0 0 0 5 0 7 1 , 3 0 9 2 8 , 6 9 1 2 8 . 6 9 % 6 0 , 4 6 1 Fi r e E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 1 9 , 6 5 0 0 2 2 8 1 1 , 9 3 8 7 , 7 1 2 3 9 . 2 4 % 3 8 4 Fi r e S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 75 0 0 0 0 7 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Fi r e F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 7 , 6 5 0 6 6 , 3 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 6 6 8 , 9 4 4 9 3 . 2 3 % 1 1 , 4 1 2 Fi r e C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 1 2 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 2 1 1 , 8 2 9 9 8 . 5 7 % 0 Fi r e P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 2 9 , 3 4 0 (6 , 0 9 3 ) 0 1 2 , 8 8 2 1 0 , 3 6 5 4 4 . 5 8 % 2 2 , 7 8 1 Fi r e P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 4 5 , 7 0 5 0 8 4 0 2 2 , 1 8 0 2 3 , 5 2 5 5 1 . 4 7 % 1 8 , 1 5 2 Fi r e B a c k g r o u n d / E m p l o y m e n t T e s t i n g 1 4 , 8 0 0 0 0 7 , 3 8 0 7 , 4 2 0 5 0 . 1 3 % 7 , 1 7 2 Fi r e T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 7, 3 1 8 0 5 2 1 4 , 5 5 8 2 , 7 6 1 3 7 . 7 2 % 3 , 1 2 5 Fi r e P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 2, 2 8 2 0 1 1 3 1 , 1 2 5 1 , 1 5 7 5 0 . 7 1 % 1 , 9 9 5 Fi r e R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 1 2 , 8 2 9 0 2 , 8 7 6 1 2 , 9 7 3 (144)(1.12)% 1,589 Fi r e C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 15 , 2 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 3 7 , 3 8 9 7 , 8 1 1 5 1 . 3 8 % 8 , 2 2 3 Fi r e R e c r u i t m e n t E x p e n s e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 2 Fi r e B u s i n e s s M e a l s 2, 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 4 9 . 9 8 % 5 5 1 Fi r e M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 5 6 5 5 . 9 8 % 0 Fi r e E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 5 1 , 7 5 8 6 , 8 9 5 3 , 7 5 7 3 3 , 0 8 3 2 5 , 5 7 1 4 3 . 5 9 % 2 9 , 2 2 5 Fi r e T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 4 , 8 7 5 0 3 , 5 8 9 7 , 6 9 0 7 , 1 8 5 4 8 . 3 0 % 4 , 6 8 6 Fi r e T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 33 , 1 9 0 0 4 , 7 8 3 1 1 , 9 6 2 2 1 , 2 2 8 6 3 . 9 5 % 1 2 , 9 3 7 Fi r e T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 15 , 7 2 0 0 1 , 8 8 9 7 , 3 2 3 8 , 3 9 7 5 3 . 4 1 % 4 , 6 3 5 Fi r e C i t y T r a i n i n g C l a s s e s 6, 9 6 9 0 1 , 1 2 8 3 , 8 7 6 3 , 0 9 3 4 4 . 3 7 % 4 , 7 8 4 Fi r e A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 7 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 0 2 4 4 , 9 7 6 7 1 . 0 8 % 2 2 3 Fi r e L e g a l N o t i c e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 3 Fi r e P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 2, 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 8 1 , 9 7 2 8 9 . 6 4 % 1 1 7 Fi r e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 9 3 , 4 4 2 0 4 6 , 4 7 9 9 1 , 5 7 6 1 , 8 6 6 1 . 9 9 % 8 8 , 7 4 3 Fi r e E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 3 3 , 5 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 6 1 4 , 0 9 2 1 9 , 4 0 8 5 7 . 9 3 % 1 4 , 8 2 2 Fi r e I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 22 , 2 0 0 0 1 , 3 4 3 1 0 , 4 6 6 1 1 , 7 3 4 5 2 . 8 5 % 1 2 , 3 4 7 Fi r e S a n i t a r y S e r v i c e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 0 Fi r e E q u i p m e n t R e n t a l & L e a s e 4 , 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 , 3 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 , 3 6 9 Fi r e D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 2 8 , 2 5 6 (6 , 8 9 5 ) 2, 6 2 1 1 1 , 4 5 5 9 , 9 0 6 4 6 . 3 7 % 2 0 , 2 6 2 Fi r e I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 1, 7 0 0 0 0 7 9 0 9 1 0 5 3 . 5 3 % 8 0 8 Fi r e H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 1, 3 9 5 0 0 1 , 3 9 5 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 , 3 8 0 Fi r e E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%510 Fi r e T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 1, 4 1 9 , 7 5 7 85 , 7 3 3 15 6 , 3 0 0 82 0 , 3 5 1 68 5 , 1 3 9 45.51%829,789 Fi r e Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Fi r e C a p O u t l a y - B l d g s & S t r u c t 3 , 8 9 9 , 2 0 1 1 , 2 2 0 , 5 7 6 9 3 , 8 1 3 5 3 3 , 7 4 1 4 , 5 8 6 , 0 3 6 8 9 . 5 7 % 3 0 , 2 2 1 Fi r e C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 10 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 , 9 2 3 6 1 , 0 7 7 6 1 . 0 7 % 3 3 , 7 7 8 Fi r e C a p i t a l - F i r e T r u c k s 1 , 2 0 8 , 9 4 4 (1 , 1 7 2 , 5 5 1 ) 9, 2 6 8 2 1 , 3 7 7 1 5 , 0 1 6 4 1 . 2 5 % 5 2 , 8 4 5 Fi r e C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 18 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 , 0 0 0 100.00%17,820 Fi r e T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 5, 3 8 8 , 1 4 5 48 , 0 2 5 10 3 , 0 8 1 59 4 , 0 4 1 4, 8 4 2 , 1 3 0 89.07%134,664 Fi r e DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 18 , 1 7 3 , 6 2 0 13 3 , 7 5 8 1, 1 3 7 , 9 1 5 7, 2 6 8 , 4 7 9 11 , 0 3 8 , 9 0 0 60.29%6,679,672 44 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 8 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Fi r e Fi r e Tr a n s f e r s Fi r e P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 3 0 , 5 2 0 0 2 , 4 1 1 1 6 , 3 2 5 1 4 , 1 9 5 4 6 . 5 1 % 8 , 1 9 3 Fi r e O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 6 3 , 9 6 0 0 8, 2 1 4 30 , 1 4 0 33 , 8 2 0 52.87%31,393 Fi r e T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 94 , 4 8 0 0 10 , 6 2 5 46 , 4 6 5 48 , 0 1 5 50.82%39,585 Fi r e Fi r e TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 18 , 2 6 8 , 1 0 0 13 3 , 7 5 8 1, 1 4 8 , 5 3 9 7, 3 1 4 , 9 4 4 11 , 0 8 6 , 9 1 4 60.24%6,719,258 45 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 8 9 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Pa r k s & R e c 2 2 5 0 - P a r k s & R e c r e a t i o n Pa r k s & R e c RE V E N U E S Pa r k s & R e c G r a n t R e v e n u e s 0 4 7 3 , 4 9 2 0 0 4 7 3 , 4 9 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 3 0 , 0 0 0 2 7 6 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 9 0 0 1 6 3 , 9 0 3 1 4 2 , 0 9 7 4 6 . 4 3 % 3 3 , 4 2 3 Pa r k s & R e c R e s t i t u t i o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 2 4 Pa r k s & R e c M e r i d i a n D o w n t o w n D e v e l o p m e n t 2 5 , 0 0 0 0 0 5 8 , 7 0 3 (3 3 , 7 0 3 ) (134.81)% 5,000 Pa r k s & R e c R e n t a l I n c o m e 0 0 2 , 1 0 6 4 0 , 8 4 2 (4 0 , 8 4 2 ) 0.00% 66,967 Pa r k s & R e c C h e r r y L a n e G o l f L e a s e R e v e n u e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 , 0 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c P a r k R e s e r v a t i o n s F e e R e v e n u e 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 0 3 2 , 4 9 1 1 4 5 , 5 2 3 4 , 4 7 7 2 . 9 8 % 1 4 4 , 1 9 0 Pa r k s & R e c R e c r e a t i o n C l a s s R e v e n u e s 2 2 9 , 4 6 0 0 7 4 , 7 8 9 1 4 2 , 7 0 3 8 6 , 7 5 7 3 7 . 8 0 % 1 2 0 , 1 6 1 Pa r k s & R e c C o m m u n i t y E v e n t R e v / S p o n s o r s h i p 3 0 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 4 7 0 2 2 , 5 1 4 7 , 4 8 6 2 4 . 9 5 % 2 7 , 0 4 5 Pa r k s & R e c S p o r t s R e v e n u e 25 6 , 5 3 0 0 1 0 , 7 2 3 2 1 8 , 3 0 8 3 8 , 2 2 2 1 4 . 8 9 % 1 6 3 , 1 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c I m p a c t R e v - M u l t i f a m i l y 1 6 5 , 8 9 9 0 8 7 , 9 2 7 5 6 3 , 1 7 8 (3 9 7 , 2 7 9 ) (239.47)% 394,211 Pa r k s & R e c I m p a c t R e v - R e s i d e n t i a l 1 , 3 2 3 , 7 2 0 0 2 5 8 , 2 1 6 1 , 2 7 1 , 0 4 6 5 2 , 6 7 4 3 . 9 7 % 1 , 0 3 9 , 0 2 9 Pa r k s & R e c C o n t r a c t S e r v i c e R e v e n u e s 7 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 7 5 0 2 , 7 4 1 4 , 2 5 9 6 0 . 8 4 % 3 , 9 6 7 Pa r k s & R e c D o n a t i o n s ( p l u s p r o j e c t c o d e ) 0 9 7 9 9 7 9 1 , 9 7 1 (992)(101.32)% 800 Pa r k s & R e c C a s h D o n a t i o n f o r C a p i t a l O u t l a y 0 1 2 1 , 5 6 1 1 2 , 9 9 5 1 2 1 , 5 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 3 5 6 5 8 1 (581)0.00% 280 Pa r k s & R e c I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 15 , 0 0 0 0 1 0 , 9 7 7 7 7 , 4 7 8 (6 2 , 4 7 8 ) (416.51)% 82,832 Pa r k s & R e c S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 0 1, 9 5 1 (1 , 9 5 1 ) 0.00%0 Pa r k s & R e c T o t a l R E V E N U E S 2, 2 3 2 , 6 0 9 87 2 , 0 3 2 50 8 , 6 7 9 2, 8 3 3 , 0 0 4 27 1 , 6 3 7 8.75%2,087,228 Pa r k s & R e c Pa r k s & R e c PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Pa r k s & R e c W a g e s 1, 4 5 9 , 9 4 4 3 9 , 5 2 0 1 2 5 , 5 0 2 8 4 3 , 3 8 0 6 5 6 , 0 8 4 4 3 . 7 5 % 7 7 9 , 8 6 2 Pa r k s & R e c W a g e s - S e a s o n a l / P a r t t i m e 6 2 7 , 1 6 0 5 1 , 7 7 3 4 1 , 5 9 9 1 5 8 , 4 0 6 5 2 0 , 5 2 7 7 6 . 6 6 % 1 2 8 , 2 2 2 Pa r k s & R e c O v e r t i m e W a g e s 48 , 5 7 5 3 , 0 0 0 4 , 2 9 5 1 3 , 1 5 6 3 8 , 4 2 0 7 4 . 4 9 % 1 5 , 2 5 3 Pa r k s & R e c F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 16 3 , 3 7 9 7 , 2 5 2 1 2 , 7 0 6 7 4 , 8 2 8 9 5 , 8 0 3 5 6 . 1 4 % 6 7 , 6 7 3 Pa r k s & R e c P E R S I 18 0 , 1 1 7 1 0 , 0 3 2 1 4 , 6 0 2 9 6 , 5 2 1 9 3 , 6 2 8 4 9 . 2 3 % 9 1 , 7 6 0 Pa r k s & R e c W o r k e r s ' C o m p 61 , 2 4 9 2 , 3 9 2 0 1 0 , 2 9 3 5 3 , 3 4 8 8 3 . 8 2 % 1 0 , 1 5 6 Pa r k s & R e c E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 7 1 4 , 3 0 6 1 5 , 0 2 9 0 5 , 3 8 5 7 2 3 , 9 5 0 9 9 . 2 6 % 2 3 5 , 9 5 8 Pa r k s & R e c U n e m p l o y m e n t 0 0 0 6 , 2 2 1 (6 , 2 2 1 ) 0.00% 20,133 Pa r k s & R e c M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 5 , 1 5 7 2 1 4 , 0 8 6 (2 1 4 , 0 8 6 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 6 6 7 4 , 5 0 0 (4 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 4 4 0 2 , 7 1 3 (2 , 7 1 3 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 7 4 6 1 6 , 8 6 0 (1 6 , 8 6 0 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 9 1 2 , 3 3 5 (2 , 3 3 5 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 9 5 2 , 0 2 5 (2 , 0 2 5 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 8 3 2 , 4 8 2 (2 , 4 8 2 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 23 8 1, 2 2 3 (1 , 2 2 3 ) 0.00%0 Pa r k s & R e c T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 3, 2 5 4 , 7 3 0 12 8 , 9 9 8 23 9 , 3 2 0 1, 4 5 4 , 4 1 4 1, 9 2 9 , 3 1 4 57.02%1,349,017 Pa r k s & R e c OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Pa r k s & R e c O f f i c e E x p e n s e 6, 5 3 2 1 2 7 7 7 4 3 , 0 5 2 3 , 6 0 7 5 4 . 1 7 % 3 , 1 7 0 Pa r k s & R e c C o p i e r E x p e n s e 8, 0 3 1 0 0 2 , 6 9 6 5 , 3 3 5 6 6 . 4 3 % 3 , 1 9 4 Pa r k s & R e c S p r a y i n g / F e r t i l i z e r 81 , 0 9 4 5 , 6 7 7 7 , 1 0 0 2 3 , 5 5 3 6 3 , 2 1 8 7 2 . 8 5 % 1 1 , 9 4 6 Pa r k s & R e c E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 3 , 5 4 0 0 1 9 7 1 , 1 8 4 2 , 3 5 6 6 6 . 5 4 % 4 0 6 Pa r k s & R e c J a n i t o r i a l 49 , 5 0 0 0 1 1 , 6 7 6 2 7 , 5 6 1 2 1 , 9 3 9 4 4 . 3 2 % 2 7 , 0 6 1 Pa r k s & R e c R e s t r o o m S u p p l i e s 31 , 2 2 8 2 , 4 8 5 9 9 6 2 3 , 2 8 7 1 0 , 4 2 6 3 0 . 9 2 % 1 7 , 3 5 2 Pa r k s & R e c S a f e t y E x p e n s e 3, 2 7 1 2 6 8 3 6 4 , 2 5 2 (713)(20.14)% 2,621 Pa r k s & R e c S h o p S u p p l i e s 8, 0 0 0 4 9 1 1 , 0 3 6 7 , 3 1 6 1 , 1 7 5 1 3 . 8 4 % 6 , 7 9 1 Pa r k s & R e c F u e l s - G a s 68 , 8 2 5 3 , 9 9 5 6 , 1 3 6 2 3 , 3 0 1 4 9 , 5 1 9 6 8 . 0 0 % 1 6 , 1 8 5 46 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 0 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Pa r k s & R e c F u e l s - D i e s e l / P r o p a n e 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 2 Pa r k s & R e c C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 6, 7 3 6 9 6 2 0 6 , 9 5 0 7 4 8 9 . 7 1 % 5 , 6 3 2 Pa r k s & R e c M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 1, 5 0 0 2 5 0 1 , 0 5 6 4 6 9 3 0 . 7 3 % 1 6 7 Pa r k s & R e c R e c r e a t i o n C l a s s E x p e n s e 2 9 , 4 5 0 0 2 , 6 7 6 2 , 8 0 7 2 6 , 6 4 3 9 0 . 4 6 % 2 , 9 0 4 Pa r k s & R e c R e c r e a t i o n S p o r t s E x p e n s e s 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 (1 2 , 0 1 5 ) 14 , 6 8 1 7 4 , 5 7 1 5 3 , 4 1 4 4 1 . 7 3 % 7 5 , 5 9 5 Pa r k s & R e c C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 5 9 , 8 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 6 1 0 , 0 3 6 4 9 , 7 6 4 8 3 . 2 1 % 5 , 1 2 7 Pa r k s & R e c B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 1 0 4 , 5 2 9 3 , 0 4 1 3 , 6 6 8 3 4 , 3 9 1 7 3 , 1 7 9 6 8 . 0 2 % 6 2 , 4 7 4 Pa r k s & R e c P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 4 9 , 6 1 8 2 , 0 0 2 0 0 5 1 , 6 2 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 3 9 Pa r k s & R e c V e h i c l e R e p a i r 16 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 9 5 5 , 9 5 0 1 1 , 0 5 0 6 5 . 0 0 % 7 , 8 9 8 Pa r k s & R e c V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 16 , 0 0 0 4 5 0 1 , 5 7 9 1 0 , 3 4 7 6 , 1 0 3 3 7 . 1 0 % 1 1 , 6 1 9 Pa r k s & R e c E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 4 3 , 6 0 5 3 , 8 3 9 1 0 , 4 8 0 3 4 , 9 0 8 1 2 , 5 3 6 2 6 . 4 2 % 3 1 , 9 5 4 Pa r k s & R e c F o r e s t r y E x p e n s e 65 , 8 5 8 3 , 8 7 2 4 , 1 9 0 2 8 , 7 5 6 4 0 , 9 7 4 5 8 . 7 6 % 2 1 , 4 9 3 Pa r k s & R e c D o w n t o w n T r e e M a i n t e n a n c e 7 5 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 , 1 4 7 Pa r k s & R e c G r o u n d s M a i n t e n a n c e 23 2 , 3 9 8 1 5 , 5 7 2 2 9 , 1 3 2 1 6 4 , 5 2 7 8 3 , 4 4 3 3 3 . 6 5 % 1 1 6 , 5 7 5 Pa r k s & R e c V a n d a l i s m C l e a n u p E x p 4, 1 5 8 9 6 0 9 5 5 3 , 2 9 9 7 7 . 5 5 % 5 7 7 Pa r k s & R e c S u r f a c e W e l l M a i n t 22 , 4 0 3 9 3 3 2 , 2 5 9 6 , 4 5 1 1 6 , 8 8 6 7 2 . 3 5 % 1 0 , 5 2 5 Pa r k s & R e c S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 11 , 8 5 0 0 5 0 0 9 , 4 7 3 2 , 3 7 7 2 0 . 0 6 % 1 , 3 8 7 Pa r k s & R e c A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 2 , 6 0 0 0 1 5 0 7 0 4 1 , 8 9 6 7 2 . 9 3 % 1 , 4 1 8 Pa r k s & R e c M i s c C o n t r i b u t i o n s 3, 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 3 5 4 6 4 6 2 1 . 5 2 % 2 , 9 9 6 Pa r k s & R e c T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s 9 , 0 0 0 0 0 9 , 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 , 0 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c F l a g / B a n n e r E x p e n s e 9, 2 5 7 7 9 0 4 , 4 8 3 4 , 7 2 8 5 , 3 1 9 5 2 . 9 3 % 1 , 0 9 0 Pa r k s & R e c E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 43 , 0 3 4 4 1 , 9 0 0 4 , 9 7 8 3 3 , 0 5 4 5 1 , 8 8 0 6 1 . 0 8 % 2 6 , 9 7 7 Pa r k s & R e c E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 1 7 , 2 9 9 1 , 0 6 5 2 8 7 1 1 , 3 2 9 7 , 0 3 5 3 8 . 3 1 % 5 , 3 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 1, 1 2 9 0 0 0 1 , 1 2 9 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 3 , 8 1 5 Pa r k s & R e c F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 3 , 0 8 2 0 0 1 , 0 9 5 1 , 9 8 7 6 4 . 4 6 % 4 , 4 9 5 Pa r k s & R e c C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 6 , 9 0 0 0 1 , 2 3 0 1 , 3 5 7 5 , 5 4 3 8 0 . 3 3 % 6 8 0 Pa r k s & R e c P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 5 8 , 8 0 0 (9 , 8 5 6 ) 6, 1 4 5 2 8 , 7 9 9 2 0 , 1 4 4 4 1 . 1 5 % 4 , 0 5 8 Pa r k s & R e c I n v e s t m e n t S e r v i c e s 0 0 1 9 3 1 , 3 4 1 (1 , 3 4 1 ) 0.00% 1,325 Pa r k s & R e c C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 11 0 , 0 0 0 0 5 , 1 6 6 5 9 , 3 8 8 5 0 , 6 1 2 4 6 . 0 1 % 5 4 , 9 4 4 Pa r k s & R e c B a c k g r o u n d / E m p l o y m e n t T e s t i n g 2 , 1 0 0 0 0 2 5 9 1 , 8 4 1 8 7 . 6 6 % 9 3 Pa r k s & R e c C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 19 9 , 5 5 8 0 2 4 , 5 1 7 8 3 , 5 7 2 1 1 5 , 9 8 6 5 8 . 1 2 % 8 7 , 8 3 1 Pa r k s & R e c T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 1, 0 1 0 0 1 6 1 9 3 7 7 3 7 . 2 4 % 6 7 0 Pa r k s & R e c P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 1, 0 0 0 0 1 6 1 1 , 0 9 8 (98)(9.83)% 1,008 Pa r k s & R e c R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 4, 8 7 2 0 4 8 8 4 , 2 5 9 6 1 3 1 2 . 5 8 % 1 , 5 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 20 , 2 8 0 1 , 5 7 8 1 , 2 9 2 8 , 4 9 5 1 3 , 3 6 3 6 1 . 1 3 % 7 , 8 9 6 Pa r k s & R e c B u s i n e s s M e a l s 40 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 5 5 0 0 1 9 0 3 9 4 1 5 6 2 8 . 3 3 % 2 9 0 Pa r k s & R e c E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 2 1 , 4 3 2 4 9 2 1 , 0 5 0 1 1 , 6 8 8 1 0 , 2 3 6 4 6 . 6 9 % 8 , 5 1 7 Pa r k s & R e c T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 6 , 5 7 6 0 0 5 4 8 6 , 0 2 8 9 1 . 6 7 % 9 6 9 Pa r k s & R e c T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 5, 9 9 5 0 0 7 7 3 5 , 2 2 3 8 7 . 1 1 % 2 , 7 2 5 Pa r k s & R e c T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 1, 4 6 9 0 0 2 8 8 1 , 1 8 1 8 0 . 3 9 % 1 , 2 4 4 Pa r k s & R e c A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 1 1 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 9 1 0 , 7 1 1 9 7 . 3 7 % 8 2 4 Pa r k s & R e c L e g a l N o t i c e s 60 0 0 0 8 8 4 (284)(47.31)% 674 Pa r k s & R e c P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 27 , 6 0 0 0 8 4 6 8 , 5 8 7 1 9 , 0 1 3 6 8 . 8 8 % 1 1 , 1 9 7 Pa r k s & R e c I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 1 9 , 7 6 7 1 9 2 1 0 , 2 6 8 2 6 , 4 7 7 (6 , 5 1 8 ) (32.65)% 16,803 Pa r k s & R e c E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 1 9 0 , 8 1 7 8 , 3 2 8 5 6 0 8 0 , 1 8 2 1 1 8 , 9 6 3 5 9 . 7 3 % 8 6 , 7 6 6 Pa r k s & R e c I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 23 , 7 8 7 (5 0 ) 1, 1 3 6 8 , 9 2 3 1 4 , 8 1 4 6 2 . 4 0 % 8 , 5 2 0 Pa r k s & R e c S a n i t a r y S e r v i c e s 0 0 0 3 9 4 (394)0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c E q u i p m e n t R e n t a l & L e a s e 6 2 , 3 3 8 3 , 1 8 9 2 , 7 4 6 2 3 , 1 5 5 4 2 , 3 7 2 6 4 . 6 6 % 1 9 , 3 1 2 Pa r k s & R e c D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 9 , 6 6 6 0 1 2 0 5 , 8 3 0 3 , 8 3 6 3 9 . 6 8 % 6 , 7 7 7 Pa r k s & R e c C o m m i s s i o n E x p e n s e 1, 0 0 0 0 3 3 8 3 6 1 7 6 1 . 7 0 % 2 9 1 47 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 1 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Pa r k s & R e c I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 54 , 2 8 8 3 , 9 0 0 0 4 9 , 0 0 7 9 , 1 8 1 1 5 . 7 7 % 4 8 , 7 7 6 Pa r k s & R e c A D A C o m p l i a n c e 24 0 , 3 4 3 (3 2 , 4 9 6 ) 12 , 7 0 0 1 6 8 , 7 0 8 3 9 , 1 3 9 1 8 . 8 3 % 1 2 , 6 7 9 Pa r k s & R e c H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 43 , 2 9 0 0 0 3 9 , 9 6 2 3 , 3 2 8 7 . 6 8 % 3 6 , 1 8 7 Pa r k s & R e c V o l u n t e e r e x p e n s e 2, 5 0 0 0 6 6 5 5 1 , 8 4 5 7 3 . 7 8 % 5 9 5 Pa r k s & R e c B a n k & M e r c h a n t C h a r g e s 2 5 , 0 0 0 0 2, 9 1 1 12 , 5 2 2 12 , 4 7 8 49.91%10,195 Pa r k s & R e c T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 2, 3 8 0 , 2 6 4 51 , 8 5 2 18 0 , 0 5 3 1, 1 9 8 , 7 9 3 1, 2 3 3 , 3 2 3 50.71%943,888 Pa r k s & R e c Pa r k s & R e c Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Pa r k s & R e c C a p i t a l O u t l a y - L a n d 0 0 8 0 , 2 1 5 8 0 , 2 1 5 (8 0 , 2 1 5 ) 0.00% 0 Pa r k s & R e c C a p O u t l a y - B l d g s & S t r u c t 6 3 4 , 1 8 1 (6 3 4 , 1 8 1 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c B u i l d i n g I m p r o v e m e n t s 8 4 4 , 9 2 7 2 8 , 5 6 6 2 , 7 6 8 3 0 , 2 9 9 8 4 3 , 1 9 4 9 6 . 5 3 % 7 3 Pa r k s & R e c P a t h w a y d e v e l o p m e n t 62 1 , 8 5 3 4 2 2 , 0 9 8 1 4 , 9 9 0 2 2 , 8 0 3 1 , 0 2 1 , 1 4 8 9 7 . 8 1 % 1 1 , 5 6 0 Pa r k s & R e c I m p r o v e m e n t s @ S t o r e y P a r k 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 9 5 , 3 0 0 Pa r k s & R e c S t r e e t s c a p e i r r i g a t i o n l a n d s c a p i n g 4 1 5 , 0 7 0 (2 9 9 , 6 3 4 ) 0 4 6 , 9 8 8 6 8 , 4 4 8 5 9 . 2 9 % 1 3 Pa r k s & R e c B o r u p P r o p e r t y c o n s t r u c t i o n 1 5 5 , 1 6 1 (8 6 , 4 1 9 ) 0 2 3 , 9 6 6 4 4 , 7 7 6 6 5 . 1 3 % 1 , 5 3 8 Pa r k s & R e c C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 93 , 0 0 0 0 2 2 , 0 5 5 8 1 , 0 3 8 1 1 , 9 6 2 1 2 . 8 6 % 2 6 , 7 6 6 Pa r k s & R e c C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 23 0 , 6 7 2 (1 0 1 , 6 0 3 ) 64 , 8 2 8 7 7 , 8 2 3 5 1 , 2 4 6 3 9 . 7 0 % 6 2 , 0 7 8 Pa r k s & R e c C a p i t a l - C o m m u n i c a t i o n E q u i p m e n t 6 7 , 9 1 0 2 9 , 7 5 3 0 9 1 , 5 7 4 6 , 0 8 9 6 . 2 3 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c B e a r C r e e k D e v e l o p m e n t 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 0 , 4 1 5 Pa r k s & R e c S e t t l e r s P a r k c o n s t r u c t i o n 1 9 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 8 5 1 1 8 4 , 1 4 9 9 6 . 9 2 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c F u l l e r P a r k I m p r o v e m e n t s 0 1 4 9 , 4 7 7 1 , 1 0 0 2 , 9 2 0 1 4 6 , 5 5 7 9 8 . 0 4 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c K e i t h B i r d L e g a c y P a r k c o n s t r u c t i o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 8 7 , 5 5 4 Pa r k s & R e c K l e i n e r M e m o r i a l P a r k 1 4 1 , 1 1 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 9 3 , 9 9 5 9 4 , 0 0 2 6 7 , 1 0 9 4 1 . 6 5 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c D i s c o v e r y P a r k 5, 6 1 0 , 0 9 6 (1 , 7 7 9 , 9 5 1 ) 10 , 3 6 8 1 , 9 6 1 , 7 6 0 1 , 8 6 8 , 3 8 5 4 8 . 7 8 % 7 9 0 , 5 6 0 Pa r k s & R e c R e t a H u s k e y P a r k 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 2 1 , 5 1 2 Pa r k s & R e c H i l l s d a l e P a r k 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%261,984 Pa r k s & R e c T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 9, 0 0 3 , 9 8 1 (2 , 2 5 1 , 8 9 5 ) 29 0 , 3 1 8 2, 5 1 9 , 2 3 9 4, 2 3 2 , 8 4 8 62.69%1,689,354 Pa r k s & R e c Pa r k s & R e c DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 14 , 6 3 8 , 9 7 5 (2 , 0 7 1 , 0 4 5 ) 70 9 , 6 9 0 5, 1 7 2 , 4 4 5 7, 3 9 5 , 4 8 5 58.84%3,982,258 Pa r k s & R e c Pa r k s & R e c Tr a n s f e r s Pa r k s & R e c P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 1 9 , 7 6 8 0 1 , 5 6 2 1 0 , 5 7 4 9 , 1 9 4 4 6 . 5 1 % 5 , 3 0 6 Pa r k s & R e c O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 6 , 4 2 4 (6 , 4 2 4 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Pa r k s & R e c O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 3 5 , 0 0 2 6, 4 2 4 5, 3 2 0 19 , 5 2 2 21 , 9 0 4 52.87%20,333 Pa r k s & R e c T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 61 , 1 9 4 0 6, 8 8 1 30 , 0 9 5 31 , 0 9 9 50.82%25,639 Pa r k s & R e c Pa r k s & R e c TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 14 , 7 0 0 , 1 6 9 (2 , 0 7 1 , 0 4 5 ) 71 6 , 5 7 2 5, 2 0 2 , 5 4 0 7, 4 2 6 , 5 8 4 58.80%4,007,898 48 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 2 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual PW 3 2 0 0 - P u b l i c W o r k s PW RE V E N U E S PW R e v i e w F e e s 30 0 , 0 0 0 0 6 1 , 9 9 1 1 8 5 , 7 5 8 1 1 4 , 2 4 2 3 8 . 0 8 % 1 8 6 , 1 6 1 PW Q L P E R e v i e w R e v e n u e 50 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 4 8 0 3 4 , 9 7 0 1 5 , 0 3 0 3 0 . 0 6 % 4 5 , 5 0 0 PW F i l i n g F e e s - R e v e n u e s 5 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 PW D e p t S v c F e e s 0 0 3 8 1 1 , 4 2 6 (1 , 4 2 6 ) 0.00% 865 PW R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 6 8 5 9 6 (596)0.00% 99 PW C o m m u n i t y E v e n t R e v / S p o n s o r s h i p 0 0 4, 7 4 0 4, 7 4 0 (4 , 7 4 0 ) 0.00%8,010 PW T o t a l R E V E N U E S 40 0 , 0 0 0 0 70 , 6 6 0 22 7 , 4 9 1 17 2 , 5 0 9 43.13%240,635 PW PW PE R S O N N E L C O S T S PW W a g e s 2, 7 2 3 , 2 3 7 5 9 , 8 2 1 2 1 5 , 4 6 7 1 , 4 8 7 , 6 8 1 1 , 2 9 5 , 3 7 7 4 6 . 5 4 % 1 , 3 6 0 , 5 8 7 PW O v e r t i m e W a g e s 15 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 6 4 7 6 , 1 0 7 8 , 8 9 3 5 9 . 2 8 % 3 , 2 6 9 PW F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 20 8 , 0 1 9 4 , 5 7 6 1 6 , 0 4 3 1 1 0 , 1 0 3 1 0 2 , 4 9 2 4 8 . 2 1 % 1 0 0 , 4 3 8 PW P E R S I 32 4 , 3 4 2 7 , 1 4 3 2 4 , 3 8 8 1 6 8 , 6 3 0 1 6 2 , 8 5 5 4 9 . 1 2 % 1 5 3 , 8 6 9 PW W o r k e r s ' C o m p 78 , 8 9 7 2 , 0 2 2 0 1 1 , 8 2 3 6 9 , 0 9 6 8 5 . 3 8 % 1 1 , 1 5 0 PW E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 6 8 3 , 9 1 0 1 5 , 1 9 8 0 6 , 1 4 3 6 9 2 , 9 6 5 9 9 . 1 2 % 2 7 5 , 6 4 0 PW M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 7 , 9 8 8 2 6 3 , 4 1 7 (2 6 3 , 4 1 7 ) 0.00% 0 PW H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 9 1 7 7 , 7 5 0 (7 , 7 5 0 ) 0.00% 0 PW V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 4 7 8 3 , 3 5 5 (3 , 3 5 5 ) 0.00% 0 PW D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 , 1 3 1 2 1 , 6 6 2 (2 1 , 6 6 2 ) 0.00% 0 PW L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 9 3 2 , 9 2 4 (2 , 9 2 4 ) 0.00% 0 PW S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 5 3 3 , 2 5 4 (3 , 2 5 4 ) 0.00% 0 PW L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 8 5 4 , 0 7 9 (4 , 0 7 9 ) 0.00% 0 PW E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 17 0 1, 0 0 8 (1 , 0 0 8 ) 0.00%0 PW T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 4, 0 3 3 , 4 0 5 88 , 7 6 0 30 1 , 9 6 1 2, 0 9 7 , 9 3 8 2, 0 2 4 , 2 2 7 49.11%1,904,954 PW PW OP E R A T I N G C O S T S PW O f f i c e E x p e n s e 11 , 2 0 0 0 6 5 8 3 , 9 2 5 7 , 2 7 5 6 4 . 9 5 % 5 , 2 0 0 PW C o p i e r E x p e n s e 2, 8 8 0 0 2 2 1 1 , 8 4 0 1 , 0 4 0 3 6 . 1 0 % 3 , 6 1 3 PW E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 2 , 7 0 0 6 0 2 1 9 6 0 9 2 , 1 5 1 7 7 . 9 5 % 6 1 6 PW S a f e t y E x p e n s e 3, 9 0 0 0 3 3 3 1 , 3 1 4 2 , 5 8 7 6 6 . 3 1 % 1 , 5 8 0 PW F u e l s - G a s 12 , 8 0 0 0 1 , 4 5 5 7 , 8 1 7 4 , 9 8 3 3 8 . 9 3 % 4 , 8 0 0 PW C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 3, 0 0 0 0 3 8 3 1 , 2 3 4 1 , 7 6 6 5 8 . 8 6 % 7 8 6 PW C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 6 , 5 0 0 0 2 , 1 9 7 2 , 2 6 0 4 , 2 4 0 6 5 . 2 3 % 2 5 3 PW V e h i c l e R e p a i r 4, 3 5 0 0 0 2 , 0 1 6 2 , 3 3 4 5 3 . 6 6 % 1 , 5 5 3 PW V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 6, 0 0 0 0 1 3 7 1 , 5 9 6 4 , 4 0 4 7 3 . 3 9 % 9 8 3 PW S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 42 , 7 3 2 0 8 , 6 0 0 4 0 , 9 7 6 1 , 7 5 6 4 . 1 0 % 3 6 , 4 9 8 PW E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 2, 2 0 0 0 2 8 1 , 9 1 1 2 8 9 1 3 . 1 3 % 1 , 2 3 5 PW E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 2 0 , 4 6 6 2 2 0 7 3 7 4 , 8 6 6 1 5 , 8 2 0 7 6 . 4 7 % 1 , 0 8 5 PW S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 7 1 0 PW F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 1 , 1 2 6 0 4 7 1 7 2 9 3 9 7 3 5 . 2 1 % 1 , 6 3 4 PW C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 2 2 , 5 5 0 1 , 5 5 0 0 0 2 4 , 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 6 3 PW P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 2 2 2 , 1 0 0 (9 9 , 1 0 0 ) 5, 0 0 0 2 9 , 0 0 0 9 4 , 0 0 0 7 6 . 4 2 % 3 0 , 7 5 9 PW P r o f e s s i o n a l S v c - P W W a s t e w a t e r 4 3 6 , 0 0 0 (1 0 2 , 0 0 0 ) 1, 8 7 3 6 7 , 5 9 7 2 6 6 , 4 0 3 7 9 . 7 6 % 1 1 1 , 3 4 6 PW P r o f e s s i o n a l S v c - P W W a t e r 2 9 3 , 8 2 0 (9 9 , 2 7 9 ) 32 , 4 7 1 5 6 , 8 4 8 1 3 7 , 6 9 3 7 0 . 7 7 % 8 5 , 5 6 4 PW P R O F E S S I O N A L S V C f o r Q L P E R e v i e w s 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 5 , 5 1 0 2 8 , 9 9 0 7 1 , 0 1 0 7 1 . 0 0 % 2 6 , 5 2 0 PW C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 5, 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 PW L e g a l S e r v i c e s 15 , 0 0 0 0 0 9 , 7 6 5 5 , 2 3 5 3 4 . 9 0 % 2 3 , 2 8 8 PW P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 0 0 0 4 6 (46)0.00% 0 49 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 3 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual PW P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 1, 5 0 0 0 0 2 5 4 1 , 2 4 6 8 3 . 0 9 % 4 3 2 PW R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 2, 9 0 4 0 2 5 1 1 , 7 5 3 1 , 1 5 1 3 9 . 6 4 % 2 , 1 3 8 PW C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 12 , 6 6 0 8 4 0 1 , 1 5 0 7 , 2 5 0 6 , 2 5 0 4 6 . 2 9 % 7 , 5 7 2 PW B u s i n e s s M e a l s 1, 0 0 0 0 2 4 4 2 7 4 7 2 6 7 2 . 6 4 % 1 7 6 PW M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 8 0 0 6 3 2 4 (144)(79.72)% 47 PW E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 8 3 , 4 1 6 8 0 0 1 5 , 5 7 9 3 6 , 9 1 2 4 7 , 3 0 4 5 6 . 1 7 % 3 0 , 0 1 1 PW T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 4 , 2 8 7 4 0 0 5 1 9 3 , 2 2 9 1 1 , 4 5 8 7 8 . 0 1 % 4 , 3 4 4 PW T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 21 , 7 6 0 4 0 0 2 , 0 3 3 5 , 6 3 8 1 6 , 5 2 2 7 4 . 5 5 % 7 , 5 6 2 PW T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 8, 6 0 4 1 7 5 7 0 9 2 , 4 7 1 6 , 3 0 8 7 1 . 8 5 % 2 , 7 2 4 PW A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 2 0 , 5 5 0 0 1 , 3 7 9 2 , 9 8 3 1 7 , 5 6 7 8 5 . 4 8 % 6 , 6 4 8 PW L e g a l N o t i c e s 45 0 0 0 1 7 2 2 7 8 6 1 . 8 6 % 0 PW P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 4, 3 2 5 6 0 4 6 3 0 8 4 , 0 7 7 9 2 . 9 7 % 3 2 4 PW I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 4 , 7 7 2 0 0 0 4 , 7 7 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 PW D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 8 6 , 7 5 9 1 5 0 1 3 , 3 1 4 6 9 , 8 6 7 1 7 , 0 4 2 1 9 . 6 0 % 6 6 , 1 3 4 PW H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 67 5 1 5 0 6 8 7 3 0 . 4 8 % 6 6 0 PW P e n a l t i e s / S e t t l e m e n t s / F o r f e i t u r e s 0 60 , 0 0 0 10 62 , 9 2 7 (2 , 9 2 7 ) (4.87)%1,980 PW T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 1, 4 7 8 , 1 6 7 (2 3 5 , 7 0 9 ) 95 , 5 3 2 45 8 , 3 8 6 78 4 , 0 7 2 63.11%469,039 PW PW Ca p i t a l O u t l a y PW C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 28 , 0 0 0 0 51 8 23 , 0 0 4 4, 9 9 6 17.84%27,206 PW T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 28 , 0 0 0 0 51 8 23 , 0 0 4 4, 9 9 6 17.84%27,206 PW PW DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 5, 5 3 9 , 5 7 2 (1 4 6 , 9 4 9 ) 39 8 , 0 1 1 2, 5 7 9 , 3 2 8 2, 8 1 3 , 2 9 5 52.16%2,401,199 PW PW Tr a n s f e r s PW P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 1 1 7 , 3 6 7 0 9 , 2 5 7 6 3 , 6 1 7 5 3 , 7 5 0 4 5 . 7 9 % 4 8 , 6 0 5 PW O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 1 7 , 6 1 0 (1 7 , 6 1 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 PW O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 9 5 , 9 4 3 17 , 6 1 0 14 , 5 8 2 53 , 5 1 1 60 , 0 4 2 52.87%55,735 PW T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 23 0 , 9 2 0 0 23 , 8 4 0 11 7 , 1 2 8 11 3 , 7 9 2 49.28%104,340 PW PW TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 5, 7 7 0 , 4 9 1 (1 4 6 , 9 4 9 ) 42 1 , 8 5 1 2, 6 9 6 , 4 5 5 2, 9 2 7 , 0 8 7 52.05%2,505,539 50 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 4 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual MU B S 33 0 0 - M e r i d i a n U t i l i t y B i l l i n g MU B S RE V E N U E S MU B S D e p t S v c F e e s 30 , 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 , 2 4 0 2 8 , 7 6 0 9 5 . 8 6 % 9 2 0 MU B S G a r b a g e - A d m i n F e e R e v e n u e 7 4 9 , 9 6 1 0 14 8 , 2 3 8 43 9 , 5 0 5 31 0 , 4 5 6 41.39%382,658 MU B S T o t a l R E V E N U E S 77 9 , 9 6 1 0 14 8 , 3 3 8 44 0 , 7 4 5 33 9 , 2 1 6 43.49%383,578 MU B S MU B S PE R S O N N E L C O S T S MU B S W a g e s 34 5 , 6 1 8 0 2 8 , 9 1 1 1 9 8 , 2 4 6 1 4 7 , 3 7 2 4 2 . 6 4 % 1 7 7 , 2 0 0 MU B S O v e r t i m e W a g e s 3, 2 7 1 0 0 6 3 , 2 6 5 9 9 . 8 1 % 3 7 6 MU B S F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 26 , 6 9 0 0 2 , 0 8 5 1 4 , 3 0 7 1 2 , 3 8 3 4 6 . 3 9 % 1 2 , 9 0 3 MU B S P E R S I 41 , 6 5 8 0 3 , 2 7 3 2 2 , 4 4 2 1 9 , 2 1 6 4 6 . 1 2 % 1 9 , 7 0 4 MU B S W o r k e r s ' C o m p 87 2 0 0 1 8 2 6 9 0 7 9 . 1 5 % 1 7 0 MU B S E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 1 2 1 , 5 8 4 0 0 1 , 0 6 0 1 2 0 , 5 2 4 9 9 . 1 2 % 4 4 , 9 2 5 MU B S M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 6 , 5 0 7 4 2 , 7 6 4 (4 2 , 7 6 4 ) 0.00% 0 MU B S H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 (1 , 5 0 0 ) 0.00% 0 MU B S V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 8 0 5 4 2 (542)0.00% 0 MU B S D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 5 3 5 3 , 5 2 8 (3 , 5 2 8 ) 0.00% 0 MU B S L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 8 9 5 3 6 (536)0.00% 0 MU B S S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 7 5 4 4 8 (448)0.00% 0 MU B S L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 9 2 5 4 4 (544)0.00% 0 MU B S E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 32 18 9 (189)0.00%0 MU B S T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 53 9 , 6 9 3 0 41 , 6 7 9 28 6 , 2 9 5 25 3 , 3 9 8 46.95%255,278 MU B S MU B S OP E R A T I N G C O S T S MU B S O f f i c e E x p e n s e 6, 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 1 , 7 1 3 4 , 2 8 7 7 1 . 4 4 % 2 , 4 9 5 MU B S C o p i e r E x p e n s e 2, 4 0 0 0 4 3 2 , 7 0 4 (304)(12.66)% 2,081 MU B S E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 4 8 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S D a t a A c c e s s E x p e n s e 1, 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 30 , 5 9 0 0 0 3 4 , 5 8 8 (3 , 9 9 8 ) (13.06)% 30,598 MU B S M i s c C o n t r i b u t i o n s 13 , 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 5 , 2 2 9 7 , 7 7 1 5 9 . 7 7 % 4 , 5 7 3 MU B S E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 3 , 9 5 0 0 2 3 5 2 6 6 3 , 6 8 4 9 3 . 2 6 % 8 8 1 MU B S F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 50 0 0 0 4 6 5 3 5 7 . 0 0 % 4 , 9 5 1 MU B S C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 2 , 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 6 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 8 4 3 MU B S L o c k b o x S e r v i c e s 22 , 6 0 0 0 1 , 4 9 0 1 0 , 6 6 6 1 1 , 9 3 4 5 2 . 8 0 % 1 1 , 7 2 9 MU B S I V R P h o n e S e r v i c e s 20 , 0 0 0 0 2 , 0 7 7 1 1 , 4 3 0 8 , 5 7 0 4 2 . 8 4 % 6 , 0 6 0 MU B S P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 26 0 , 0 0 0 0 2 1 , 1 0 9 1 4 6 , 0 1 7 1 1 3 , 9 8 3 4 3 . 8 3 % 1 4 3 , 0 4 7 MU B S B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 4 , 9 5 8 0 0 2 2 5 4 , 7 3 3 9 5 . 4 6 % 0 MU B S T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 , 1 2 5 0 0 6 4 9 4 7 6 4 2 . 2 9 % 0 MU B S T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 1, 1 2 5 0 0 1 , 2 0 2 (77)(6.81)% 0 MU B S T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 75 0 0 0 6 9 3 5 7 7 . 6 0 % 0 MU B S P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 13 , 0 0 0 0 4 , 4 8 5 4 , 4 8 5 8 , 5 1 5 6 5 . 4 9 % 8 , 7 3 5 MU B S I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 1 8 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 MU B S H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 12 0 0 0 9 3 2 7 2 2 . 3 2 % 1 1 7 MU B S B a n k & M e r c h a n t C h a r g e s 2 3 0 , 0 0 0 0 2 2 , 3 3 9 1 4 6 , 7 2 9 8 3 , 2 7 1 3 6 . 2 0 % 9 7 , 1 8 7 MU B S A / R W r i t e o f f s & L o s s 25 , 0 0 0 0 31 5 5, 7 6 0 19 , 2 4 0 76.95%16,519 MU B S T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 64 0 , 3 2 8 0 52 , 5 5 3 37 2 , 9 1 4 26 7 , 4 1 4 41.76%329,816 51 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 5 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual MU B S MU B S Ca p i t a l O u t l a y MU B S C a p i t a l - S o f t w a r e 14 , 7 2 8 (1 4 , 7 2 8 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 4 , 0 9 0 MU B S C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 7, 5 0 0 0 0 0 7, 5 0 0 100.00%0 MU B S T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 22 , 2 2 8 (1 4 , 7 2 8 ) 0 0 7, 5 0 0 100.00%24,090 MU B S MU B S DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 2 0 2 , 2 4 9 (1 4 , 7 2 8 ) 94 , 2 3 2 65 9 , 2 0 9 52 8 , 3 1 2 44.48%609,183 MU B S MU B S TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 1, 2 0 2 , 2 4 9 (1 4 , 7 2 8 ) 94 , 2 3 2 65 9 , 2 0 9 52 8 , 3 1 2 44.48%609,183 52 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 6 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Wa t e r 3 4 0 0 - W a t e r D e p a r t m e n t Wa t e r RE V E N U E S Wa t e r D e p t S v c F e e s 25 0 , 0 0 0 0 2 7 , 0 7 5 1 8 6 , 2 9 2 6 3 , 7 0 8 2 5 . 4 8 % 1 8 3 , 3 8 3 Wa t e r R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 3 , 9 7 1 (3 , 9 7 1 ) 0.00% 1,425 Wa t e r R e c y c l e d R e v e n u e 0 0 0 1 , 6 7 6 (1 , 6 7 6 ) 0.00% 4,827 Wa t e r R e n t a l I n c o m e 20 , 0 0 0 0 8 , 6 4 0 4 9 , 3 1 1 (2 9 , 3 1 1 ) (146.55)% 43,246 Wa t e r W a t e r / S e w e r S a l e s R e v e n u e 8 , 8 5 2 , 8 0 4 0 5 6 7 , 6 5 4 4 , 1 8 5 , 6 5 7 4 , 6 6 7 , 1 4 7 5 2 . 7 1 % 3 , 9 5 3 , 4 4 2 Wa t e r M e t e r / E q u i p S a l e s R e v e n u e s 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 7 0 , 2 0 4 3 5 6 , 6 4 7 (5 6 , 6 4 7 ) (18.88)% 311,360 Wa t e r S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%6,093 Wa t e r T o t a l R E V E N U E S 9, 4 2 2 , 8 0 4 0 67 3 , 5 7 4 4, 7 8 3 , 5 5 3 4, 6 3 9 , 2 5 1 49.23%4,503,778 Wa t e r Wa t e r PE R S O N N E L C O S T S Wa t e r W a g e s 1, 3 1 5 , 2 7 6 8 3 , 7 4 3 1 0 3 , 5 8 4 7 5 2 , 8 7 8 6 4 6 , 1 4 1 4 6 . 1 8 % 6 8 0 , 5 4 0 Wa t e r O v e r t i m e W a g e s 34 , 5 8 6 5 0 0 3 , 8 2 5 2 0 , 5 0 9 1 4 , 5 7 7 4 1 . 5 4 % 1 7 , 8 4 4 Wa t e r F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 10 3 , 2 6 7 6 , 4 4 4 7 , 8 0 4 5 6 , 0 0 3 5 3 , 7 0 8 4 8 . 9 5 % 4 9 , 9 4 0 Wa t e r P E R S I 16 1 , 1 7 2 9 , 9 0 4 1 2 , 1 5 9 8 5 , 8 2 7 8 5 , 2 4 9 4 9 . 8 3 % 7 8 , 9 2 6 Wa t e r W o r k e r s ' C o m p 42 , 8 9 1 1 , 9 7 9 0 7 , 2 4 2 3 7 , 6 2 8 8 3 . 8 6 % 5 , 7 5 8 Wa t e r E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 4 1 0 , 3 4 6 2 1 , 9 4 2 0 3 , 7 8 4 4 2 8 , 5 0 4 9 9 . 1 2 % 2 1 6 , 3 6 9 Wa t e r U n e m p l o y m e n t 0 0 0 1 0 2 (102)0.00% 0 Wa t e r M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 9 , 0 7 5 2 0 1 , 5 9 4 (2 0 1 , 5 9 4 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 3 6 3 2 , 4 9 4 (2 , 4 9 4 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 3 3 9 1 6 , 1 4 5 (1 6 , 1 4 5 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 9 1 1 , 7 5 7 (1 , 7 5 7 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 6 7 1 , 6 4 1 (1 , 6 4 1 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 2 8 2 , 0 1 3 (2 , 0 1 3 ) 0.00% 0 Wa t e r E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 10 7 62 6 (626)0.00%0 Wa t e r T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 2, 0 6 7 , 5 3 8 12 4 , 5 1 2 16 0 , 1 4 2 1, 1 5 2 , 6 1 5 1, 0 3 9 , 4 3 5 47.42%1,049,377 Wa t e r Wa t e r OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Wa t e r O f f i c e E x p e n s e 8, 0 0 0 0 8 8 6 3 , 0 9 0 4 , 9 1 0 6 1 . 3 7 % 3 , 0 3 4 Wa t e r C o p i e r E x p e n s e 3, 5 1 4 0 3 4 6 1 , 5 8 8 1 , 9 2 6 5 4 . 7 9 % 2 , 1 4 0 Wa t e r E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 1 , 6 2 0 1 2 0 0 8 0 9 9 3 1 5 3 . 5 1 % 4 1 5 Wa t e r C h e m i c a l s 11 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 9 5 8 1 , 7 5 0 2 8 , 2 5 0 2 5 . 6 8 % 5 0 , 1 5 2 Wa t e r J a n i t o r i a l 8, 7 0 0 0 1 , 0 9 5 2 , 5 5 6 6 , 1 4 4 7 0 . 6 2 % 2 , 5 0 6 Wa t e r S a f e t y E x p e n s e 13 , 2 7 4 8 5 0 1 4 4 8 , 1 1 4 6 , 0 1 0 4 2 . 5 5 % 5 , 3 7 7 Wa t e r S h o p S u p p l i e s 7, 0 0 0 0 2 8 4 2 , 7 6 7 4 , 2 3 3 6 0 . 4 7 % 2 , 7 7 2 Wa t e r F u e l s - G a s 48 , 6 0 0 0 3 , 4 7 2 2 2 , 0 8 8 2 6 , 5 1 2 5 4 . 5 5 % 1 8 , 4 7 3 Wa t e r F u e l s - D i e s e l / P r o p a n e 3 , 3 0 0 0 0 1 , 9 8 6 1 , 3 1 4 3 9 . 8 2 % 2 , 9 7 2 Wa t e r C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 5, 4 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 , 8 1 5 2 , 1 8 5 3 6 . 4 2 % 4 , 4 0 4 Wa t e r M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 30 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 1 4 Wa t e r W a t e r M e t e r s 81 2 , 8 3 9 0 5 8 , 2 8 2 5 9 8 , 8 3 4 2 1 4 , 0 0 5 2 6 . 3 2 % 3 9 9 , 3 2 7 Wa t e r B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 27 , 7 0 4 0 4 6 4 1 0 , 4 2 8 1 7 , 2 7 6 6 2 . 3 5 % 1 7 , 6 5 8 Wa t e r V e h i c l e R e p a i r 13 , 2 7 5 0 0 3 , 6 0 2 9 , 6 7 3 7 2 . 8 6 % 8 , 7 8 2 Wa t e r V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 13 , 7 7 5 0 2 , 1 9 7 6 , 4 1 6 7 , 3 5 9 5 3 . 4 2 % 6 , 1 2 2 Wa t e r E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 8 , 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 , 5 3 5 2 , 7 6 5 3 3 . 3 1 % 8 0 3 Wa t e r R o l l i n g S t o c k R e p a i r 2, 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 , 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 6 Wa t e r R o l l i n g S t o c k M a i n t e n a n c e 2 , 5 0 0 0 0 3 5 3 2 , 1 4 7 8 5 . 8 7 % 1 , 2 4 2 Wa t e r G r o u n d s M a i n t e n a n c e 3, 7 0 0 0 0 1 , 7 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 5 4 . 0 5 % 2 , 3 9 0 Wa t e r L i n e W a t / S e w M a i n t e n a n c e 2 2 , 4 6 8 0 0 7 , 6 0 8 1 4 , 8 6 0 6 6 . 1 3 % 1 5 , 6 5 9 Wa t e r L i n e W a t / S e w R e p a i r 18 3 , 5 0 0 0 5 , 4 4 6 5 5 , 5 8 9 1 2 7 , 9 1 1 6 9 . 7 0 % 6 7 , 2 4 0 53 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 7 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Wa t e r S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 53 , 4 9 7 0 8 8 7 2 9 , 1 2 0 2 4 , 3 7 7 4 5 . 5 6 % 5 3 , 1 7 3 Wa t e r A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 5 , 3 6 4 0 2 3 0 3 , 5 1 8 1 , 8 4 6 3 4 . 4 1 % 5 5 6 Wa t e r F l a g / B a n n e r E x p e n s e 10 0 0 0 1 1 5 (15)(15.04)% 0 Wa t e r E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 81 , 0 0 0 2 1 , 0 0 0 4 6 4 6 1 , 5 1 9 4 0 , 4 8 1 3 9 . 6 8 % 5 7 , 0 4 0 Wa t e r W e l l M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 3 5 8 , 4 9 0 8 2 , 9 8 9 1 0 1 , 8 3 6 2 9 7 , 2 2 5 1 4 4 , 2 5 3 3 2 . 6 7 % 1 4 4 , 7 7 3 Wa t e r E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 5 , 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 6 3 4 , 5 3 7 9 0 . 7 3 % 6 6 0 Wa t e r S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 1 0 5 1 0 5 (105)0.00% 5,250 Wa t e r F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 1 , 3 0 0 1 , 8 0 0 6 7 0 1 , 1 7 5 1 , 9 2 5 6 2 . 1 0 % 8 5 6 Wa t e r C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 8 , 2 0 0 4 , 3 1 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 1 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 6 3 Wa t e r P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 2 1 7 , 0 0 0 (8 , 6 8 0 ) 0 3 5 , 4 6 1 1 7 2 , 8 5 9 8 2 . 9 7 % 0 Wa t e r P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 0 0 0 1 6 9 (169)0.00% 0 Wa t e r W a t e r T e s t i n g 19 4 , 5 6 7 0 1 4 , 5 8 0 4 7 , 7 4 1 1 4 6 , 8 2 6 7 5 . 4 6 % 4 8 , 9 9 3 Wa t e r D E Q W a t e r A s s e s s m e n t 1 0 7 , 9 8 8 0 0 1 0 5 , 5 2 2 2 , 4 6 6 2 . 2 8 % 1 0 1 , 2 1 4 Wa t e r C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 21 , 4 0 0 0 2 , 9 5 6 9 , 4 7 9 1 1 , 9 2 1 5 5 . 7 0 % 8 , 1 1 7 Wa t e r W e l l A s s e s s m e n t 50 , 0 0 0 (5 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 6 , 8 9 7 Wa t e r T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 3, 7 4 4 0 3 5 1 2 , 4 1 8 1 , 3 2 6 3 5 . 4 1 % 2 , 4 0 5 Wa t e r P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 14 , 5 6 3 0 1 , 6 4 0 3 , 1 2 7 1 1 , 4 3 6 7 8 . 5 3 % 8 , 0 1 3 Wa t e r R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 1 7 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 4 8 5 9 , 9 9 0 7 , 0 1 1 4 1 . 2 3 % 8 , 2 0 2 Wa t e r C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 15 , 7 0 0 1 , 4 6 0 1 , 0 4 3 7 , 7 4 7 9 , 4 1 3 5 4 . 8 5 % 7 , 5 5 3 Wa t e r B u s i n e s s M e a l s 30 0 0 3 7 1 0 6 1 9 3 6 4 . 5 2 % 1 1 2 Wa t e r M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 1 7 , 5 4 2 2 , 5 0 0 1 , 4 9 3 7 , 3 8 4 1 2 , 6 5 8 6 3 . 1 5 % 7 , 6 2 9 Wa t e r T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 5 , 7 2 0 0 2 0 4 1 , 4 0 9 4 , 3 1 1 7 5 . 3 6 % 1 , 0 2 5 Wa t e r T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 5, 7 9 0 0 1 , 1 1 1 3 , 3 5 9 2 , 4 3 1 4 1 . 9 8 % 2 , 3 3 4 Wa t e r T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 3, 3 8 0 0 5 8 1 1 , 3 0 0 2 , 0 8 0 6 1 . 5 4 % 1 , 0 7 3 Wa t e r A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 9 , 5 5 5 0 3 , 3 3 8 1 3 , 2 0 2 (3 , 6 4 7 ) (38.16)% 8,184 Wa t e r P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 8, 7 9 1 6 0 4 6 2 4 0 8 , 6 1 1 9 7 . 2 8 % 1 , 8 9 5 Wa t e r I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 3 9 , 5 3 3 0 1 7 , 5 6 7 3 5 , 1 3 3 4 , 4 0 0 1 1 . 1 2 % 3 3 , 7 7 4 Wa t e r E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 4 3 1 , 2 2 8 0 0 1 8 1 , 9 1 5 2 4 9 , 3 1 3 5 7 . 8 1 % 2 0 1 , 9 2 5 Wa t e r I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 10 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 2 6 6 , 5 6 5 3 , 4 3 5 3 4 . 3 4 % 6 , 0 0 0 Wa t e r S a n i t a r y S e r v i c e s 1, 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r E q u i p m e n t R e n t a l & L e a s e 5 , 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 2 4 , 3 6 8 8 7 . 3 6 % 6 , 4 1 4 Wa t e r D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 1 0 , 0 9 3 4 3 4 2 4 2 4 , 5 6 5 5 , 9 6 2 5 6 . 6 3 % 5 , 8 5 2 Wa t e r I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 4, 5 0 0 0 0 3 , 6 4 0 8 6 0 1 9 . 1 0 % 3 , 5 6 1 Wa t e r H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 40 5 3 0 0 4 0 5 3 0 6 . 8 9 % 3 9 0 Wa t e r F i x e d A s s e t D i s p o s a l C o s t s 0 3 0 , 0 0 0 0 5 , 7 1 5 2 4 , 2 8 5 8 0 . 9 4 % 0 Wa t e r E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 46 19 1 (191)0.00%0 Wa t e r T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 3, 0 0 8 , 6 1 9 87 , 4 7 3 23 7 , 4 7 2 1, 6 9 9 , 2 8 5 1, 3 9 6 , 8 0 7 45.12%1,345,931 Wa t e r Wa t e r Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Wa t e r C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 40 , 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 , 9 8 9 1 1 0 . 0 2 % 1 5 7 , 5 7 1 Wa t e r C a p i t a l - E l e c t r o n i c s 2 8 , 4 8 8 (2 8 , 4 8 8 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 3 , 8 4 7 Wa t e r C a p i t a l - S o f t w a r e 93 , 5 7 0 (9 3 , 5 7 0 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r C a p i t a l - C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 16 0 , 0 0 0 (8 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 0 80 , 0 0 0 100.00%0 Wa t e r T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 33 2 , 0 5 8 (2 0 2 , 0 5 8 ) 0 39 , 9 8 9 90 , 0 1 1 69.24%171,418 Wa t e r Wa t e r DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 5, 4 0 8 , 2 1 5 9, 9 2 7 39 7 , 6 1 4 2, 8 9 1 , 8 8 9 2, 5 2 6 , 2 5 3 46.62%2,566,726 Wa t e r Wa t e r 54 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 8 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Wa t e r Tr a n s f e r s Wa t e r P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 3 8 , 0 8 7 (3 8 , 0 8 7 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 9 5 9 , 4 0 5 3 8 , 0 8 7 7 9 , 1 7 7 5 4 6 , 3 9 1 4 5 1 , 1 0 2 4 5 . 2 2 % 5 4 6 , 6 2 5 Wa t e r O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 1 0 5 , 6 1 3 (1 0 5 , 6 1 3 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 Wa t e r O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 1 8 0 , 8 3 2 10 5 , 6 1 3 23 , 4 0 2 19 2 , 6 7 1 93 , 7 7 3 32.73%223,539 Wa t e r T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 1, 2 8 3 , 9 3 7 0 10 2 , 5 8 0 73 9 , 0 6 2 54 4 , 8 7 5 42.44%770,164 Wa t e r Wa t e r TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 6, 6 9 2 , 1 5 2 9, 9 2 7 50 0 , 1 9 3 3, 6 3 0 , 9 5 1 3, 0 7 1 , 1 2 8 45.82%3,336,890 55 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 1 9 9 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual Wa t e r 3 4 9 0 - W a t e r C o n s t r u c t i o n Wa t e r RE V E N U E S Wa t e r A s s e s s m e n t s - R e s i d e n t i a l R e v e n u e 2 , 4 1 6 , 6 2 9 0 4 2 0 , 2 4 9 2 , 1 0 3 , 2 1 8 3 1 3 , 4 1 1 1 2 . 9 6 % 1 , 8 3 8 , 8 3 6 Wa t e r C a s h D o n a t i o n f o r C a p i t a l O u t l a y 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 , 4 1 0 Wa t e r A s s e s s m e n t s - C o m m e r c i a l R e v e n u e 5 1 0 , 4 8 5 0 3 5 , 3 6 9 2 5 2 , 7 0 2 2 5 7 , 7 8 3 5 0 . 4 9 % 3 2 5 , 8 3 0 Wa t e r A s s e s s m e n t s - M u l t i f a m i l y R e v e n u e 4 2 6 , 4 6 4 0 1 3 2 , 1 9 1 9 9 6 , 9 8 3 (5 7 0 , 5 1 9 ) (133.77)% 899,688 Wa t e r I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 10 0 , 0 0 0 0 27 , 3 9 1 19 1 , 6 5 6 (9 1 , 6 5 6 ) (91.65)%150,427 Wa t e r T o t a l R E V E N U E S 3, 4 5 3 , 5 7 8 0 61 5 , 2 0 0 3, 5 4 4 , 5 5 9 (9 0 , 9 8 1 ) (2.63)%3,217,191 Wa t e r Wa t e r OP E R A T I N G C O S T S Wa t e r I n v e s t m e n t S e r v i c e s 18 , 0 0 0 0 85 4 5, 9 3 0 12 , 0 7 0 67.05%5,855 Wa t e r T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 18 , 0 0 0 0 85 4 5, 9 3 0 12 , 0 7 0 67.06%5,855 Wa t e r Wa t e r Ca p i t a l O u t l a y Wa t e r C a p i t a l - E l e c t r o n i c s 3 6 4 , 2 7 8 (2 1 6 , 2 3 5 ) 0 2 4 , 1 0 2 1 2 3 , 9 4 0 8 3 . 7 1 % 7 6 , 4 4 0 Wa t e r S e r v i c e L i n e / M a i n R e p l a c e m e n t 1 , 5 2 9 , 4 3 4 (3 7 6 , 2 4 0 ) 23 9 , 7 2 3 6 1 1 , 2 1 6 5 4 1 , 9 7 8 4 6 . 9 9 % 5 4 1 , 6 2 4 Wa t e r W E L L 1 5 25 3 , 7 7 6 (2 , 5 9 4 ) 0 9 , 1 8 2 2 4 2 , 0 0 0 9 6 . 3 4 % 1 6 , 5 1 2 Wa t e r W E L L 2 9 c o n s t r u c t i o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 7 7 , 0 8 8 Wa t e r W E L L 2 2 C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 , 3 4 1 , 6 1 6 (7 9 3 , 2 8 1 ) 0 4 5 8 , 6 9 5 8 9 , 6 3 9 1 6 . 3 4 % 2 2 7 , 9 5 2 Wa t e r W E L L 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 8 8 , 2 3 0 Wa t e r W A T E R L I N E E X T E N S I O N S 2 , 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 (1 2 4 , 0 3 6 ) 13 , 4 5 9 1 1 5 , 7 3 5 1 , 9 6 0 , 2 2 9 9 4 . 4 2 % 8 9 2 , 1 4 1 Wa t e r W e l l 2 8 c o n s t r u c t i o n 1 , 5 9 1 , 9 7 8 1 8 8 , 0 7 5 1 1 4 , 9 4 3 3 7 7 , 6 7 3 1 , 4 0 2 , 3 8 0 7 8 . 7 8 % 9 4 , 5 5 1 Wa t e r W e l l 3 2 c a p i t a l 80 5 , 5 6 3 (2 8 9 , 6 9 7 ) 0 4 7 2 , 9 1 2 4 2 , 9 5 4 8 . 3 2 % 6 9 , 9 5 5 Wa t e r W E L L 3 3 84 5 , 4 7 3 (3 5 0 , 0 2 8 ) 1, 4 1 3 43 , 9 8 2 45 1 , 4 6 3 91.12%0 Wa t e r T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 8, 9 3 2 , 1 1 8 (1 , 9 6 4 , 0 3 6 ) 36 9 , 5 3 8 2, 1 1 3 , 4 9 8 4, 8 5 4 , 5 8 4 69.67%2,884,491 Wa t e r Wa t e r DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 8, 9 5 0 , 1 1 8 (1 , 9 6 4 , 0 3 6 ) 37 0 , 3 9 2 2, 1 1 9 , 4 2 8 4, 8 6 6 , 6 5 4 69.66%2,890,345 Wa t e r Wa t e r TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 8, 9 5 0 , 1 1 8 (1 , 9 6 4 , 0 3 6 ) 37 0 , 3 9 2 2, 1 1 9 , 4 2 8 4, 8 6 6 , 6 5 4 69.66%2,890,345 56 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 2 0 0 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual WR R F 3 5 0 0 - W a s t e W a t e r F a c i l i t y WR R F RE V E N U E S WR R F R e v i e w F e e s 0 0 1 , 9 5 0 1 0 , 6 5 0 (1 0 , 6 5 0 ) 0.00% 12,075 WR R F R e i m b u r s e m e n t R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 7 WR R F R e c y c l e d R e v e n u e 0 0 0 1 2 7 (127)0.00% 152 WR R F W a t e r / S e w e r S a l e s R e v e n u e 1 5 , 9 4 5 , 3 9 6 0 1 , 2 5 9 , 7 3 1 9 , 1 1 2 , 9 8 8 6 , 8 3 2 , 4 0 8 4 2 . 8 4 % 8 , 7 7 7 , 2 0 5 WR R F M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e s 0 0 0 7 , 1 1 0 (7 , 1 1 0 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F S a l e o f A s s e t s - G a i n ( L o s s ) 0 0 0 55 7 (557)0.00%0 WR R F T o t a l R E V E N U E S 15 , 9 4 5 , 3 9 6 0 1, 2 6 1 , 6 8 1 9, 1 3 1 , 4 3 1 6, 8 1 3 , 9 6 5 42.73%8,789,449 WR R F WR R F PE R S O N N E L C O S T S WR R F W a g e s 2, 0 2 3 , 0 3 9 (5 8 , 7 8 7 ) 15 7 , 6 2 1 1 , 0 6 0 , 7 5 6 9 0 3 , 4 9 6 4 5 . 9 9 % 9 8 5 , 4 1 2 WR R F O v e r t i m e W a g e s 49 , 8 5 5 (5 0 0 ) 3, 4 6 7 2 7 , 7 5 5 2 1 , 6 0 0 4 3 . 7 6 % 2 6 , 2 1 1 WR R F F I C A ( 7 . 6 5 % ) 15 8 , 5 7 7 (4 , 5 3 5 ) 11 , 7 8 2 7 9 , 7 1 4 7 4 , 3 2 8 4 8 . 2 5 % 7 3 , 3 5 9 WR R F P E R S I 24 6 , 6 2 1 (7 , 0 7 9 ) 17 , 7 0 7 1 2 2 , 4 0 6 1 1 7 , 1 3 6 4 8 . 8 9 % 1 1 3 , 3 0 5 WR R F W o r k e r s ' C o m p 50 , 9 7 8 (1 , 3 9 3 ) 0 8 , 5 0 0 4 1 , 0 8 5 8 2 . 8 5 % 9 , 4 5 5 WR R F E m p l o y e e B e n e f i t F e e s 6 2 3 , 1 1 8 (1 5 , 1 9 8 ) 0 5 , 0 9 1 6 0 2 , 8 2 9 9 9 . 1 6 % 2 8 7 , 6 7 9 WR R F U n e m p l o y m e n t 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 , 1 4 3 WR R F M e d i c a l I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 5 , 5 2 2 2 4 3 , 4 2 0 (2 4 3 , 4 2 0 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F H S A / H R A V E B A C o n t r i b u t i o n s 0 0 0 1 2 , 1 6 7 (1 2 , 1 6 7 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F V i s i o n I n s P r e m i u m 0 0 4 4 5 3 , 0 1 6 (3 , 0 1 6 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F D e n t a l I n s P r e m i u m s 0 0 2 , 9 9 2 2 0 , 0 3 2 (2 0 , 0 3 2 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F L i f e I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 1 5 2 , 4 5 4 (2 , 4 5 4 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F S h o r t T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 3 9 6 2 , 3 4 5 (2 , 3 4 5 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F L o n g T e r m D i s a b i l i t y P r e m i u m s 0 0 4 8 1 2 , 8 5 0 (2 , 8 5 0 ) 0.00% 0 WR R F E A P P r e m i u m s 0 0 15 0 87 4 (874)0.00%0 WR R F T o t a l P E R S O N N E L C O S T S 3, 1 5 2 , 1 8 8 (8 7 , 4 9 2 ) 23 0 , 9 7 9 1, 5 9 1 , 3 7 9 1, 4 7 3 , 3 1 7 48.07%1,496,563 WR R F WR R F OP E R A T I N G C O S T S WR R F O f f i c e E x p e n s e 6, 6 5 0 0 3 4 4 1 , 8 3 9 4 , 8 1 1 7 2 . 3 5 % 2 , 7 7 5 WR R F C o p i e r E x p e n s e 4, 9 6 6 0 3 3 7 2 , 0 6 8 2 , 8 9 8 5 8 . 3 5 % 6 , 8 2 4 WR R F E m p l o y e e R e c o g n i t i o n a n d C o f f e e 2 , 4 6 0 (6 0 ) 12 4 1 , 0 2 2 1 , 3 7 8 5 7 . 4 2 % 7 0 1 WR R F C h e m i c a l s 45 0 , 0 0 0 0 5 9 , 4 9 4 2 6 7 , 3 3 3 1 8 2 , 6 6 7 4 0 . 5 9 % 1 7 5 , 7 4 2 WR R F J a n i t o r i a l 22 , 3 0 0 0 5 , 4 5 0 1 3 , 5 9 9 8 , 7 0 1 3 9 . 0 1 % 1 2 , 7 1 8 WR R F S a f e t y E x p e n s e 32 , 4 5 0 (6 5 0 ) 5, 4 9 9 2 2 , 7 4 8 9 , 0 5 2 2 8 . 4 6 % 1 2 , 2 3 5 WR R F S h o p S u p p l i e s 69 , 0 0 0 0 3 , 4 0 1 3 1 , 3 5 2 3 7 , 6 4 8 5 4 . 5 6 % 2 9 , 3 3 1 WR R F F u e l s - G a s 17 , 8 0 0 0 1 , 7 5 5 1 2 , 6 0 5 5 , 1 9 5 2 9 . 1 8 % 9 , 2 8 2 WR R F F u e l s - D i e s e l / P r o p a n e 9 , 0 0 0 0 5 7 2 1 2 8 , 7 8 8 9 7 . 6 3 % 3 , 4 0 2 WR R F C l o t h i n g E x p e n s e 6, 6 0 0 (3 0 0 ) 99 2 , 4 2 8 3 , 8 7 2 6 1 . 4 6 % 3 , 9 3 9 WR R F M e d i c a l S u p p l i e s 85 0 0 0 1 2 8 3 8 9 8 . 6 0 % 2 8 4 WR R F C o m m u n i t y E v e n t s E x p e n s e s 1 , 5 0 0 0 1 7 9 1 , 0 3 8 4 6 2 3 0 . 7 7 % 5 2 2 WR R F B u i l d i n g M a i n t e n a n c e 62 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 0 1 7 3 2 , 2 0 4 2 9 , 7 9 6 4 8 . 0 5 % 3 6 , 0 5 0 WR R F P l a n t M a i n t e n a n c e 54 0 , 0 0 0 0 9 , 5 5 7 2 7 1 , 4 9 0 2 6 8 , 5 1 0 4 9 . 7 2 % 1 4 4 , 0 7 3 WR R F P l a n t R e p a i r s 15 5 , 0 0 0 0 2 , 4 5 0 4 6 , 1 3 5 1 0 8 , 8 6 5 7 0 . 2 3 % 1 2 6 , 9 7 3 WR R F P a r k i n g / A s p h a l t M a i n t e n a n c e 6 , 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 9 0 0 1 0 0 1 . 6 6 % 0 WR R F V e h i c l e R e p a i r 29 , 6 0 0 0 1 , 2 0 2 4 , 8 4 8 2 4 , 7 5 2 8 3 . 6 2 % 1 2 , 1 9 2 WR R F V e h i c l e M a i n t e n a n c e 24 , 4 0 0 0 5 8 4 6 , 7 5 1 1 7 , 6 4 9 7 2 . 3 3 % 4 , 0 2 6 WR R F E q u i p m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e & R e p a i r 6 5 , 0 0 0 0 1 , 4 7 4 4 5 , 4 1 8 1 9 , 5 8 2 3 0 . 1 2 % 6 4 , 4 5 9 WR R F R o l l i n g S t o c k R e p a i r 10 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 , 3 4 7 (347)(3.47)% 755 WR R F R o l l i n g S t o c k M a i n t e n a n c e 8 , 5 0 0 0 0 1 , 1 8 7 7 , 3 1 3 8 6 . 0 3 % 2 , 4 8 8 57 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 2 0 1 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual WR R F G r o u n d s M a i n t e n a n c e 15 , 0 0 0 0 1 4 6 1 , 3 8 6 1 3 , 6 1 4 9 0 . 7 6 % 1 , 2 6 1 WR R F L i f t S t a t i o n M a i n t 45 , 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 6 , 8 7 0 2 8 , 1 3 0 6 2 . 5 1 % 2 2 , 8 3 2 WR R F L i f t S t a t i o n R e p a i r 35 , 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 , 3 8 0 (1 , 3 8 0 ) (3.94)% 32,499 WR R F L i n e W a t / S e w M a i n t e n a n c e 2 7 , 3 2 0 0 2 , 0 5 2 1 6 , 1 4 0 1 1 , 1 8 0 4 0 . 9 2 % 8 , 2 1 6 WR R F L i n e W a t / S e w R e p a i r 22 5 , 0 0 0 (2 , 2 5 0 ) 6, 3 0 0 6 3 , 8 0 7 1 5 8 , 9 4 3 7 1 . 3 5 % 3 0 , 1 0 9 WR R F S o f t w a r e M a i n t e n a n c e 58 , 1 3 9 0 6 4 9 4 8 , 7 5 1 9 , 3 8 8 1 6 . 1 4 % 4 7 , 1 3 1 WR R F A l a r m S e r v i c e / S p r i n k l e r S y s t e m 3 , 2 2 7 0 8 9 5 2 , 9 2 2 3 0 5 9 . 4 6 % 2 , 6 4 4 WR R F F l a g / B a n n e r E x p e n s e 20 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 3 0 WR R F E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s 1 6 1 , 5 0 0 (1 , 0 0 0 ) 3, 0 4 9 2 0 , 5 2 9 1 3 9 , 9 7 1 8 7 . 2 0 % 5 6 , 8 6 7 WR R F E l e c t r o n i c s E x p e n s e ( u n d e r $ 5 0 0 0 ) 7 , 7 3 0 0 1 , 0 3 3 1 , 6 2 4 6 , 1 0 6 7 8 . 9 9 % 3 , 8 4 1 WR R F S o f t w a r e A c q u i s i t i o n & L i c e n s e s ( u n d e r $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 ) 30 , 0 0 0 (3 0 , 0 0 0 ) 10 5 1 0 5 (105)0.00% 6,880 WR R F F u r n i t u r e & F u r n i s h i n g s 1 , 5 0 0 (1 , 0 0 0 ) 0 6 6 1 (161)(32.23)% 0 WR R F C o m p u t e r s & P r i n t e r s ( I T u s e o n l y ) 1 6 , 7 1 0 (2 , 2 1 0 ) 0 0 1 4 , 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 9 1 WR R F P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e s 1 4 5 , 0 0 0 (4 1 , 0 0 0 ) 1, 4 8 0 1 4 , 2 7 7 8 9 , 7 2 3 8 6 . 2 7 % 1 5 , 8 8 9 WR R F C o n t r a c t e d L a b o r 5, 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 , 4 1 0 WR R F P r e v e n t a t i v e H e a l t h E x p 1 , 2 0 0 0 0 3 4 3 8 5 7 7 1 . 4 2 % 5 6 4 WR R F D E Q W a t e r A s s e s s m e n t 59 , 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 9 , 0 0 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 WR R F C o n t r a c t e d S e r v i c e s 79 , 5 0 0 0 9 7 3 4 , 2 7 3 4 5 , 2 2 7 5 6 . 8 8 % 2 8 , 4 8 3 WR R F T e l e p h o n e / I n t e r n e t 5, 5 0 0 0 3 1 6 2 , 6 5 0 2 , 8 5 0 5 1 . 8 1 % 2 , 6 3 8 WR R F P o s t a g e & M a i l i n g s 11 , 5 0 0 0 4 1 3 2 , 9 1 7 8 , 5 8 3 7 4 . 6 3 % 3 , 8 5 2 WR R F R a d i o s / C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 2, 5 8 0 0 2 2 4 1 , 3 6 6 1 , 2 1 4 4 7 . 0 5 % 9 4 6 WR R F C e l l p h o n e E x p e n s e 14 , 3 2 0 (8 0 0 ) 95 3 6 , 7 9 0 6 , 7 3 0 4 9 . 7 7 % 6 , 0 3 5 WR R F B u s i n e s s M e a l s 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 8 8 WR R F M i l e a g e & P a r k i n g R e i m b u r s e m e n t 0 0 0 2 6 0 (260)0.00% 0 WR R F E m p l o y e e S e m i n a r s / T r a i n i n g 3 9 , 1 2 7 (2 , 0 0 0 ) 96 4 1 6 , 6 2 8 2 0 , 4 9 8 5 5 . 2 1 % 1 3 , 6 5 3 WR R F T r a v e l - T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 7 , 4 5 0 0 0 8 7 2 6 , 5 7 8 8 8 . 2 9 % 2 , 5 7 7 WR R F T r a v e l - L o d g i n g 8, 6 2 5 0 0 2 , 0 1 3 6 , 6 1 2 7 6 . 6 5 % 3 , 1 2 4 WR R F T r a v e l - P e r D i e m 2, 8 0 0 0 0 6 2 8 2 , 1 7 2 7 7 . 5 7 % 1 , 1 8 0 WR R F A d v e r t i s i n g / P r o m o t i o n a l 5 , 3 0 0 0 4 3 8 3 , 6 0 3 1 , 6 9 7 3 2 . 0 1 % 2 , 6 1 0 WR R F L e g a l N o t i c e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 1 7 7 WR R F P r i n t i n g / B i n d i n g 1, 2 5 0 0 8 2 3 2 1 9 2 9 7 4 . 3 0 % 3 6 8 WR R F I n s u r a n c e P r e m i u m / C l a i m s 5 0 , 3 1 5 0 2 2 , 3 5 8 4 4 , 7 1 5 5 , 6 0 0 1 1 . 1 2 % 4 2 , 9 1 2 WR R F E l e c t r i c i t y - I d a h o P o w e r 5 0 8 , 8 1 3 0 4 1 , 2 8 5 2 9 0 , 5 3 2 2 1 8 , 2 8 1 4 2 . 8 9 % 3 4 9 , 7 4 2 WR R F I n t e r m o u n t a i n G a s 87 , 5 0 0 0 9 , 0 5 7 4 9 , 3 2 2 3 8 , 1 7 8 4 3 . 6 3 % 4 8 , 8 8 9 WR R F S a n i t a r y S e r v i c e s 20 0 , 9 0 0 0 1 , 2 1 5 9 4 , 5 7 9 1 0 6 , 3 2 1 5 2 . 9 2 % 8 1 , 2 3 4 WR R F E q u i p m e n t R e n t a l & L e a s e 1 0 , 7 4 6 0 5 9 2 , 8 9 9 7 , 8 4 7 7 3 . 0 2 % 1 , 0 7 1 WR R F D u e s , L i c e n s e s , P u b l i c a t i o n s 6 , 6 7 8 (3 3 4 ) 20 7 2 , 1 1 2 4 , 2 3 2 6 6 . 7 0 % 2 , 3 0 1 WR R F I r r i g a t i o n T a x e s 4, 0 0 0 0 0 3 , 5 2 1 4 7 9 1 1 . 9 7 % 3 , 5 6 0 WR R F H o l i d a y E x p e n s e 61 5 (1 5 ) 0 6 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 8 5 WR R F E m p l o y e e L o n g e v i t y a w a r d s 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%48 WR R F T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 3, 4 0 8 , 2 2 4 (8 1 , 6 1 9 ) 18 6 , 4 2 0 1, 5 6 4 , 9 3 4 1, 7 6 1 , 6 7 1 52.96%1,475,409 WR R F WR R F Ca p i t a l O u t l a y WR R F W W T P - B l d g i m p r o v e m e n t s 0 0 0 (2 1 3 ) 213 0.00% 0 WR R F C a p i t a l - V e h i c l e s 40 , 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 , 5 9 3 1 , 4 0 7 3 . 5 1 % 0 WR R F C a p i t a l - E l e c t r o n i c s 1 2 , 3 3 1 (1 2 , 3 3 1 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 6 , 6 6 9 WR R F C a p i t a l - S o f t w a r e 0 3 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 WR R F C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 7, 5 0 0 0 0 8, 9 1 9 (1 , 4 1 9 ) (18.92)%82,626 WR R F T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 59 , 8 3 1 17 , 6 6 9 0 47 , 2 9 9 30 , 2 0 1 38.97%109,295 WR R F DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 6, 6 2 0 , 2 4 3 (1 5 1 , 4 4 2 ) 41 7 , 3 9 9 3, 2 0 3 , 6 1 2 3, 2 6 5 , 1 8 9 50.47%3,081,267 58 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 2 0 2 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual WR R F WR R F Tr a n s f e r s WR R F P e r s o n n e l t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 3 8 , 0 8 7 (3 8 , 0 8 7 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 WR R F P e r s o n n e l T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 9 5 9 , 4 0 5 3 8 , 0 8 7 8 0 , 7 0 2 5 5 5 , 9 8 6 4 4 1 , 5 0 6 4 4 . 2 6 % 5 5 6 , 3 9 8 WR R F O p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r i n t e r f u n d - O U T 1 0 5 , 6 1 3 (1 0 5 , 6 1 3 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 WR R F O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r o f E x p e n s e - I N 1 8 0 , 8 3 2 10 5 , 6 1 3 23 , 4 0 2 19 2 , 6 7 1 93 , 7 7 3 32.73%223,539 WR R F T o t a l T r a n s f e r s 1, 2 8 3 , 9 3 7 0 10 4 , 1 0 4 74 8 , 6 5 7 53 5 , 2 8 0 41.69%779,937 WR R F WR R F TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 7, 9 0 4 , 1 8 0 (1 5 1 , 4 4 2 ) 52 1 , 5 0 3 3, 9 5 2 , 2 6 9 3, 8 0 0 , 4 6 9 49.02%3,861,204 59 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 2 0 3 o f 6 6 4 Ci t y o f M e r i d i a n St a t e m e n t o f R e v e n u e s E x p e n s e s Fr o m 4 / 1 / 1 9 - 4 / 3 0 / 1 9 De p t De s c r i p t i o n To t a l B u d g e t - Or i g i n a l To t a l B u d g e t - Re v i s e d Cu r r e n t P e r i o d Ac t u a l Cu r r e n t Y e a r Ac t u a l Bu d g e t Re m a i n i n g Percent of Budget RemainingPrior Year Actual WR R F 3 5 9 0 - W a s t e W a t e r C o n s t r u c t i o n WR R F RE V E N U E S WR R F A s s e s s m e n t s - R e s i d e n t i a l R e v e n u e 4 , 7 5 7 , 3 1 7 0 9 0 1 , 0 8 8 4 , 4 3 9 , 4 1 2 3 1 7 , 9 0 5 6 . 6 8 % 3 , 7 0 9 , 6 2 8 WR R F C a s h D o n a t i o n f o r C a p i t a l O u t l a y 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 2 , 2 4 4 WR R F E P A W W C o m p l i a n c e F e e 1 , 5 7 6 , 5 1 5 0 1 3 4 , 6 7 7 9 3 0 , 0 2 7 6 4 6 , 4 8 8 4 1 . 0 0 % 8 7 9 , 8 8 4 WR R F A s s e s s m e n t s - C o m m e r c i a l R e v e n u e 9 5 8 , 1 2 1 0 6 1 , 2 1 2 6 2 9 , 2 8 6 3 2 8 , 8 3 5 3 4 . 3 2 % 7 0 6 , 7 7 7 WR R F A s s e s s m e n t s - M u l t i f a m i l y R e v e n u e 8 3 9 , 5 2 8 0 2 6 0 , 2 2 8 1 , 9 6 9 , 1 8 8 (1 , 1 2 9 , 6 6 0 ) (134.55)% 1,749,024 WR R F I n t e r e s t E a r n i n g s 50 , 0 0 0 0 54 , 7 7 3 37 0 , 2 2 7 (3 2 0 , 2 2 7 ) (640.45)%297,837 WR R F T o t a l R E V E N U E S 8, 1 8 1 , 4 8 1 0 1, 4 1 1 , 9 7 7 8, 3 3 8 , 1 4 0 (1 5 6 , 6 5 8 ) (1.91)%7,345,393 WR R F WR R F OP E R A T I N G C O S T S WR R F I n v e s t m e n t S e r v i c e s 35 , 0 0 0 0 1, 7 0 8 11 , 8 6 0 23 , 1 4 0 66.11%11,709 WR R F T o t a l O P E R A T I N G C O S T S 35 , 0 0 0 0 1, 7 0 8 11 , 8 6 0 23 , 1 4 0 66.11%11,709 WR R F WR R F Ca p i t a l O u t l a y WR R F C a p i t a l O u t l a y - L a n d 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 % 0 WR R F W W T P - B l d g i m p r o v e m e n t s 8 7 6 , 5 8 4 (5 0 , 9 6 5 ) 77 7 4 4 1 , 9 9 5 3 8 3 , 6 2 4 4 6 . 4 6 % 9 3 9 , 0 7 2 WR R F S e w e r L i n e E x t e n s i o n s 4 , 4 6 0 , 8 6 0 (1 , 8 1 5 , 1 3 0 ) 10 , 4 9 0 5 9 8 , 4 8 2 2 , 0 4 7 , 2 4 8 7 7 . 3 7 % 1 , 1 6 0 , 3 4 1 WR R F C a p i t a l - E q u i p m e n t 67 , 8 8 8 (6 7 , 8 8 8 ) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 3 1 , 3 9 3 WR R F S e r v i c e L i n e / M a i n R e p l a c e m e n t 2 , 2 9 0 , 2 9 1 (4 5 9 , 0 7 8 ) 93 , 8 3 5 1 6 5 , 5 3 0 1 , 6 6 5 , 6 8 3 9 0 . 9 6 % 4 9 5 , 7 7 3 WR R F L i f t S t a t i o n c o n s t r u c t i o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 5 3 , 9 8 0 WR R F P r e D e s i g n o f C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s 1 9 , 7 2 7 , 2 0 8 (4 , 8 1 3 , 1 0 8 ) 89 5 , 0 5 7 4 , 9 5 5 , 8 7 6 9 , 9 5 8 , 2 2 4 6 6 . 7 7 % 1 0 , 0 4 6 , 9 2 8 WR R F B o i s e R i v e r O u t f a l l 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 % 4 9 4 , 3 4 1 WR R F C e n t r a t e B a s i n C o n s t r u c t i o n 7 5 , 8 4 6 (6 , 6 4 7 ) 62 4 4 3 , 9 6 7 2 5 , 2 3 1 3 6 . 4 6 % 1 1 , 9 4 5 WR R F H e a d w o r k s I m p r o v e m e n t s 6 , 3 3 3 , 2 8 7 (2 , 1 9 0 , 4 0 1 ) 23 5 , 4 3 6 2, 4 1 4 , 4 6 1 1, 7 2 8 , 4 2 6 41.72%4,997,895 WR R F T o t a l C a p i t a l O u t l a y 34 , 6 3 1 , 9 6 4 (9 , 4 0 3 , 2 1 6 ) 1, 2 3 6 , 2 2 0 8, 6 2 0 , 3 1 2 16 , 6 0 8 , 4 3 6 65.83%18,231,668 WR R F WR R F DE P T E X P E N D I T U R E S 34 , 6 6 6 , 9 6 4 (9 , 4 0 3 , 2 1 6 ) 1, 2 3 7 , 9 2 8 8, 6 3 2 , 1 7 2 16 , 6 3 1 , 5 7 6 65.83%18,243,377 WR R F WR R F TO T A L E X P E N D I T U R E S 34 , 6 6 6 , 9 6 4 (9 , 4 0 3 , 2 1 6 ) 1, 2 3 7 , 9 2 8 8, 6 3 2 , 1 7 2 16 , 6 3 1 , 5 7 6 65.83%18,243,377 60 o f 6 0 Me r i d i a n C i t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g A g e n d a M a y 2 8 , 2 0 1 9 – P a g e 2 0 4 o f 6 6 4 EIDIAINDAHO ,+-- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 7 G Project File Name/Number: Item Title: AP Invoices for Payment for 5-29-2019 $1,633,526.54 Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 7.G. Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - AP Invoices for Payment - 05/29/19 - $1,633,526.54 C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate A P I nvoices for Payment C over Memo 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate F inance.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 1:01 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 205 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund A-1 STAMP & MABEL'S LABELS Approved stamp for City Clerk Staff 18.00 01 General Fund A-1 STAMP & MABEL'S LABELS Name Badges for MAC/HPC 30.00 01 General Fund A-1 STAMP & MABEL'S LABELS Office Supplies 10.00 01 General Fund ADA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE Phone Translation Service April 2019 41.18 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS 220/trailer adapter, MF034 11.39 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS angled snap ring pliers for Heroes Park - qty 1 12.69 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS filters for mules - qty 4 11.48 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS fuel pump parts for Toro spray rig - qty 5 60.27 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS fuses & lubricant for vehicles - qty 57 40.05 01 General Fund ADVANCE AUTO PARTS v-belts for power trim edgers - qty 3 16.77 01 General Fund ALLEGIANT POWDER COATING, LLC powder coat Kleiner trash can enclosures - qty 8 1,800.00 01 General Fund ASSOC OF IDAHO CITIES 2019 Spring Dist. Employee Training - C.Johnson 39.00 01 General Fund ASSOC OF IDAHO CITIES Dist.3A Meeting for Anne Little Roberts, Nampa ID 15.00 01 General Fund BARRY EQUIPMENT & RENTAL toolcat repair 1,103.27 01 General Fund BERLE STOKES PerDiem:B.Caldwell,MultiCities,CA,Background Investigation 329.00 01 General Fund BICKFORD SIGN & AWNING Heroes Park flagpole install 1,661.40 01 General Fund BOE - Boise Office Equipment XPN547404: B&W; Color Copies 04/22/19-05/21/19 228.62 01 General Fund BRADY INDUSTRIES, LLC.220/ Truck wash & kitchen towels 196.29 01 General Fund BRADY INDUSTRIES, LLC.220/Janitorial, Cleaner, soap, liner, towels, tissue 276.91 01 General Fund BRIAN CALDWELL PerDiem:B.Caldwell,MultiCities,CA,Background Investigation 329.00 01 General Fund BRIGHT IDEAS LIGHTING COMPANY repair conduit at bandshell in Kleiner due to shade project 431.25 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC 220/MF035, Rear Brakes 472.70 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC 220/Oil Change, rotation, MF042 55.00 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC 220/Oil filter, differential, axel seals,mtnc, MF030 375.42 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC 220wipers for MF042 41.40 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC Disassemble Driver Seat to Retrieve Stuck Radar Remote #102 42.50 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC LOF - Unit 122 65.00 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC LOF, Cabin Filter for Unit # 129 101.05 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC LOF, Rear Brake Pads/Rotors, Rear Brake Calipers for #153 829.39 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC LOF, Tires for Unit # 140 640.95 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC Oil Pressure Switch for Unit # 128 310.68 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC Post Evoc Inspection, Tires & Alignment for Unit # 119 635.95 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC Rear Brakes for Unit # 17 365.94 01 General Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC trailer #1 repairs - license A6308 137.00 01 General Fund CABLE ONE 112461900 City Hall Cable Service 05/16/19 - 06/15/19 47.78 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 1Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 206 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund CAVANAUGH JV LLC Refund of Landscaping Surety Deposit Caven Ridge Estates 2,339.70 01 General Fund CENTURYLINK Fuller Park Modem Service 05/10/19-06/09/19 107.84 01 General Fund CITY OF BOISE - CITY PRINT & MAIL SERVICES Printing Contact Card Information 68.73 01 General Fund CITY OF BOISE FIRE DEPARTMENT 220/20 Heartsaver CPR Cards, CPR program Qty.20 340.00 01 General Fund CITY OF BOISE IT COMMUNICATIONS 220/radio batteries, hook up headsets to E-36 130.00 01 General Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS 18-0301 Professional Services during the period of 4/1/19-4/ 262.00 01 General Fund COTTONWOOD DEVELOPMENT, LLC Refund of Perf Surety Deposit; Vicenza Commons 171,009.45 01 General Fund CREATIVE SERVICES FOR NEW ENGLAND MPD Stickers for Community Outreach & Events 523.95 01 General Fund CREWSENSE LLC Support Plan less than 100 users (Monthly) Charges for this 39.99 01 General Fund CREWSENSE LLC Users Pro 298.24 01 General Fund CURTIS CLEAN SWEEP INC parking lot sweep and detail at Bear Creek Park 160.00 01 General Fund CURTIS CLEAN SWEEP INC parking lot sweep and detail at Gordon Harris Park 80.00 01 General Fund CURTIS CLEAN SWEEP INC parking lot sweep and detail at Jabil 80.00 01 General Fund CURTIS CLEAN SWEEP INC parking lot sweep and detail at Renaissance Park 80.00 01 General Fund CURTIS CLEAN SWEEP INC parking lot sweep and detail at Storey Park 160.00 01 General Fund D & B SUPPLY chain to hold down trash cans at Tully Park - qty 24 18.06 01 General Fund D & B SUPPLY Dog Food for K9 Dory 47.99 01 General Fund D & B SUPPLY hitch for fleet truck 30 - qty 1 209.99 01 General Fund D & B SUPPLY RV hose & fitting for Toro spray rig - qty 2 22.98 01 General Fund DIGLINE, INC.FY 10 Street Light Underground Pwr Locates as of 4/30/19 1,716.61 01 General Fund EMSTAT BIOMEDICAL 220/prev mtnc on 8 cardiac monitors 3,840.00 01 General Fund FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC.Replacement Hot water Tank and Filtration Parks Admin 277.45 01 General Fund FIRE EXTINGUISHER CO 220/ Recharge one fire extinguisher 34.00 01 General Fund FIRE EXTINGUISHER CO annual fire extinguisher service at Community Center 30.00 01 General Fund FIREMARK EQUIPMENT TESTING SERVICES LLC 220/Hose testing, 28,822 feet 6,340.84 01 General Fund FRANZ WITTE LANDSCAPE irrigation repairs at Bear Creek around new ADA sidewalks 2,745.00 01 General Fund GALLERY HOMES IDAHO LLC Refund Water Asmt 6557 Spindrift; House is in Suez District 2,193.59 01 General Fund GALLERY HOMES IDAHO LLC Refund Water Asmt 6571 Spindrift; House is in Suez District 2,193.59 01 General Fund GEM STATE PAPER & SUPPLY CO grip 'n grab for trash pick up - qty 12 308.16 01 General Fund GEM STATE PAPER & SUPPLY CO grip 'n grab for trash pick up - qty 15 303.60 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 2Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 207 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund GEM STATE PAPER & SUPPLY CO morning mist cleaner for all park restrooms - qty 4 cases 158.52 01 General Fund GEM STATE PAPER & SUPPLY CO morning mist cleaner for all parks - qty 16 cases 634.08 01 General Fund GEM STATE PAPER & SUPPLY CO trash can lids for Fuller Park - qty 5 cases 405.80 01 General Fund GERALD HENDRICK PerDiem:G.Hendrick,Fire Rescue Med Conf,Henderson,NV 274.50 01 General Fund GIESLER AUTO REPAIR fleet truck 12 servicing - license C8242 41.19 01 General Fund GIESLER AUTO REPAIR Toro spray rig repairs 105.00 01 General Fund GLASS DOCTOR Windshield Replacement for Unit # 22 343.35 01 General Fund GOSNEY MANAGEMENT, LLC.instructor fee - Art with Your Kid 5/6/19 - qty 3 60.00 01 General Fund GYM OUTFITTERS Gym Equipment Maintenance 80.00 01 General Fund H.D. FOWLER COMPANY irrigation parts for downtown flower pots - qty 93 78.08 01 General Fund H.D. FOWLER COMPANY mainline fittings for PD - qty 22 41.87 01 General Fund HENRY SCHEIN MATRIX MEDICAL 220/ 1 strap system, 3 arm boards 44.81 01 General Fund HENRY SCHEIN MATRIX MEDICAL 220/ALS Training Manikin, Full Body, PHTLS 5,365.66 01 General Fund HIGHLAND GOLF Settlers golf cart repair 143.93 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 220/20 1x2x8 boards, forcible entry prop 24.40 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 220/Tools, sledge hammer, cablecutters, wrenches 94.89 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 220/tools, sledgehammer,roofing nails, 20in tool box 100.55 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Credit for Tax Charged in Error on Inv #3053813 (2.58) 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES extension cords - qty 2 97.96 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES mops, bucket, vacuum - qty 4 138.90 01 General Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES SWAT Related Supplies 108.61 01 General Fund HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC edger blades for sidewalk edging - qty 102 766.50 01 General Fund HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC gas cans for Heroes & Bear Creek Parks - qty 2 87.56 01 General Fund HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC plant bed redefiner, blower, weed eater, edger, trimmer x 5 1,242.87 01 General Fund HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC trimmer head & air filter cover for small engines - qty 11 187.45 01 General Fund HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC weed eaters for Settlers Park - qty 2 640.18 01 General Fund IDAHO BRUSH CONTROL Property Abatement 375.00 01 General Fund IDAHO CHAPTER PRIMA Andrea Pogue - PRIMA Training on 5/8/19 50.00 01 General Fund IDAHO CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOC ICOPA Annual Dues for Jeff Lavey 225.00 01 General Fund IDAHO NUTRITION ASSOCIATES, LLC instructor fee - Cooking With Kids 4/18-5/2/19 - qty 14 728.00 01 General Fund IDAHO PRESS-TRIBUNE Legal Notice Ord 19-1822 City Council Meeting time/date 124.09 01 General Fund IDAHO PRESS-TRIBUNE Legal Notice Public Hearing Notice for Pollard Subdivision 62.16 01 General Fund IDAHO STATE FIRE MARSHAL 220/Fire Code Official Recert Fees, 23 Employees @ $5.00 Ea 115.00 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 3Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 208 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund INDEPENDENCE INDOOR SHOOTING 19-0267 Monthly Membership for Shooting Range 4,773.00 01 General Fund INDUSTRIAL/ORGANIZATIONAL SOLU New Officer Testing 993.00 01 General Fund INSIGHT ARCHITECTS, pa 19-0226 Homecourt renovations professional svcs - April 2019 2,500.00 01 General Fund INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER AAA, AA, 9-volt, D, A23 batteries for Parks Shop - qty 8 80.07 01 General Fund JOHN E REID & ASSOCIATES Training Registration for L.Ahl & T. Weitzel 1,150.00 01 General Fund JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION LP 220/repair wet sprinkler system, ST. 2, leaking drain 255.50 01 General Fund JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION LP Annual Sprinkler Test & Fire Alarm Test 697.00 01 General Fund KELLER ASSOCIATES, INC.18-0509 Electrical Plans Examining Services 2/19 3,520.00 01 General Fund KELLER ASSOCIATES, INC.Bldg Svcs - Kari 19,738.40 01 General Fund LAURELEI MCVEY Reimburse:L.McVey,Tuition Reimburs,BSU,01/14/19-05/03/19 1,000.00 01 General Fund LAWN CO MAINTENANCE 19-0222 price code #1/landscape maintenance contract 05/2019 17,741.20 01 General Fund LAWN CO MAINTENANCE sprinkler repairs at various sites 583.12 01 General Fund LIGHTHOUSE UNIFORM CO 220/Class A uniform insignia, buttons, striping 2,872.50 01 General Fund LIGHTHOUSE UNIFORM CO 220/Class A uniforms for 7 new recruits 4,806.20 01 General Fund LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN 18-0395 Comp Plan Strategies & Plan Dev consultant work 9,076.80 01 General Fund M2M WIRELESS Parks Modem Service Qty 24 - 04/17/19-05/16/19 275.05 01 General Fund MINUTEMAN, INC.Door Handle Repair @ Main CID Entrance 105.00 01 General Fund MINUTEMAN, INC.grand master replacement key 12.55 01 General Fund MISTER CAR WASH Fleet Washes for April 2019 150.00 01 General Fund MODERN PRINTERS Business Cards for Crime Prevention and Forms for PD 347.00 01 General Fund MODERN PRINTERS Business Cards for Kulack & Allen 60.00 01 General Fund MODERN PRINTERS Newsletters,thank you cards,flyers, postcards 780.00 01 General Fund MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SVCS 19-0175 220/20 wildland fire helmets 979.80 01 General Fund NATE SHIMATSU Refund: Reg for sports tourn. Org. Rec. 12765072 350.00 01 General Fund NEW CAVANAUGH LLC Refund of Landscaping Surety Deposit Caven Ridge Estates 175,439.00 01 General Fund NORCO cold packs - qty 5 10.00 01 General Fund NORCO cylinder rental for welding gas - April 2019 40.80 01 General Fund NORCO grinding discs - qty 25 140.51 01 General Fund NORCO respirator & cartridge - qty 2 59.77 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.220/ tape 9.85 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Batteries 80.32 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.copy paper x 1 case; duster & pop-up notes x 2 73.66 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Copy Paper, Post Its 6.69 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 4Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 209 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Forks for the Office Qty.1 box 52.78 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Heater, Ceramic, OSC 37.32 01 General Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Keyboard/Mse, Crdls, MK550 38.07 01 General Fund OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL Medal of Honor for K.Mikowski 92.10 01 General Fund OFFICE VALUE - MERIDIAN Bubble Mailers for PD 21.14 01 General Fund OFFICE VALUE - MERIDIAN Chair Slides/Floor Savers for PD Admin 69.75 01 General Fund OFFICE VALUE - MERIDIAN Office Supplies for PSTC & PD Admin Bldg 1,274.13 01 General Fund OFFICE VALUE - MERIDIAN Wireless Mouse 28.13 01 General Fund ON THE SPOT CLEANERS #15 Cleaning PD Uniforms - April 2019 1,026.00 01 General Fund OPTIV SECURITY INC Tempered Networks: HIPswitch 100g Hardware, 2 Ethernet Ports 318.19 01 General Fund PRECISION PUMPING SYSTEMS pump station start-ups at 8 parks 960.00 01 General Fund QUALITY ELECTRIC FY19 Street light Underground Pwr Lines as of 05/03/19 5,006.25 01 General Fund RAIN BIRD Online Training; R.Norberg 77.94 01 General Fund REAL ANIMAL MANAGEMENT 19-0141 goose management services - April 2019 1,800.00 01 General Fund REVVED UP MOTORSPORTS Rear Brake, Rear Tire for Unit # 526 312.99 01 General Fund RICOH USA, INC C86243698; Black & White, Color Copies April 2019 173.72 01 General Fund SAFEBUILT LLC 19-0033 Plan review svc April2019 64,358.00 01 General Fund SHANTA WALLACE Return Evidence to Owner 610.00 01 General Fund SIGNS, ETC Kleiner Park fishing dock bronze plaque - qty 1 622.00 01 General Fund SIGNS, ETC Remove Graphics for Sale of Motorcycle # 521 65.00 01 General Fund SIGNS, ETC Replace Graphics & New Out of Service Magnets for Vehicles 1,116.00 01 General Fund SIGNS, ETC Traffic Box Wrap @ Meridian & Victory Rd.524.00 01 General Fund SIGNS, ETC vehicle lettering for #35 Ford Escape 140.00 01 General Fund SIMPLOT PARTNERS herbicide x 59.75 jugs; pre-emergent x 85 bags-for all parks 1,277.50 01 General Fund SOUTHEASTERN SECURITY CONSULTANTS, INC. background checks for volunteers - qty 2 37.00 01 General Fund SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE Hewlett Packard 24 LED Backlit Monitor 1,268.76 01 General Fund SPECIALTY CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY Directional Signage for Pine St School 205.00 01 General Fund SPF WATER ENGINEERING, LLC 19-0030 prof svcs Settlers irrigation well engineering 04/19 140.00 01 General Fund ST. LUKE'S HEALTH SOLUTIONS 220/Medication, MFD, Versed, Ketamine, vallum 723.84 01 General Fund STAN'S GOLF CARS, INC.batteries for volunteer electric egg - qty 6 1,473.68 01 General Fund SYRINGA NETWORKS, LLC 19-0024 Dark Fiber 4 Strands 1,150.00 01 General Fund SYRINGA NETWORKS, LLC Internet B/W (100MB)790.00 01 General Fund TENZINGA Tenzinga Performance Management Annual License Fee (05/01/20 480.00 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 5Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 210 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 01 General Fund THE LAND GROUP, INC.professional services for park site maps - April 2019 3,495.00 01 General Fund THE UPS STORE Ground Commercial Tracking# IZE786060388738552 19.33 01 General Fund THE UPS STORE Postage to Send BWC back for Replacement 16.46 01 General Fund THE UPS STORE Postage to Send Equipment to Factory for Replacement 35.15 01 General Fund TURF EQUIPMENT & IRRIGATION gas cap for Toro sprayer - qty 1 78.36 01 General Fund ULINE, INC.45-gal flammable storage cabinet for Heroes & Fuller x 2 1,879.12 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #2 C20823 12.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #3 C20825 12.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #5 C20995 15.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #7 C21130 12.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #8 C21127 12.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Basic Car Wash Vehicle #9 C21132 12.70 01 General Fund ULTRA TOUCH CAR WASH Car Wash for Unit # 10 17.70 01 General Fund USSSOA 19-0051 volleyball officials 4/22-5/3/19 - qty 82 games 1,827.82 01 General Fund USSSOA 19-0051 volleyball officials 5/6-5/17/19 - qty 88 games 1,961.56 01 General Fund WILBUR-ELLIS CO.Criterion insecticide for all parks - qty 50 JU 2,750.00 01 General Fund WW GRAINGER, INC 220/Diesel Exhaust Fluid, St. 4 426.54 01 General Fund WW GRAINGER, INC 220/duct tape, safety glasses-PPE 65.04 Total 01 General Fund 567,314.78 07 Impact Fund ANVIL FENCE CO 18-0234,19-0039 Pay 7 Discovery fencing & gates thru 4/30/19 13,969.75 07 Impact Fund CANO ROOFING 18-0237,19-0187 Pay 5 Discovery Park roofing thru 4/30/19 27,639.30 07 Impact Fund CITY OF BOISE IT COMMUNICATIONS 220/radio batteries, hook up headsets to E-36 114.50 07 Impact Fund D & A DOOR & SPECIALTIES, INC.19-0192 pay 1 Discovery maint shop doors, frames, hardware 3,286.63 07 Impact Fund DEBEST PLUMBING, INC 19-0049,19-0078 Pay #14 Discovery Park plumbing thru 4/30/19 12,831.04 07 Impact Fund DEBEST PLUMBING, INC 19-0196 Pay #2 Discovery maintenance shop plumbing 4/30/19 503.50 07 Impact Fund ESI, INC 19-0230 220/St. 6 Pay application 273,932.95 07 Impact Fund FRANZ WITTE LANDSCAPE 18-0233 Pay #13 Discovery Park landscaping thru 4/30/19 78,375.00 07 Impact Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Discovery Park picnic table lumber - qty 29 361.92 07 Impact Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES picnic table lumber for Discovery Park - qty 14 174.72 07 Impact Fund LANDON ENTERPRISES 18-0249/0505,19-0058 Pay #9 Discovery concrete thru 4/30/19 172,587.95 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 6Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 211 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 07 Impact Fund MOUNTAIN POWER ELECTRICAL 19-0199 Pay 3 Discovery maint shop electrical thru 4/30/19 18,082.30 07 Impact Fund RODDA PAINT COMPANY Discovery Park picnic table paint - qty 10 gallons 439.90 07 Impact Fund RODDA PAINT COMPANY Discovery Park picnic table paint - qty 7 gallons 307.93 07 Impact Fund THE LAND GROUP, INC.19-0055 A&E services for Discovery maintenance shop 04/2019 3,250.00 07 Impact Fund TVR INC 19-0197 Pay 3 Discovery Park maint shop HVAC thru 4/30/19 4,617.00 Total 07 Impact Fund 610,474.39 20 Grant Fund governmental BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ADA COUNTY CFDA#14.253;Scholarship Program Feb-April 2019 1,991.40 Total 20 Grant Fund governmental 1,991.40 60 Enterprise Fund A COMPANY INC WRRF Capacity Expansion as of 4/30/2019 101.75 60 Enterprise Fund A-1 STAMP & MABEL'S LABELS Name plate for Cyndi 10.00 60 Enterprise Fund ALL AMERICAN INSURANCE Bruce Freckleton Notary Bond 50.00 60 Enterprise Fund ALL AMERICAN INSURANCE Notory Bond for Cyndi 50.00 60 Enterprise Fund ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES INC.Water Testing-Microbiological; PO# 19-0082; Qty 108 1,641.60 60 Enterprise Fund ARNOLD MACHINERY CO Labor & parts to repair hyster 430.88 60 Enterprise Fund ASSOC OF STATE FLOODPLAIN MANAGERS 2019 Renewal of ASFPM 27384 Certification Kyle Radek 80.00 60 Enterprise Fund BILLING DOCUMENT SPECIALISTS 19-0007;FY19 Bills 05/06/19 DelNot 05/07/19 9,449.30 60 Enterprise Fund BOE - Boise Office Equipment 8TB614975 Copier Usage 04/10/19 - 05/09/19 176.82 60 Enterprise Fund BONNEVILLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY Safety flag & clamp for manholes at Bittercreek Lagoon (2 qt 5.58 60 Enterprise Fund BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES, INC Consulting Eng Water FY19 as of 4/26/19 537.00 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 7Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 212 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund BRUNEEL TIRE OF MERIDIAN LLC Wheel Alignment, C18965, Ops Vehicle; WO#256448 129.95 60 Enterprise Fund CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC SCADA System Upgrade Services 1/1-4/26 1,113.51 60 Enterprise Fund CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC WRRF Capacity Expansion Services through 3/29/19 23,514.17 60 Enterprise Fund CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC WRRF Capacity Expansion Svc through 4/26/19 15,895.97 60 Enterprise Fund CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC WRRF Capacity Expansion through 4/1/19 6,903.27 60 Enterprise Fund CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC WRRF Headworks Upgrade Svc Through 1/26-3/29 9,552.89 60 Enterprise Fund CHRISTOPHER STOTKA Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 2007 W. Marten Creek Dr.57.72 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS 18-0334 Water main ext. Victory and 10 Mile 4/1-4/30/19 1,219.50 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS ACHD Linder - Franklin Pro Services 04/30/19 4,510.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS ACHD Linder Rd Pro Svcs 4/1 - 04/30/19 484.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS ACHD Meridian Rd Svcs 4/1/-4/30/19 2,392.05 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS ACHD, 10 Mile, Ustick Water and Sewer Svcs to 4/30 4,195.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS Consulting Eng Water FY19 as of 4/30/19 477.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS Sewer Replacement CIPP FY 19 as of 05/02/19 381.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS Water & Sewer Main Replacement- Gregory Lift Station Svcs 900.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS WRRF Capacity Expansion as of 5/2/19 1,325.00 60 Enterprise Fund CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS WRRF Headworks Upgrades through 4/30 725.00 60 Enterprise Fund COLUMBIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY Batteries for VFD replacement at pump 4 (6 qty)29.70 60 Enterprise Fund CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY,Bronze Hand Groover, Curb & Gutter Tool;Qty 3 64.95 60 Enterprise Fund CONDOC Multiple Capital Projects document services as of 04/30/19 154.97 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 8Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 213 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund CONRAD PAUL JEFFRIES Refund: wat/sew/trash, #04703804-02, 645 W Laughton Dr., 85.00 60 Enterprise Fund CORE & MAIN LP Brass Tee, Brass Nipple;Qty 3 12.63 60 Enterprise Fund COTTONWOOD DEVELOPMENT, LLC Refund of Perf Surety Deposit; Vicenza Commons 282,236.75 60 Enterprise Fund D & B SUPPLY Adapter & blow gun kit (2 qty)14.18 60 Enterprise Fund D & B SUPPLY Parts to repair hose reel on CCTV Van 1 camera (6 qty)8.34 60 Enterprise Fund DAVE GASSEL Reimbursement:D.Gassel, WW Lic App & Testing Fees 87.00 60 Enterprise Fund DC ENGINEERING 19-0070 S Black Cat LS VFD cable installation inspection 375.00 60 Enterprise Fund DC ENGINEERING WRRF & Lift Station Gas Alarm Study as of 4/15/19 625.00 60 Enterprise Fund DIGLINE, INC.Line Locate Tickets; PO#19-0005;Qty 1332 2,380.80 60 Enterprise Fund FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC.19-0183; Single Port M520M, Double Port M520M;Qty 91; 16,060.41 60 Enterprise Fund FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC.Hose barb for hose reel on CCTV Van 1 camera 4.10 60 Enterprise Fund FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC.Rebuild kit to rebuild spare valve, seepex pump 4 inlet 615.00 60 Enterprise Fund FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC.Sensor for boiler at S. Black Cat lift station 24.31 60 Enterprise Fund FISHER SCIENTIFIC Ammonium persulfate 44.47 60 Enterprise Fund FISHER SCIENTIFIC GGA-Glucose glutamic acid (3 qty)100.74 60 Enterprise Fund FISHER SCIENTIFIC Nitrile gloves-XS for PW Week Expo (4 pk)37.82 60 Enterprise Fund GOBLE SAMPSON ASSOCIATES, INC.Load sure hose with 3/4 inch ends 257.60 60 Enterprise Fund HAZEL ASPHALT, LLC Asphalt Patch for 3526 E Florence; WO#252606 750.00 60 Enterprise Fund HAZEL ASPHALT, LLC Asphalt Patch for Sewer Plant;WO#255198 750.00 60 Enterprise Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Grout, clamp, storage totes, groover, drill drive set (15 qt 413.69 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 9Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 214 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Top soil, tre & shrub food, & drain bladder (8 qty)97.67 60 Enterprise Fund HONSINGER LAW Water Rights Admin 3/1/19-5/1/19 1,420.00 60 Enterprise Fund IDAHO CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES Business cards for Cyndi Ochner 46.25 60 Enterprise Fund IDAHO CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES Business cards for PZarmez (500 qty)46.25 60 Enterprise Fund IDAHO CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES Business Cards-Codee Krausch 46.25 60 Enterprise Fund JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES INC ACH MUBS Bank Fees April 2019 528.05 60 Enterprise Fund JESS D LETE Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 638 E. Senita Canyon St.1,200.00 60 Enterprise Fund JUB ENGINEERS On-Call Master Planning & Modeling Svc through 03/30/19 1,566.00 60 Enterprise Fund KENDALL FORD OF MERIDIAN Keyless entry replacement for PreTreatment Truck C4715 75.00 60 Enterprise Fund LAWN CO MAINTENANCE 2019 Maint Contract as of 5/2019 2,364.56 60 Enterprise Fund LUISA & NATHAN PERKES Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 6087 N. Santa Rita Ave.26.38 60 Enterprise Fund MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION WRRF Capacity Expansion Services through 04/27/2019 2,730.75 60 Enterprise Fund MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION WRRF Capacity Expansion Svcs through 3/16/19 1,708.80 60 Enterprise Fund McCALL INDUSTRIAL Ball valve, close nipple, & hex reducer bushing (13 qty)183.02 60 Enterprise Fund MODERN PRINTERS Leak Check Doorhangers;Qty 500 188.00 60 Enterprise Fund MODERN PRINTERS Newsletters,thank you cards,flyers, postcards 148.00 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC 19-0123:Well 28 Water Treatment as of 04/19/19 10,542.50 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC Optimal Corrosion Control Treatment, April 2019; PO#18-0530 1,945.00 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC Well 23 Uranium Trtmt Feasibility as of 4/19/19 15,472.50 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC Well 28 Water Treatment through 4/19/2019 16,124.00 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 10Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 215 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC WRRF Centrate Modifications as of 4/19/19 300.00 60 Enterprise Fund MOUNTAIN WATERWORKS, INC WRRF-DAFT2019 720.00 60 Enterprise Fund MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.Alcohol pads & antiseptic wipes for first aid kits (2 qty)4.95 60 Enterprise Fund MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.Bandages for first aid kits, safety glasses, & tape (34 qty) 309.81 60 Enterprise Fund MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.Bolts for stock & to repair spare penn valley pump (10 qty) 30.06 60 Enterprise Fund MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.Nuts & bolts plus replacement batteries for drill set (303) 312.99 60 Enterprise Fund MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.Welding helmet 108.70 60 Enterprise Fund NAPA AUTO PARTS Brake cleaner for motors & all season windshield cleaner (40 82.40 60 Enterprise Fund NATHAN BRYAN Reimbursement:N.Bryan, Safety Boots 1 pair 200.00 60 Enterprise Fund NORCO Safety Glasses for Inspection 97.58 60 Enterprise Fund O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Armor All, Glass Cleaner;Qty 3 22.57 60 Enterprise Fund O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Wiper Fluid for Inspection Vehicles - Qty. 2 Gallons 5.58 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Calendar, letter paper, binder 50.05 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Copy Paper, Post Its 29.08 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Expandable folders for Record Retention 27.87 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.Mousepad, Expandable Envelopes for Rec Retention 87.55 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE DEPOT, INC.MUBS 'Copy' Stamp 5.04 60 Enterprise Fund OFFICE VALUE - MERIDIAN Binder clips, scissors, highlighters, pens, markers, (16 qty 186.12 60 Enterprise Fund OPTIV SECURITY INC Tempered Networks: HIPswitch 100g Hardware, 2 Ethernet Ports 760.82 60 Enterprise Fund PACIFIC BACKFLOW LLC 19-0071; Backflow Testing @ City Properties; Qty 7 161.00 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 11Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 216 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund PATSY SHOUSE Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 2707 W. Leonard St.136.34 60 Enterprise Fund PHILLIP SOSA & GAIL MCFARLANE Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 2532 W. Wapoot Dr.57.77 60 Enterprise Fund PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY Equipment Panel;Qty 2 335.40 60 Enterprise Fund PRIMARY HEALTH MEDICAL GROUP DOT Physical; Distribution;Qty 1 75.00 60 Enterprise Fund PROCORE PROPERTY MGMT Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 1124 New Creek Ave.23.75 60 Enterprise Fund RED WING SHOES Steel Toed Boots; Production; Qty 1 167.19 60 Enterprise Fund RED WING SHOES Steel Toes Boots; Production; Qty 1 175.99 60 Enterprise Fund SIGNS, ETC PWW Tour signs for event 44.00 60 Enterprise Fund STACY & ALLISON DEYETTE Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 5774 N. Fox Run Way 66.61 60 Enterprise Fund STEELMAN PLUMBING Replaced Vacuum Breaker at Water Bldg; WO#256968 97.00 60 Enterprise Fund STEPHEN HELSTOWSKI Refund:Wat/Sew/Trash; 3758 S. Marsala 52.14 60 Enterprise Fund SYNCB/AMAZON Car DC Adapter for GPS Reading Equipment 42.66 60 Enterprise Fund SYNCB/AMAZON Dtech 10 feet USB 2.0 to RS232 DB9 Serial Port Adapter Cable 20.89 60 Enterprise Fund SYNCB/AMAZON Letter Tray, Paper Clip Holder, Command Hooks, Qty 4 35.30 60 Enterprise Fund THE UPS STORE NPDES sample shipping 116.53 60 Enterprise Fund ULINE, INC.Stackable storage bins for inventory 209.07 60 Enterprise Fund USA BLUEBOOK Marking Paint; Qty 4 271.98 60 Enterprise Fund WW GRAINGER, INC Groove gaskets (2 qty)15.08 60 Enterprise Fund WW GRAINGER, INC Hose reel spring for CCTV Van 1 camera 234.83 60 Enterprise Fund WW GRAINGER, INC HVAC filters (12 qty)32.28 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 12Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 217 of 664 City Of Meridian Invoices Selected for Payment - Invoices for Payment - Amie Code Fund Fund Title Vendor Name Invoice/Credit Description Invoice Amount 60 Enterprise Fund WW GRAINGER, INC Seal kit to repair boiler 3 blending pump 36.47 60 Enterprise Fund XEROX CORPORATION - PASADENA 8TB570607 b/w (469 qty) & color (1,601 qty) images 82.40 60 Enterprise Fund XEROX CORPORATION - PASADENA 8TB576316 b/w (2,144 qty) & color (80 qty) images 14.72 Total 60 Enterprise Fund 453,745.97 Report Total 1,633,526.54 Date: 5/23/19 12:32:59 PM Page: 13Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 218 of 664 EIDIAN+<DAHO- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 8 Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda Meeting Notes: EIDIANC-- H� CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 8-A Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0053 Item Title: Final Plat Continued from May 21, 2019 for Keep Subdivision By Jarron Langston. Located at the SW Corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. Meeting Notes: k/D-VO-S 1\) ° EIDIAN?- DAJ CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 9 A Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Youth Scholarship Awards Presentation Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 9.A . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Youth S cholarship Awards Presentation C ouncil Notes: RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Mayors Office J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 3:03 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 219 of 664 j�i��E IDIIZAN,+-- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Planning and Zoning Public Hearing Outline and Presentations Meeting Notes: Changes to Agenda: Item #7B: Keep Subdivision (H-2019-0053) – Pull off consent & place on regular agenda (Applicant is no longer in agreement with staff report) Item #7D: Villasport (H-2018-0121) – Applicant requests this item is removed from agenda in order to make a minor revision to the agreement. Item #10C: Olivetree at Spurwing (H-2019-0055) – Applicant requests deferral to June 11th in order to address conditions in staff report. Item #7B: Keep Sub – Final Plat (H-2019-0053) The applicant is not in agreement with condition #A.4f in Section VI, which requires the street frontage of Lot 4, Block 1 to be widened to a minimum of 80’ measured as a chord measurement in accord with UDC Table 11-2A-4 for the R-2 district; the measurement is currently 69.86’. The UDC (11-2A-3B.1) does allow properties with street frontages on cul-de-sacs or at approximately a 90 degree angle to be a minimum of 30’ measured as a chord measurement; however, the frontage of this lot does not meet the requirements for a reduced frontage. 69.86 Item #10A: Wagner Farms (H-2019-0035) Application(s): Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPAM) Annexation Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 2.46 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 3240 W. Chinden Blvd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: SFR sub. zoned RUT in Ada County South: W. Chinden Blvd/SH-20/26 and future commercial (Costco), zoned C-G East: Common lot in a Meridian Sub. zoned R-8 and the Spurwing Golf Course zoned RUT in the County West: common lot in an Ada County Sub. zoned RUT History: N/A Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR) Summary of Request: Request to change the future land use map for this parcel from LDR to Commercial to allow for the existing produce market to expand and to add a convenience store with fuel station; contingent upon approval of that request, the applicant requests to annex the subject parcel with a C-C zoning designation. As a note, the applicant and staff had discussions regarding the current Comp. Plan update and the applicant’s request to change the land use on this parcel prior to application submittal. The applicant chose to request a map amendment rather than process the land use change request with the comp. plan update. Although staff has been trying to limit the number of CPAM applications with the current Comp. Plan update, staff and Commission are supporting the subject request because the proposed commercial land use is consistent with existing land uses and will complement the area. Wagner Farms has been in operation since 1982 in this location and were considering moving to another site to expand its oper ations. They were overwhelmed with requests from surrounding residents and customers to keep the business open and have since decided to pursue growing in their current location. A petition with over 450 signatures in support of Wagner Farm remaining in its current location was submitted with this application. The applicant is proposing one full access point via W. Chinden Blvd. and has coordinated with ITD to align that entrance with Ten Mile Rd. to the south. A 35-foot landscape buffer is required along Chinden, the applicant is proposing to construct a portion of the City’s 10- foot multi-use pathway adjacent to Chinden Blvd. The project has been conditioned to require a micropathway to the residential subdivision to the west to increase pedestrian connectivity. Proposed hours of operation for the market, convenience store and fuel station are 6 AM-11 PM, fuel pumps are not proposed to be operational outside those hours. A 25-foot landscape buffer is required to the residential use to the north, the applicant also plans to install a 6 or 8-foot masonry wall to adjacent to that property to mitigate any activity related to the proposed use. The submitted concept plan generally complies with City Code, however a thorough review of the site and landscape plan and elevations will be completed with the CZC and DES application. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the facility and will maintain a country barn feel which will help to maintain the historic character of the area. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Becky McKay; Mike Wardle ii. In opposition: Denise LaFever (in opposition to amount of traffic and changing the FLUM from LDR to COM outside the Comp. Plan update) iii. Commenting: Becky McKay; Mike Wardle; Denise LaFever iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): Deceleration lane and future expansion of Chinden Blvd. with the Costco development to the south; Change from LDR to COM land use outside of the current Comp. Plan update Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Deceleration lane, amount of anticipated traffic, ITD requirements; ii. Micropathway requirement and pedestrian connectivity to the east and west; Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. Modify condition 8.c. to strike the requirement to extend a micropathway to the east Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0035, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 28, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0035, as presented during the hearing on May 28, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0035 to the hearing date of May 28, 2019 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #10C: Bainbridge Southeast (H-2019-0042) Application(s): Preliminary plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.25 acres of land, zoned R-8, located on the west side of N. Ten Mile Rd. approximately ½ mile south of W. Chinden Blvd. History: This property was previously annexed and included in the preliminary plat for Bainbridge Subdivision. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR (3-8 units/acre) Summary of Request: A new preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 21 SFR building lots and 1 common lot on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. The plat has been revised since the original submittal to provide a stub street to the out-parcel from N. Fairborn Ave., rather than from the south via Lake Rapids St., to alleviate the long cul-de-sac length. A minimum 10% qualified open space & (1) site amenity is required to be provided based on the area of the site. The applicant proposes 13.14% (0.69 of an acre) qualified open space consisting of parkways along internal local streets, a common area in excess of 50’ x 100’ in area, and half of the street buffer along Ten Mile Rd. The applicant requests the extra amenities provided with the larger Bainbridge Sub consisting of a 2nd community swimming pool and playground in Phase 9 abutting this site to the west, are allowed to count as site amenities for this development; the Commission also requested the Applicant provide a bench/seating area in the common area in this development as an amenity. This subdivision will be included in the HOA for the larger Bainbridge Subdivision and will have access to the same common areas & site amenities. A 20’ wide gravity irrigation easement exists along the southern boundary of the site within adjacent proposed building lots. The Council previously approved this easement to be located within the adjacent building lots rather than in a common lot; the Applicant requests Council extend that approval to the proposed plat. Concept building elevations were submitted for the proposed SFR dwellings as shown consistent with those constructed in previous phases of Bainbridge Subdivision. Commission Recommendation: Approval 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. The provision of a site amenity in the common area near the cul-de-sac. 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Add a requirement for the provision of a site amenity such as a bench/seating area in the common area on Lot 10, Block 32 (see condition #A.2c in Section VIII). 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. Applicant requests approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6D to allow an existing 20-foot wide irrigation easement along the southern boundary of the site to be located within adjacent building lots as previously approved with the preliminary plat for Bainbridge Subdivision (H-2016-0115). Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0042, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 28, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0042, as presented during the hearing on May 28, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0042 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #10D: Gander Creek (H-2019-0013) Application(s): Annexation & Zoning (2) Preliminary Plat – North and South Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This overall site consists of 117.10 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at the SWC of W. McMillan Rd. & N. McDermott Rd. History: In 2015, an application for annexation & zoning and preliminary plat (Copperbrook Sub.) was denied on the northern portion of this site due to Council’s Finding that it was not in the best interest of the City to annex the property at that time. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR (3-8 units/acre) This development application was submitted and went to the Planning & Zoning Commission under one preliminary plat application. Since that time, it’s been bifurcated into 2 separate preliminary plats due to the site being bisected by the Five Mile Creek which is owned by NMID and not the adjacent land owner as is typical. The overall number and configuration of building lots and common lots has not changed. The staff report was updated accordingly. Summary of Request: Annexation and zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district consistent with the MDR FLUM designation. The preliminary plat for the northern portion of the development consists of 156 building lots and 29 common lots on 51.46 acres of land; the southern portion of the development consists of 245 building lots & 36 common lots for an overall total of 401 building lots and 65 common lots. The overall subdivision is proposed to develop in 9 phases which Staff recommends is allowed to develop as one project instead of two. The minimum lot size for the overall development is 4,000 square feet (s.f.) with an average lot size of 6,002 s.f. Five (5) different sizes of lots are proposed (i.e. 4K, 5K, 6K, 7K, and 8K square feet) for the development of traditional front-loaded lots and rear-loaded alley lots. A lot size rendering was submitted that demonstrates the variety of lots proposed within the development. There are 2 existing structures, one in the north & one in the south, that are within the future ROW area that are proposed to remain until such time as ROW acquisition occurs for SH-16 and/or the construction of SH-16 commences. One access is proposed via W. McMillan Rd. & two accesses are proposed via N. McCrosson Ave., the proposed mid-mile collector street. A crossing over the Five Mile Creek is proposed at the ¼ mile. SH-16 is proposed to be extended along the east boundary of this site within 300’ of land designated for future ROW. ITD has hired Jacobs Design who is recommending a modified selected alternative for the design & construction of SH-16 which has changed since the submittal of this application. One of the major changes from the previous design approved with the environmental document is that the highway is now elevated over McMillan Rd. instead of McMillan going over the highway. The potential impacts to this development could be more development area along McMillan Rd. resulting from a lesser amount of ROW/slope easement needed for an overpass over McMillan Rd. and different noise impacts to residential properties. A 10-wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the west boundary of the site within the buffer along McCrosson from the south boundary to the north boundary of the Five Mile Creek continuing to the east to the ¼ mile and then north through the development and the proposed park to McMillan Rd. Each preliminary plat complies with the minimum 10% qualified open space & site amenity standards. The northern area contains 12.11% (or 6.23 acres) of qualified open space & the southern area contains 10.5% (6.89 acres) of qualified open space. Site amenities consist of a swimming pool with a playground, picnic shelter and ½ basketball court in the 2.11 acre park at the entry to the development from McMillan Rd. in the northern portion of the development; another playground and picnic shelter in the 2.64 acre park at the entry of the development from McCrosson Ave. in the southern portion of the development; a picnic shelter in the 0.97 acre park also in the southern portion of the development; a long segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system along the west boundary of the southern portion of the development running along the north side of the Five Mile Creek to N. Glassford Way and north to McMillan Rd.; and many internal pedestrian pathways in excess of UDC standards.. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for proposed SFR detached structures from Tresidio and Biltmore builders. Commission Recommendation: Approval 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Bob Taunton, Taunton Group; David Bailey, Beiley Engineering; Kevin Amar, Biltmore Company; Sonia Daleiden, Kittleson and Associates b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: Joe Yochum, West Ada School District; David McKinney d. Written testimony: Shawn Brownlee e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: Mark Niemeyer, Fire Chief; Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. Adequacy of proposed berm and wall as a buffer along the east boundary of the subdivision adjacent to future SH-16 – belief that additional buffering should be required; b. Provision of additional pathways and wider sidewalks to accommodate both bicyclists and pedestrians – in favor of extension of the multi-use pathway along the north side of the creek to McDermott Rd. for connection with the pathway in the Oaks Subdivision to the east – would like to see more of a direct pedestrian connection from internal pathways along Glassford to the school site to the south through Block 4. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. The extension of the multi-use pathway along the Five Mile Creek east of N. Glassford Way to McDermott Rd.; b. The ability of the Fire Dept. to adequately service the proposed development within desired response times until construction of another fire station occurs; c. In favor of the mix of lot sizes proposed; d. Concern pertaining to adequacy of parking for the swimming pool 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Modification to conditions #A.1b and #A.1c in Section VIII in regard to the timing for construction of N. McCrosson Ave. and the pedestrian walkways along the entire frontage of the site along McCrosson Ave. and McMillan Rd. from the first phase of development to the earlier part of the second phase or at the time of substantial completion of the high school consistent with the WASD’s construction timeline for the high school with submittal of a letter of intent to that effect from WASD. b. The Commission was supportive of the Applicant’s request for Council approval of a waiver to hook up to City water and sewer services for the home(s) located within the future SH-16 right-of- way. c. Add a micro-path connection through Block 4 in the southern portion of the development for a more direct pedestrian connection to the school site to the south (reflected on the revised plans); d. Add a requirement for the provision of a minimum of 6 parking spaces at the swimming pool area (see condition #A.1l in Section VIII); e. Recommendation for the Applicant to work with the Park’s Dept. to determine multi-use pathway requirements consistent with the Pathways Master Plan, specifically along the creek; (The Park’s Dept. amended their conditions to not require a pathway along the north side of the creek east of Glassford Way to McDermott Rd – deleted condition #A.3g in Section VIII.) f. Allowance for the sidewalk along N. McDermott Rd. to be constructed with the last phase of development (see condition #A.2i in Section VIII); g. Modify the sound attenuation wall along the east boundary adjacent to future SH-16 to reflect a 12-foot tall berm (see condition #A.3j). 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. The plan for McMillan Rd. crossing SH-16 may shift from an overpass to SH-16 going over McMillan Rd. This scenario would likely result in a lesser amount of right-of-way needed along McMillan Rd. which might enable the out-parcel to possibly redevelop in the future with buildable lots. In this scenario an access to a local street should be provided with this development to that parcel as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3; this could be accomplished by the provision of a common driveway through Lot 36, Block 9. b. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver for the existing home located at the SWC of McMillan & McDermott (parcel #S0432110100) to not be required to hook up to City water & sewer service since it will be removed with the extension of SH-16. c. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to the block length standards as noted in condition #A.2h. due to the site being constrained by site conditions that include an abutting arterial street or highway and a large waterway (Five Mile Creek). Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Bob Taunton, Applicant’s Representative, requests the following changes: #A.1g & A.1h – Delete Parcel #S0432110500 as the home on that parcel will be removed & will not remain until the extension of SH-16 like the other one (staff is ok w/change) #A.2h – Amend condition to reflect the re-name of W. Mill Creek Dr. to W. Plateau Creek St. (staff is ok w/change) #A.3e – Delete condition requiring fencing to be installed on the south side of the pathway along the Five Mile Creek per Kim Warren, Park’s Dept.’s, email stating the drain is not classified as live water, therefore fencing shouldn’t be required. (The UDC (11-3A-6C) doesn’t require fencing only if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director that the waterway serves as or will be improved as a part of the development to be a water amenity as defined by the UDC – staff does not recommend removing this requirement.) #A.3j – Applicant requests clarification of the requirement for noise abatement adjacent to future SH-16 – The Commission’s motion required a 12’ berm; it was Staff’s understanding a fence/wall wasn’t required. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0013, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 28, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0013, as presented during the hearing on May 28, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0013 to the hearing date of ________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) City Council Meeting May 28, 2019 69.86 CPAM RequestCurrent Zoning Map Original Revised 20’ Irrigation Easement Phasing Plan Preliminary Plat/Landscape Plan Lot Size Rendering Modified by Commission to be a 12’ tall berm (no fencing/wall) Tresidio Conceptual Elevations Biltmore Conceptual Elevations ��EDAHO IDIZ IAN�- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 10 A Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0035 Item Title: Public Hearing for Wagner Farms By PD Larson & Co. Located at 3240 W. Chinden Blvd. 1. Request: An Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation on 2.46 acres of land from Low Density Residential to Commercial; and 2. Request: An Annexation and Zoning of 2.46 acres of land from the RUT (Rural to Urban Transit) zoning district to a C -C (Community Business) zoning district for future addition of a convenience store and fuel sales facility to the existing farmers market Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 10.A . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Wagner F arms (H-2019-0035) by P D L arson & C o., L ocated 3240 W. C hinden Blvd. C lic k Here for Applic atio n Materials C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Commission Recommendations S taf f R eport 5/22/2019 Minutes from Planning and Z oning Commission Hearing B ackup Material 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/22/2019 - 8:46 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 220 of 664 5/28/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 5/28/2019 Hearing Type: Council Item Number: 10-A Project Name: Wagner Farms Project No.: H-2019-0035 Active: � There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http:Hi nternalapps/SIGN INFORM TOOLS/Si gnlnForm Detai Is?id=239 1/1 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 5/2/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Stephanie Leonard, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0035 Wagner Farms LOCATION: 3240 W. Chinden Blvd., in the SE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 22, Township 4N., Range 1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation on 2.46 acres of land from Low Density Residential to Commercial; and Annexation and zoning of 2.46 acres of land from the RUT (Rural to Urban Transition) zoning district to a C-C (Community Business) zoning district for the future addition of a convenience store and fuel sales facility to the existing farmers market. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 2.46 Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential (LDR) Existing Land Use Produce market (Wagner Farms) Proposed Land Use(s) Expansion of produce market and convenience store with fuel sales facility Current Zoning RUT Proposed Zoning C-C Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 8/1/2018; 19 attendees History (previous approvals) N/A Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 221 of 664 Page 2 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Staff report (yes/no) Not in ACHD ROW; no comment Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Access proposed via W. Chinden Blvd. (State Hwy) Traffic Level of Service Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers No existing sidewalk; applicant proposes to install a 10-foot multi-use pathway along W. Chinden Blvd. Fire Service Distance to Fire Station +/- 1.3 miles from Fire Station No. 5 Fire Response Time 3 minutes (under ideal conditions) Resource Reliability 77% (does not meet target goal of 85% or greater) Risk Identification 3=commercial Accessibility Project meets all required road widths and turnarounds. Special/resource needs Project will not require an aerial device. In the event of a hazmat event, mutual aid will be required. Water Supply 1500 gal./minute for 2 hours required Other Resources Police Service Distance to Police Station 7.5 miles Police Response Time 6 minutes (2 minutes higher than average response time in Meridian) Calls for Service Between 1/1/2018-12/31/2018 PD responded to 100 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development. % of calls for service split by priority See PD comments in Section VIII. D Accessibility No issues with proposed access. Specialty/resource needs None Crimes 20 Crashes 9 Other Reports The applicant shall make every attempt to mitigate sound, odor, light trespass and litter to surrounding neighborhoods. MPD would like to see pathway/sidewalks to connect with surrounding neighborhoods and SpurWing Golf Course. Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services 0-feet Sewer Shed North Black Cat Trunkshed Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See Application Information WRRF Declining Balance 13.66 Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns Water Impacts/Concerns This proposed development is within Suez Water’s service area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 222 of 664 Page 3 C. Project Area Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: PD Larson & Co. 855 S. Calhoun Place Star, ID 83669 B. Owner: Rod and Debra Wagner 3240 W. Chinden Blvd. Meridian, ID 83646 Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 223 of 664 Page 4 C. Representative: Becky McKay Engineering Solutions, LLP. 1029 N. Rosario St. #100 Meridian, ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/12/2019 5/10/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 4/9/2019 5/7/2019 Radius notification published on 4/18/2019 5/18/2019 Nextdoor posting 4/9/2019 5/7/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPAM) to change the land use designation on 2.46 acres of land from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial; and, Annexation & Zoning of 2.46 acres of land from RUT to the C-C zoning district. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property to the south and east, and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description for the annexation area is included in Section VII.A. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII. A. Future Land Use Map Designation (CPAM) (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Current Land Use Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR) – LDR designated areas allow for the development of single-family homes on large lots where urban services are provided. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of three (3) dwelling units or less per acre. The site is currently zoned RUT in Ada County and operates as the Wagner Farms produce market. Proposed Land Use Designation: Commercial - The intent of the commercial designation is to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area residents and visitors. Uses may include retail, wholesale, service and office uses. These zones may include neighborhood commercial uses focusing on specialized service for residential areas adjacent to that zone. The applicant is proposing a comprehensive plan map amendment to change the land use designation from LDR to Commercial to allow for an expansion of the existing produce market use and the construction of a convenience store and fuel sales facility. Wagner Farms has been in operation since 1982 and has been a well -utilized and valued market throughout its existence. The surrounding area has grown considerably since its establishment and the market has become even more of a neighborhood amenity to many of the residents in the area. Recognizing the growth in the area, the Wagners had planned to sell the property and were inundated with requests from customers and residents in the area to keep their business open. The Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 224 of 664 Page 5 Wagners decided to stay at their current location and wish to expand in a manner that will not only be consistent with the history of the area but will complement the current character of the area. Further, an expansion of the site will support Comprehensive Plan Goal 3.05.02, “Maintain integrity of neighborhoods to preserve values and ambiance of areas”. Wagner Farms has been a staple in the area and will continue to be such with the proposed expansion. The proposed facility will continue to serve surrounding residential neighborhoods and will provide a variety of fresh and local food items as well as the opportunity to fuel vehicles when needed. There is resounding support from the surrounding community for the subject application, over 450 residents in the area signed a petition in support of the proposed expansion. Staff is of the opinion that the requested annexation with the C-C zoning district and proposed development is consistent with the proposed Commercial FLUM designation for this site and is appropriate for this site. The proposed development supports various Comprehensive Plan goals, will maintain historic character to preserve a part of Meridian’s roots, and is widely supported by the surrounding community. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): “Plan for and encourage services like health care, daycare, grocery stores and recreational areas to be built within walking and biking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) Provision of services within walking and biking distance of several neighborhoods north of W. Chinden Blvd. will allow residents to access food and necessary items without requiring use of a vehicle. Added pedestrian micropathways, as recommended by staff, will increase the walkability of surrounding communities with the proposed development. “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F) Services to this area are available and can be reasonably provided since the MFD and MPD are already servicing the area. “Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B) The proposed development includes pedestrian connectivity along W. Chinden Blvd. in accord with the Pathways Master Plan, however, an opportunity to connect surrounding residences and the golf course to the east is possible. Additional micropathways to the east and west would increase pedestrian connection and would aid in creating a neighborhood amenity, making it even more consistent with City Code. “Require neighborhood and community commercial areas to create a site design compatib le with surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, fences, etc.) (3.05.02A) The applicant has made a concerted effort to maintain the “farm feel” of the original Wagner Farms property through the design of the building, landscaping and planned operations. Additionally, in an effort to maintain compatibility with surrounding uses, the applicant is working with the resident to the north of the subject site to install fencing to mitigate any impact accompanying the planned expansion. “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) This site is intended to be utilized as a neighborhood market and convenience store for surrounding neighborhoods and the adjacent golf course. Since the site is adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd. and the entrance will align with the Ten Mile Rd. intersection improvements, it will provide a convenient option for commuters to stop in and purchase items on their way to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 225 of 664 Page 6 and from work. The expansion of Wagner Farms may also provide additional employment and shopping opportunities to surrounding residents and could alleviate the necessity to drive a vehicle to find such services. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The site has been utilized as a produce market with associated out-buildings since 1982; there are also two (2) existing residences on the site. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing homes and produce barn to accommodate the proposed convenience store and produce market. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed produce market and convenience store are classified as a “retail store” and the fuel center a “Fuel Sales Facility” in accord with UDC 11-1A-1. If the CPAM request is approved, all aforementioned uses are listed as principal permitted uses in the C-C district per UDC Table 11- 2B-2. Hours of operation within the C-C zoning district are 6 AM-11 PM; the applicant is proposing to operate the market, convenience store and fuel facility within those hours of operation, fuel pumps will not be operable outside of business hours. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-20, Fuel Sales Facility. A. General standards: 1. When allowed as an accessory use, gasoline or diesel fuel sales facilities shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) of the subject property. The proposed fuel sales facility will not encompass more than 25% of the overall site. The applicant has also integrated fuel pump canopies into the design of the building and relocated pumps to the east of the site to mitigate any related noise or visual nuisance to surrounding neighbors. 2. The total height of any overhead canopy or weather protection device shall not exceed twenty feet (20'). The applicant’s design is in compliance with this requirement; height and dimensions shall be further specified with the CZC and DES application. 3. Vehicle stacking lanes shall be available on the property but outside the fueling areas. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right- of-way by patrons. Such stacking lanes shall be separate from areas required for access and parking. The stacking lanes shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any abutting residential districts. Vehicle stacking lanes have been provided approximately 120-feet from the access point to W. Chinden Blvd. A 29-foot drive aisle has been provided to the east of fuel pumps to allow traffic to bypass fuel pumps if occupied. Staff recommends the applicant consider installing wayfinding and directional signage to increase effective circulation and to alleviate potential stacking and obstruction of the main entrance. 4. If the use is unattended, the standards in accord with section 11-3A-16 of this title shall also apply. The use will not be operational outside of normal business hours (6 AM-11 PM), so will not be unattended. F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): This development is subject to the C-C zoning district dimensional standards in UDC Table 11- 2B-3. The applicant is proposing a 25-foot landscape buffer to the adjacent residential use to the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 226 of 664 Page 7 north and is coordinating with the homeowner to install a wall to further mitigate related noise and/or light. G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): The subject site currently has two (2) access points to W. Chinden Blvd./SH-20/26; the applicant is proposing to close the westerly access point to provide one (1) access to the site. The applicant coordinated with ITD in realigning the easterly access point when the Ten Mile Rd. intersection improvements and signal were installed to align with the future outside turn lane at Ten Mile Rd. Part of the proposed access is to be constructed on the adjacent property to the east. The applicant shall submit written documentation from the adjacent property owner stating agreement to allow construction of the driveway as shown. H. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided on the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B per the dimensions shown in Table 11-3C-5. In commercial districts, a minimum of one (1) vehicle space is required for every 500 square feet of gross floor area. Bicycle parking is also required to be provided at one space for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Based on the overall square footage of the structures proposed (i.e. 12,459 square feet), a minimum of 25 vehicle spaces and one (1) bicycle parking spaces are required to be provided. A total of 61 vehicle spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. The site plan does not include bicycle parking and shall be modified to comply with the aforementioned standards with CZC and DES application submittal. I. Pathways ( UDC 11-3A-8): A segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system (sidewalk) exists along the southern boundary of this site adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd. in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. A detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within a public use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping is required to be provided within the street buffer along W. Chinden Blvd. in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4C.3. The applicant has located the 10-foot multi- use pathway at the northern part of the required 30-foot ITD easement. The proposed landscape plan is deficient one (1) perimeter tree along W. Chinden Blvd., the landscape plan submitted with the CZC and DES application shall be modified to comply with the aforementioned standards. In accord with Comprehensive Plan Action Item #3.07.02C and in an effort to increase pedestrian connectivity to the adjacent subdivisions to the west and to the SpurWing golf course to the east, staff recommends the applicant provide two (2) additional micropathways. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 227 of 664 Page 8 J. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Landscaping is required to be provided with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B. Street buffers are required to be provided along all streets as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along both US 20-26/W. Chinden Blvd. an entryway corridors. The applicant has provided a 38- foot landscape buffer including the City’s 10-foot multi-use pathway. Per UDC-3B-7C-3.b, the applicant shall provide one (1) tree per 35 linear feet; the proposed landscape plan is short one (1) tree along the southern perimeter of the site. The landscape plan shall be modified to reflect these standards. A 25-foot wide buffer to residential uses is required to be provided with development on the C-C zoned properties in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C. The concept plan depicts a buffer with landscaping between the subject site and the residential use to the north of the site. The applicant is working with the property owner to the north to determine height and location of fencing to further buffer the commercial use. The buffers should facilitate pedestrian access from the residential to the commercial development in accord with UDC 11-3B-9C.3. Parking lot landscaping will be required internally within the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C with development. The front plant islands flanking the pathway to the front entrance shall be revised to a minimum 50 square feet and landscaped with one (1) tree in accord with UDC 11-3B-8C-2.a or an alternative compliance request shall be submitted with CZC and DES application. The current site plan depicts the removal of existing trees from the subject site. The submitted site plan does include information regarding mitigation, however, if the applicant has not already done so, they shall contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, at 888-3579 to confirm mitigation requirements prior to removal of any trees on the site. K. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): A 6- or 8-foot tall masonry screen wall is proposed along the north boundary adjacent to the residential use. The applicant is currently working with the property owner to the north to determine placement, height and material to be used. A detail of proposed masonry wall along with placement shall be submitted with the CZC and DES application. L. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City sewer services is required. Suez Water will supply water. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII-B Below for Public Works comments/conditions. M. Pressurized Irrigation (11-3A-15) An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided within the development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 228 of 664 Page 9 N. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. O. Structure and Design Standards (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the produce market and convenience store as shown in Section VII.B. The proposed building is approximately 12,459 square-feet, proposed materials and architectural character is intended to reflect the “country barn” feel of the original building and site. Final design of the structure shall be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual for commercial districts. Parking lots for properties greater than 2 acres in size should not have more than 50% of the total off-street parking area for the site located between the building façade and the abutting streets; as an alternative, the parking area should be screened by berms, landscaping, walls, architectural elements or a combination of these elements to produce an appropriate buffer adjacent to public spaces and roadways as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.3. Slightly more than 50% of required on- site parking is located between the building and W. Chinden Blvd. However, the applicant is proposing to install trees, shrubs and vegetative groundcover within a 38-foot landscape buffer to mitigate the expanse of paved area. Traffic calming measures should be provided where vehicle circulation is directed in front of the building entries and around the east part of the site where fuel pumps are proposed to be located. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of 5 feet in width is required to be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s) and be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. P. Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. Plans submitted with these applications should comply with UDC standards and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. VI. DECISION A. Staff: The legal description submitted with the annexation application shows the boundaries of the property contiguous to land that has been annexed into the City and is within the Area of City Impact boundary. The proposed development supports goals within the Comprehensive Plan, is widely supported by the surrounding community, and by maintaining its original historic character will preserve the ambience and character of the area. If approved, the proposed facility will continue to serve surrounding residential neighborhoods by providing fresh fruit, vegetables and other products and services within walking distance. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed CPAM and AZ applications with the requirement of a Development Agreement per the provisions in Section VII. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 229 of 664 Page 10 B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on May 2, 2019. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject CPAM and AZ requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Becky McKay, Applicant’s Representative; Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation b. In opposition: Denise LaFever, (in opposition to amount of traffic and change of FLUM outside of Comp. Plan update, not project in general); c. Commenting: Becky McKay, Applicant’s Representative; Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation; Denise LaFever; d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Stephanie Leonard f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. Deceleration lane and future expansion of Chinden Blvd. with Costco development; b. Change from low density residential to commercial land use outside of current Comprehensive Plan update; 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. Deceleration lane, ITD requirements, amount of anticipated traffic; b. Micropathway requirement and pedestrian connectivity to the east and west; 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Modify condition 8.c. to strike the requirement to extend a micropathway to the east. 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. None Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 230 of 664 Page 11 VII. EXHIBITS A. Existing and Proposed Future Land Use Map Designation Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 231 of 664 Page 12 B. Annexation and Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 232 of 664 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 233 of 664 Page 14 C. Site/Landscape Plan (date: 2/13/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 234 of 664 Page 15 D. Building Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 235 of 664 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 236 of 664 Page 17 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A CZC and DES application will not be accepted until the DA has been executed. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: 1. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the concept plan and building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. 2. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 3. Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative Design Review applications are required to be submitted to the Planning Division for approval of all future buildings/uses on the site, prior to applying for a building permit. 4. The applicant shall comply with the Fuel Sales Facility standards set forth in UDC 11-4- 3-20. 5. The existing homes and produce barn shall be removed upon development of the site. 6. Business hours of operation in the C-C zoning district are limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours of operation may be requested through a conditional use permit as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3A.4. 7. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. 8. The site/landscape plan submitted with the CZC and DES application shall include the following: a. The applicant shall install wayfinding and directional signage to increase effective circulation and to alleviate potential stacking and obstruction of the main entrance. b. Depict masonry fencing and location proposed along northern boundary adjacent to the residential use. c. Depict micropathways connecting to the west and east. Submit a revised concept plan with CZC and DES application. d. Add one (1) tree within the street landscape buffer adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd. e. Modify site plan to include 1 bike parking space for every 25 vehicle parking spaces. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 237 of 664 Page 18 f. Modify the front planter islands along the pathway to the front entrance to a minimum 50 square feet and landscape with one (1) tree in accord with UDC 11- 3B-8C-2a or submit a request for alternative compliance with the CZC and DES application. g. Provide written documentation regarding construction of the eastern portion of the driveway with the CZC and DES application. h. The applicant shall confirm mitigation requirements with Elroy Huff, the City Arborist prior to removal of any existing trees. 9. The applicant shall submit written documentation from the adjacent property owner stating agreement to allow construction of the driveway as shown. 10. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall submit a public access easement for a multi-use pathway connecting east-west across the project site, north of the SH 20/26 right-of-way, to the Planning Division for Council approval and subsequent recordation. The easement shall be a minimum of 14’ wide (10’ pathway + 2’ shoulder each side). Use standard City template for public access easement. Easement checklist must accompany all easement submittals. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 1.2 Applicant shall be required to connect to the existing sanitary sewer system. 1.3 Suez Water will be providing water service to the proposed site. 2 General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall be dedicated using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 238 of 664 Page 19 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being developed shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.11 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.12 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.14 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.15 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.16 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 239 of 664 Page 20 2.18 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.19 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.20 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/164169/Page1.aspx D. POLICE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/165239/Page1.aspx E. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/165533/Page1.aspx F. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/161948/Page1.aspx Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 240 of 664 Page 21 IX. FINDINGS A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission finds that the proposed changes to the Future Land Use Map are consistent with elements of the Comprehensive Plan as detailed in Section VI above. b. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. The Commission finds that the proposal to modify the Future Land Use Map to allow for commercial uses on this site will be compatible with existing uses in the area and will provide services to surrounding residential uses as W. Chinden Blvd. is expanded and the area continues to grow. c. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission finds that the proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan (see Section VII for detailed analysis). d. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. The Commission finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. e. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. The Commission finds the proposed amendment will be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential and commercial uses. f. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. The Commission finds that the proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities in this area of the city. Sewer and water services exist and will be extended to this property. g. The proposed map amendment (as applicable) provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. The Commission finds the proposed commercial use of this property is consistent with the proposed map amendment, will not significantly impact existing and future development in this area and provides a logical juxtaposition of uses. h. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. For the reasons stated in Sections V and VI and the subject findings above, the Commission finds that the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City if the applicant enters into a development agreement to allow for the proposed zoning and future commercial use of the property. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 241 of 664 Page 22 B. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to annex and develop the subject 2.46 acre property with C-C zoning consistent with the Commercial designation. (See section V above for more information.) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statement of the commercial districts in that it will provide for a neighborhood serving commercial use consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed commercial use should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to, school districts; and City services are available to be provided to this development. Additionally, the Meridian Fire and Police Departments currently serve this area. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City with the conditions in Section VIII of this report. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 242 of 664 WAGNER FARMS ANNEXATION AND ZONING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT MAY 28, 2019 Meridian City Council Public Hearing WAGNER FARMS WAGNER FARMS WAGNER FARMS Northbound Ten M ile at Chinden Wagner Farms Legend 10 ft ©2018 Google ©2019 Google Southbound Ten M ile at Ch inden Wagner Farm s Legend 9.68 ft ➤©2018 Google ©2019 Google Eastbound Chinden at Ten M ile Wagner Farms Legend 6.33 ft ©2018 Google ©2019 Google rUTUBE l.UMM AU.IU. SUBDMSIO N �it �E IDIIZDAHO ANC-- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 10 B Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0055 Item Title: Final Plat Modification for Olivetree at Spurwing By Spurwing Limited Partnership. Located at the NE Corner of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 2O-26 and N. Ten Mile Road. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 10.B . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - F inal P lat M odification for Olivetree at S purwing (H-2019-0055) by Spurwing L imited Partnership, L ocated at the NE corner of W. Chinden Blvd./S H 20-26 and N. Ten M ile Rd. C lick Here for A pplication Materials C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 4:07 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 258 of 664 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 5/28/2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0055 Olivetree at Spurwing LOCATION: North of W. Chinden Blvd./SH-20/26 and east of N. Ten Mile Rd., in the SW ¼ of Section 23, T.4N., R.1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Modification to the landscape plan approved with the final plat application to remove the wrought iron fencing adjacent to the golf course. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Spurwing Limited Partnership – 1406 N. Main Street, Ste. 205, Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP – 1029 N. Rosario Street, Ste. 100, Meridian, ID 83642 III. STAFF ANALYSIS The landscape plan approved for this development with the final plat (FP-08-004) application in 2008 depicts 4-foot tall wrought iron fencing along the rear of building lots adjacent to the golf course. The Applicant requests approval to remove the fencing and has submitted a revised landscape plan STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 259 of 664 Page 2 depicting the proposed change, included in Section V as Exhibit C. The Developer wishes to leave the option open to each individual homeowner to construct fencing or not based on their needs. Because the golf course is not common open space for the subdivision, the fencing standards in UDC 11-3A-7A.7, which require the Developer to construct fences abutting common open space lots to distinguish common from private areas, do not apply. However, Staff does feel it is necessary for the Developer to provide some form of delineation between the privately owned building lots and the golf course such as berming, landscaping (i.e. plantings and/or bark) or other means. While Staff is amenable to the Applicant’s request to remove the fencing, Staff recommends the Applicant address at the hearing how they plan to delineate private areas from the golf course. Additionally, in 2018, the City Council approved a modification to the landscape plan (H-2018-0021) to remove the pathway connection to the golf course planned between Lots 7 and 9, Block 1 and the requirement for bollard lighting along the pedestrian pathway; and the addition of an archway/entryway feature and water fountain. The revised landscape plan also included the following changes: 1) a note stating all wrought iron fencing would be installed by the individual lot owner/builder at the time of development/construction of each individual lot rather than by the developer with development of the subdivision; and 2) the extension of the masonry screen wall along the northern boundary of the subdivision along N. Big Cedar Way to W. Balata Ct. Because these changes were not specifically requested or approved and because they do not comply with the UDC standards listed below, they are not approved. UDC 11-3A-7A.7a requires the developer to construct fences abutting pathways and common open space lots to distinguish common from private areas; and, UDC 11-3A-7C.2 limits the maximum fence height in the required front yard, including the front and side yard property lines, to 3 feet for a closed vision fence and 4 feet for an open vision fence. Therefore, Staff recommends the landscape plan is revised accordingly as noted in Section VI.A.1. IV. DECISION Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the landscape plan approved with the final plat with the conditions in Section VI of this report. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 260 of 664 Page 3 V. EXHIBITS A. Recorded Plat Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 261 of 664 Page 4 B. Approved Landscape Plan (dated: 4/11/08) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 262 of 664 Page 5 C. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 2/28/19) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 263 of 664 Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 264 of 664 Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 265 of 664 Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 266 of 664 Page 9 VI. CONDITIONS A. Planning Division 1. The landscape plan included in Section V.C shall be revised as follows: a. The Developer shall provide some form of delineation between the privately owned building lots and the golf course such as berming, landscaping (i.e. plantings and/or bark) or other means as determined at the City Council meeting. b. Depict 4-foot tall wrought iron fencing adjacent to the common area on Lot 45, Block 1 as required by UDC 11-3A-7A.7a; remove the note stating, “Note: All wrought iron fencing to be installed by the individual lot owner/builder at the time of development/construction of each individual lot.” c. Depict the location of the 6-foot tall screen wall outside of the front yard area of Lot 5, Block 1, Spurwing Subdivision in accord with UDC 11-3A-7C.2. The maximum fence height in the required front yard, including the front & side yard property lines, is 3 feet for a closed vision fence; the required setback for a wall greater than 3 feet is a minimum of 15 feet measured from back of sidewalk. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 267 of 664 C�E IDIZIAN*,---.-, CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 10 C Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0042 Item Title: Public Hearing for Bainbridge Southeast By Brighton Investments, LLC. Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Road., Approximately 1/2 mile South of W. Chinden Blvd./SH-20/26 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat Consisting of 21 building lots and 7 common lots on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Meeting Notes: covncl me�vl �� �e�� � re cvv d �` 4 I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 10.C. Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for B ainbridge Southeast (H-2019-0042) by B righton Investments, L L C, L ocated on the West side of N. Ten M ile Rd., Approximately 1/2 mile South of W. Chinden B lvd./S H-20/26 C lic k Here for Applic atio n Materials C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 5/23/2019 Minutes from Planning and Z oning Commission Hearing B ackup Material 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 8:20 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 268 of 664 5/28/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 5/28/2019 Hearing Type: Council Item Number: 10-C Project Name: Bainbridge Southeast Project No.: H-2019-0042 Active: There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http:Hi nternalapps/SIGN INFORM TOOLS/Si gnlnForm Detai Is?id=241 1/1 Page 1 HEARING DATE: May 28, 2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0042 Bainbridge Southeast LOCATION: West side of N. Ten Mile Rd., approximately ½ mile south of W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-26 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Preliminary plat consisting of 21 building lots and 7 common lots on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district for Bainbridge Southeast Subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 5.25 Future Land Use Designation MDR (3-8 units/acre) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential (SFR) Current Zoning R-8 Proposed Zoning NA Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 21 building/7 common Phasing plan (# of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units (type of units) 21 SFR units Density (gross & net) 4.0 gross/6.84 net Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) 0.60 of an acre (11.43%) Amenities None in this phase Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 269 of 664 Page 2 Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) NA Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: January 16, 2018; 11 attendees History (previous approvals) AZ-05-001 (DA #109061598); PP-05-002; CUP-05-002 (PD); PP-13-011; H-2016-0115 (MI- McMullen Lateral easement) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 270 of 664 Page 3 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Staff report (yes/no) No Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Fire Service Distance to Fire Station 2.1 miles from Fire Station #2 Fire Response Time 4 minutes under ideal conditions Resource Reliability 81% from Fire Station #2 – does not meet the target goal of 85% or greater Risk Identification 1 – Current resources would be adequate to supply service to this project Accessibility Project does not meet all required access, road widths and turnarounds; a turnaround is required that meets those in Appendix D of the 2015 IFC; the knuckle is too small to be used as a turnaround, a minimum radius of 48’ is needed Special/resource needs An aerial device is not required; the closest truck company is 13 minutes travel time (under ideal conditions) – Fire Dept. can’t meet this need in the required timeframe if a truck company is required (this fire station is 6.1 miles away); in the event of a structure fire, an additional truck company will be required. Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 1 hour Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services 0 Sewer Shed North Black Cat Trunkshed Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See application information WRRF Declining Balance 13.66 Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns No concerns, flows already committed. Water Distance to Water Services 0-feet Pressure Zone 1 Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application information Water Quality No concerns Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns Bainbridge No. 9 infrastructure must be complete and accepted to enable service to this development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 271 of 664 Page 4 C. Project Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Brighton Investments, LLC – 12601 W. Explorer Dr., Ste. 200, Boise, ID 83713 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation – 12601 W. Explorer Dr., Ste. 200, Boise, ID 83713 Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 272 of 664 Page 5 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/14/2019 5/10/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 4/9/2019 5/7/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 4/18/2019 5/18/2019 Nextdoor posting 4/9/2019 5/7/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): This property is designated Medium Density Residential (MDR) on the City’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 units per acre. Single-family residential detached homes are proposed at a gross density of 4.0 units/acre consistent with the MDR designation. A. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat consists of 21 building lots and 7 common lots on 5.25 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district for Bainbridge Southeast Subdivision. This subdivision will be included in the Homeowner’s Association for the larger Bainbridge Subdivision and will have access to the same common areas and site amenities. The subject property was previously part of the preliminary plat (PP-13-011) for Bainbridge Subdivision and was to be the final phase of development. The reason for submittal of a new preliminary plat is that the number of buildable lots proposed in this phase, in additional to those in previous phases, would have exceeded the total number approved with the preliminary plat making the final plat not in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat as required by UDC 11-6B-3C. See the Applicant’s narrative for more information. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on this site. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district. Phasing Plan: The subdivision is proposed to develop in one (1) phase. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is proposed for the development via internal local streets to be constructed with Phase 9 of Bainbridge Subdivision. A public stub street is proposed to the adjacent 2.5 acre parcel to the north (Parcel #S0427142323) for future extension and access for that parcel. No access is proposed via N. Ten Mile Rd. Staff recommends the right-of-way for N. Fairborn Ave. is shifted to the east so that it touches Parcel #S0427142323 in a width adequate for the construction of a public street; or, right-of-way is dedicated for a stub street to the out-parcel. This is necessary because Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 273 of 664 Page 6 without a public street connection to Fairborn for the out-parcel, the cul-de-sac length will exceed the maximum of 450’ allowed by UDC 11-6C-3B-4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided for single-family detached dwellings as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): No pathways are proposed with this development. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 17. Detached sidewalks are proposed throughout the development in accord with UDC standards except for along S. Double Eagle Ln., the stub street to the north where attached sidewalks are proposed. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11 -3A- 17E. Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed as shown on the landscape plan in accord with UDC standards. Class II trees are proposed within the parkways in accord with UDC standards. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35-foot wide buffer is required along N. Ten Mile Rd., an arterial street and entryway corridor; a street buffer in excess of UDC standards is proposed. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10% (or 0.53 of an acre) qualified open space is required to be provided for the single-family residential portion of the development based on 5.25 acres of land per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. A qualified open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.C that depicts 0.60 of an acre (or 11.43%) of qualified open space in excess of UDC standards consisting of parkways along all internal local streets, except for along S. Double Eagle Ln., and common area in excess of 50’ x 100’ in area. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of one (1) qualified site amenity is required to be provided for the development based on 5.25 acres of land per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The Applicant is not proposing any amenities with this subdivision but requests that the second community pool and playground that was constructed in Phase 9, directly to the west of this site, be allowed to count toward the amenity required with this subdivision. Because this project will be included in the Bainbridge HOA and additional site amenities above the minimum required were provided in Bainbridge Subdivision, Staff is amenable to the Applicant’s request. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): No waterways cross this site. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 7. Fencing is not depicted on the landscape plan. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 274 of 664 Page 7 The developer is required to construct fencing abutting pathways and common open space lots in residential areas to distinguish common from private areas; therefore, the landscape plan should depict fencing accordingly. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for each lot within the development. A 20-foot wide gravity irrigation easement is depicted on the plat along the southern boundary of the site. This is for the over-flow coming out of Hero’s Park that conveys irrigation water through and to the Bainbridge property. The Applicant has a water right that is delivered through this overflow and is combined with the McMullen and Harrell Laterals to provide the irrigation water for Bainbridge. The Applicant received Council approval in 2016 for the McMullen Lateral to be located within adjacent building lots rather than in a common lot (H-2016-0115). Staff recommends that approval be honored with this preliminary plat without further application. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single-family dwellings as shown in Section VII.D, consistent with those constructed in previous phases of Bainbridge Subdivision. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Preliminary Plat per the conditions included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on May 2, 2019. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject PP request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. The provision of a site amenity in the common area near the cul-de-sac. 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Add a requirement for the provision of a site amenity such as a bench/seating area in the common area on Lot 10, Block 32 (see condition #A.2c in Section VIII). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 275 of 664 Page 8 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. Applicant requests approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6D to allow an existing 20-foot wide irrigation easement along the southern boundary of the site to be located within adjacent building lots as previously approved with the preliminary plat for Bainbridge Subdivision (H-2016-0115). VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat (dated: 3/15/19) NOT APPROVED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 276 of 664 Page 9 Alternate design presented by the Applicant at the Commission hearing to provide access to the out- parcel and decrease the length of the cul-de-sac: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 277 of 664 Page 10 B. Landscape Plan (date: 3/15/2019) NOT APPROVED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 278 of 664 Page 11 C. Qualified Open Space Exhibit (dated: 3/27/19) NOT APPROVED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 279 of 664 Page 12 D. Conceptual Building Elevations: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 280 of 664 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 281 of 664 Page 14 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division 1. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.A, shall be revised as follows: a. Shift the right-of-way for N. Fairborn Ave. to the east across Lot 13, Block 30 so that it touches Parcel #S0427142323 in a width adequate for the construction of a public street; or, dedicate right-of-way for a stub street to the out-parcel. 2. The landscape plan included in Section VII.B shall be revised as follows: a. Depict fencing on building lots adjacent to common open space lots to distinguish common from private areas as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7A.7. b. Reconfigure the lot/right-of-way configuration per condition #1a above. c. Depict a site amenity such as a bench/seating area in the common area on Lot 10, Block 32. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 Applicant shall be required to enter into a Future Installation Agreement and fund one Type 1 streetlights on Ten Mile Road. Contact the Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator for more information. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20- feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 282 of 664 Page 15 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 283 of 664 Page 16 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/165008/Page1.aspx D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments were received E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS) No comments were received F. SETTLER’S IRRIGATION DISTRICT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/165339/Page1.aspx http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/PDF/v0ytj055glm4vgynydegsxy1/50/Settlers%20- %20Bainbridge%20Southeast.pdf Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 284 of 664 Page 17 G. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/165348/Page1.aspx H. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=165007&dbid=0 I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/164960/Page1.aspx J. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=167949&dbid=0 IX. FINDINGS Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8- 30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 285 of 664 DAHO IDIAN*,----�/rE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 10 D Project File Name/Number: H-2019-0013 Item Title: Public Hearing for Gander Creek By Trilogy Development, Inc. Located at the SW Corner of N. McDermott Rd. and W. McMillan Rd. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and, 2. Request: Gander Creek North Preliminary Plat consisting of 156 building lots and 36 common lots on 51.46 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; and, 3. Request: Gander Creek South Preliminary Plat consisting of 256 building lots and 36 common lots on 65.64 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district Meeting Notes: U IQ/V r✓C4-;, N� I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 10.D. Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Gander Creek (H-2019-0013) by T rilogy Development, Inc., L ocated at the S W corner of N. M cD ermott Rd. and W. M cM illan Rd. C lic k Here for Applic atio n Materials C lick H ere to Sign Up to Testify at H earing C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 5/24/2019 Minutes from Planning and Z oning Commission Hearing B ackup Material 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 2:46 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 291 of 664 5/28/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 5/28/2019 Hearing Type: Council Item Number: 10-D Project Name: Gander Creek Project No.: H-2019-0013 Active: � Signature City -State- I Wish To Sign In Address For Against Neutral Name Zip Testify Date/Time Sonia 101 S Capitol Boulevard 5/28/2019 X X Daleiden Suite 600 5:54:31 PM 4242 N Brookside In boise 5/28/2019 David Bailey X X 83714 5:55:28 PM 5/28/2019 Kevin Amar 1548 W Cayuse Creek Dr X X 5:56:17 PM 5/28/2019 Fred Depold X 5:59:19 PM Shawn 9839 w cable car st Boise 5/28/2019 X brownlee Idaho 6:01:06 PM 1303 E Central Drive 5/28/2019 Joe Yochum X X Meridian 83642 6:52:37 PM Go Back To List I Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho httpWi nternalapps/SIGN IN FORMTOOLS/SignlnForm Detai Is?id=240 1/1 Page 1 HEARING DATE: May 28, 2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0013 Gander Creek North & South LOCATION: Southwest corner of N. McDermott Rd. and W. McMillan Rd., in the NE ¼ of Section 32, T.4N., R.1W. (Parcel No’s.: S0432110450; S0432110100; S0432110565; S0432141800; S0432110500) NOTE: This development application was submitted and went to the Planning & Zoning Commission under one preliminary plat application. During Staff’s review of the application for the staff report it was noted that the subject property is bisected by the Five Mile Creek which is owned by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and not the adjacent land owner as is typical. Because the Irrigation District does not wish for their land to be part of the subdivision, the subject property is required to be included in two (2) separate preliminary plats. Since the Commission hearing, the Applicant has submitted an updated application and plans to bifurcate the proposed subdivision as required. Staff has updated the staff report accordingly. The number and configuration of building lots and common lots have not changed. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation and zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and Preliminary plat consisting of 401 building lots, 55 common lots and 5 other lots on 117.10 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district for Gander Creek Subdivision. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 292 of 664 Page 2 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Acreage 117.10 Future Land Use Designation MDR (3 to 8 units/acre) Existing Land Use Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) SFR Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8 Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 401 building/55 common/5 other lots Phasing plan (# of phases) 9 phases Number of Residential Units (type of units) 401 SFR units (detached) Density (gross & net) 3.42 gross/4.15 net Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) 12.55 acres (13%) Amenities 10’ wide multi-use pathway, internal pathways, a swimming pool, (2) children’s play structures, (2) picnic shelters, ½ basketball court Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The Five Mile Creek bisects the northern & southern portions of this development and is owned by the Irrigation District Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: December 17, 2018; 5 attendees History (previous approvals) In 2015, an application for annexation & zoning and preliminary plat was denied on the northern portion of this site due to Council’s Finding that it was not in the best interest of the City to annex the property at that time. (Copperbrook Sub. H-2015-0029) Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Staff report (yes/no) No Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Fire Service Distance to Fire Station 4 miles Fire Response Time 7:00 minutes under ideal conditions Resource Reliability 77% from Fire Station #5 – does not meet the targeted goal of 85% or greater Risk Identification 2 – Current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project (see comments in Section VII.C Accessibility Project meets all required access, road widths and turnarounds; project will be limited to 30 building lots until secondary access is available Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 293 of 664 Page 3 Special/resource needs An aerial device is not required Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 2 hours Other Resources NA Police Service Distance to Police Station 8.5 miles Police Response Time 5-7 minutes Calls for Service NA (site is currently in Ada County) Accessibility No issues with the proposed access Specialty/resource needs No additional resources are needed at this time; the PD already services the area to the east Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services +/- 340 Ft. Sewer Shed North McDermott Trunkshed Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See application information WRRF Declining Balance 13.59 Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns This development is subject to paying reimbursement fees for The Oaks Lift Station and Pressure Sewer Reimbursement Agreement, and the West Ada School District Reimbursement Agreement for Oaks Lift Station Pump Upgrades (currently under development) pursuant to meridian city code section 8-6-5 Water Distance to Water Services +/- 500 Ft. Pressure Zone 1 Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application information Water Quality This development will require significant off-site utility improvements to connect to existing water system mainlines. In the early phases of this development, water demand will be low, and resident time of water in the system may be several days. This will make it difficult to maintain residual chlorine levels. This problem will decrease as homes are built and demand increases. This can also be mitigated by requiring looping of t he water mains to allow water to move through the development to areas of higher demand, and by system flushing. Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns Each phase must be modeled at final plat to ensure adequate fire flow. Water must be supplied from at least two mains for all phases of the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 294 of 664 Page 4 C. Project Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Trilogy Development, Inc. – 9839 W. Cable Car St. #101, Boise, ID 83709 B. Owner: Union Square, LLC/RWK Investments, LLC/Heartland Townhomes Property Management, LLC – 9839 W. Cable Car St., Ste. 101 Boise, ID 83709 Kenneth P. Goldbach & Melynda A. Maxwell – 4455 N. McDermott Rd., Meridian, ID 83646 Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 295 of 664 Page 5 C. Representative: Bob Taunton, Taunton Group, LLC – 2724 S. Palmatier Way, Boise, ID 83716 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 3/15/2019 5/10/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 3/12/2019 5/7/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 3/21/2019 5/17/2019 Nextdoor posting 3/12/2019 5/7/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION & ZONING The Applicant requests annexation and zoning of 125.68 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district for the development of 401 single-family detached residential homes. Comprehensive Plan (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for this property is Medium Density Residential (MDR). The MDR (Medium Density Residential) designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 units per acre. Single-family residential detached homes at a gross density of 4.15 units/acre (or 3.42 units/acre including the future right- of-way easement for SH-16 and the land reserved for a fire station and service center) are proposed to develop on this site consistent with the MDR designation. Transportation: The Master Street Map (MSM) depicts a planned north/south residential collector street along the western boundary of this site at the half mile between N. McDermott & N. Star Rd. as proposed on the plat consistent with the MSM. Note: With approval of the school site to the south (i.e. Owyhee High School and future elementary school), the Developer committed to construct the collector street from McMillan Rd. to the north boundary of the school site (i.e. the subject property’s south boundary) to be substatially complete prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the High School anticipated to open in the Fall of 2021. This access is needed in order to provide the school with two (2) points of public street access as required by the Fire and Police Departments. The Applicant and West Ada School District plan to enter into a binding agreement for such improvements upon annexation of the subject property. State Highway 16 is planned to extend in the future from W. Chinden Blvd. to the south to I-84 across the eastern portion of this site within a 300’ wide easement west of N. McDermott Rd. An overpass is conceptually planned on W. McMillan Rd. over the future SH-16. The future right-of-way and slope easements needed for these improvements are depicted on the plat included in Section VII.B although the design of these improvements are still in process and are not yet finalized. ITD has programmed funding for preliminary engineering and right-of-way acquisition on SH-16 between I-84 and SH-20/26/Chinden Blvd. (FY2019-2023 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Key Number 208158); however, construction is unfunded. Proposed Use Analysis: Single-family detached dwellings are listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 296 of 664 Page 6 Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): Goals, Objectives, & Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in italics): “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B) Only one housing type, single-family detached homes, is proposed within this development; however, there are a mix of 5 different lot sizes proposed (i.e. 38’ wide rear load, 40’, 50’, 60’ and 70’+); Staff is unaware if the homes will be owner occupied or rental units. “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) The proposed development is not currently in close proximity to any employment or shopping centers; however, a large medical campus including medical offices, a hospital, surgical center and emergency room, and other office uses are planned a mile to the north near the SH-16/Chinden intersection. The proposed development will provide housing options for this area and the adjacent mixed use designated land. “Consider ACHD’s Master Street Map (MSM) in all land use decisions.” (3.03.04K) The proposed plat depicts a north/south collector street along the west boundary of this site consistent with the MSM. “Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A) An open space exhibit is included in Section VII.E that complies with the minimum UDC standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F) The proposed development is contiguous to the City and urban services can be provided to this development. “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D) Only one access is proposed via W. McMillan Rd., an arterial street; two accesses are proposed via the collector street; Staff is of the opinon the proposed accesses are appropriate for this development. “Work with ACHD, COMPASS, and VRT on bringing public transportation to and through Meridian.” (3.03.04H) VRT’s long-term plan (ValleyConnect 2.0) does not include any service in this area. “Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B) Pedestrian pathways are depicted on the landscape plan throughout the development. A segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system is planned along the Five Mile Creek which bisects this site (east/west) that will assist in providing connectivity between developments and to the school site to the south. “Work with transportation agencies and private property owners to preserve transportation corridors, future transit routes and infrastructure, road and highway extensions, and to facilitate access management planning.” (3.01.01J) The Applicant has been working with ITD to plan for the future extension of SH-16 across the eastern portion of this site. “Develop alternative modes of transportation through pedestrian improvements, bicycle lanes, off-street pathways, and transit-oriented development as appropriate.” (3.03.03D) Pedestrian walkways are proposed internally throughout the development and a segement of the City’s multi-use pathway system is proposed off-street along the Five Mile Creek. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 297 of 664 Page 7 Zoning: Based on the analysis above, Staff is of the opinion the requested annexation with the R-8 zoning district and proposed development and density is generally consistent with the MDR FLUM designation for this site. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property to the south and east and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description for the annexation area is included in Section VII.A. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII. Although the proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property, it is located at the far west periphery of the City; annexation of this property would further the sprawl in this area. A previous development (i.e. Copperbrook Subdivision) was denied on this site in 2015 based on Council’s decision that it was not in the best interest of the City to annex the property at that time based on comments from the public hearings. Reasons for denial discussed at the hearing were that they wanted the City to develop from the inside out, rather than the outside in; and concern that stretching City services out west of McDermott would t ake away services to existing residents and open up another square mile for development. Since that time, the property directly to the south was annexed for the development of a high school. A lot for a fire station is proposed with this development which would assist is providing services for this development as well as the surrounding area. For this reason and because the City Council approved the annexation of the school property to the south, staff is supportive of the proposed annexation. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat for Gander Creek North consists of 401 156 building lots, 55 and 29 common lots on 51.46 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; and the proposed preliminary plat for Gander Creek South consists of 245 building lots and 5 36 common lots on 65.64 other lots consisting of (4) lots reserved for ITD for future right-of-way (ROW) for the construction of SH-16 and (1) lot reserved for the City for construction of a future fire station and service center on 117.10 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. The minimum lot size for the development is 4,000 square feet (s.f.) with an average lot size of 6,002 s.f. Five (5) different sizes of lots are proposed (i.e. 4K, 5K, 6K, 7K, and 8K square feet) for the development of traditional front-loaded lots and rear-loaded alley lots. A lot size rendering is included in Section VII.D that demonstrates the variety of lots proposed within the development. Note: It came to the attention of Staff after scheduling this application for hearing that NMID actually owns the land on which the the Five Mile Creek is located that bisects this property instead of only having an easement which is typical. Prior to the City Council hearing, the Applicant should revise the preliminary plat (and associated plans and documents) to break the plat into two (2) separate preliminary plats north and south of the Five Mile Creek, obtain approval of new subdivision names from the Ada County Surveyor’s office, and submit additional application fees ($2,264). Phasing Plan: The subdivision is proposed to develop in 9 phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VII.B. The first phase is in the northern portion of the development and will include a 2.11 acre park with a playground, picnic shelter and pathway at the entry of the development off McMillan Rd. The second phase is in the southern portion of the development and includes a 2.73 acre park with a playground, picnic shelter and pathways off N. McCrosson Ave. Because Gander Creek North and South will be developed as one project, Staff recommends a provision is included in the DA that allows the project to develop under one phasing plan as shown in Exhibit B in Section VIII. Outparcel: There is a 0.43 of an acre out-parcel that contains a residence at the northeast boundary of the site. Staff has verified it is an “original parcel of record” as defined by UDC 11-1A-1. As such, it’s not required to be included in the proposed subdivision but will create an enclave. The Applicant stated in their narrative that they have spoken to the property owners and they declined to sell their property or be included in the subject Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 298 of 664 Page 8 annexation and preliminary plat application; they also do not wish to have a sidewalk on their property along McMillan Rd. Existing Structures: There are four existing homes and accessory structures on this site. The two existing homes on Parcel #S0432110100 and #S0432110500 within the future ROW area for SH-16 are now owned by the Developer and are being leased back to the previous owners until such time as right-of-way acquisition occurs for SH-16 and/or the construction of SH-16 commences; the other two existing homes outside of the ROW will be removed with development. These homes should not be expanded or enlarged. Existing homes that are proposed to remain are required to hook up to city water and sewer service within sixty (60) days after date of official notice from the City to do so; provided, that such services are within three hundred feet (300’) of any property line of the building to be served as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. The Applicant requests a waiver of this requirement as ITD right-of-way acquisition is about to commence and the homes will either be removed upon acquisition of ROW or with construction of SH-16. Existing Easements: There is an existing ingress/egress easement (Inst. #98106235) for W. Lazy Diamond C Lane and an Idaho Power easement (Inst. #8958920) noted on the plat that should be relinquished and/or vacated (as applicable) prior to signature on the final plat for the phase in which they are located. The Applicant should submit copies of easement relinquishment(s) and/or proof of vacation of the easement(s) with the final plat application as applicable. Fire Station: A 3.84 acre lot is designated at the southwest corner of the site for a City fire station and equipment service facility. The transfer to the Fire Dept. will be a combination donation and purchase transaction to take place at the time of recording the final plat that includes the lot. A condtional use permit is required for a fire station (i.e. public/quasi-public use) in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2; compliance with the associated specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-30, Public or Quasi-Public Use is required. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2) The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district. Lots 15 and 16, Block 4 (S); and Lots 38 and 40, Block 2 (S) should be revised to reflect a minimum 30- foot wide street frontage; and Lot 12, Block 6 (S) should be a minimum of 40-feet wide measured as a chord measurement. Subdivision Design & Improvement Standards (11-6C-3): Compliance with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 is required, which includes streets (including alleys), easements and block face. The proposed plat appears to be in compliance with these standards except for a couple of blocks that exceed the maximum length of 750’ without an intersecting street or alley as follows: The face of Block 2 that fronts on W. Mill Creek Dr. and abuts the south side of the Five Mile Creek (790’+/-); and, The face of Block 2 and Block 7 that fronts on W. Redwood Creek Dr. that abuts the north side of the McFadden Drain/Five Mile Creek along the project’s south boundary (800’+/- and 763’+/-, respectively). The UDC allows for City Council to approve block faces up to 1,200’ in length where block design is constrained by site conditions that include an abutting arterial street or highway, and a large waterway and/or a large irrigation facility, which is the case in all three of these cases. Staff recommends Council approval the block face of these 3 blocks as proposed. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 299 of 664 Page 9 North Arroyo Creek Ave. and N. Carmel Creek Ave. on the northern portion of the site are proposed as 28’ public streets, which require sidewalks to be provided on each side of the street per UDC 11-3A-17. If sidewalks aren’t desired, these streets should be constructed as alleys; signage should be provided at each end of the alleys for addressing purposes. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): One (1) full access is proposed via W. McMillan Rd., an arterial street, at the project’s north boundary and two (2) full accesses are proposed via N. McCrosson Ave., the proposed collector street, at the project’s west boundary. A secondary emergency access is proposed following the sewer alignment from McDermott Rd. and the future W. Deer Creek Dr. Direct lot access via N. McCrosson Ave., W. McMillan Rd., N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16 is prohibited, except for Lot 2, Block 7 which is planned for a fire station and should have direct access via N. McCrosson Ave. A crossing is proposed over the Five Mile Creek at the ¼ mile between N. McDermott Rd. and N. McCrosson Ave. A stub street, N. Glassford Way, is proposed to the south for future extension and interconnectivity with the school site (Owyhee High School). Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit [i.e. 1-bedroom requires 2 per unit with at least 1 in an enclosed garage, other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad; 2-, 3-, and 4-bedroom units require 4 per unit with at least 2 in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad(s); and 5+ bedroom units require 6 spaces per unit with at least 3 in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6]. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): Pathways are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 with landscaping on either side of the pathway(s) per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Internal pedestrian walkways are proposed throughout the development linking the neighborhood to the common areas and amenities. A 10-foot wide segment of the City’s multi-use pathway is proposed along the west boundary of the site within the street buffer along N. McCrosson Ave. from the south boundary of the site to the north boundary of the Five Mile, continuing to the east along the north side of the creek to N. Glassford Ave. and then to the north through the site to McMillan Rd. for access to the future overpass over SH-16. The Park’s Dept. recommends the pathway continues from Glassford to the east boundary of the site consistent with the Pathways Master Plan. Prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature, a public access easement should be submitted for the multi-use pathway; coordinate the details with Kim Warren, Park’s Department (208-888-3579). No landscaping is depicted adjacent to the multi-use pathway along the creek; minimum 5-foot wide landscape strips are required to be provided along each side of the pathway landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C – if NMID will not allow any or all of the landscaping on their property, a common lot should be provided on the subject property to accommodate the pathway and associated landscaping as needed. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are required within the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. The proposed plan depicts sidewalks in accord with UDC standards, except for along N. McDermott Rd. where a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required; the plans should be revised accordingly. Although the sidewalk will eventually be torn out when SH-16 is extended, it will likely be many years before this occurs as the project is currently unfunded and right-of-way has not yet been acquired for the extension. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E and 11- 3B-7C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 300 of 664 Page 10 Six-foot wide parkways are proposed on the portion of the development north of the Five Mile Creek; root barriers that are a minimum of 18 inches below subgrade adjacent to the sidewalk and a 24 inches below subgrade adjacent to the curb extending 2 inches above grade are required. Trees within the parkway are restricted to Class II trees. If 8-foot wide parkways are provided, root barriers are not required. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Street buffers are required to be provided as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 25-foot wide buffer is required along W. McMillan, an arterial street; a 20-foot wide buffer is required along N. McCrosson Ave., a collector street; and a 35-foot wide buffer is required adjacent to N. McDermott Rd./ future SH-16, an entryway corridor as proposed. The street buffer landscaping depicted on the landscape plan in Section VII.C far exceeds UDC standards. Note: Because the ultimate plan is for a state highway to be constructed along the project’s east boundary and an appropriate street buffer is proposed for the highway, staff does not recommend an additional buffer is required along McDermott Rd. as it would just need to be removed when the highway is constructed. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10% (or 9.65 acres) of the overall developed site is required to be provided for qualified open space based on 96.54 acres (excluding the ITD easement for SH-16 and the 3.84 acre parcel reserved for the City to construct a future fire station and service center) per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. A qualified open space exhibit was submitted for the north and south portions of the development as shown in Section VII.E that depicts 6.23 acres (or 12.11%) of qualified open space in the north portion and 14.01 6.89 acres (or 12 10.5%) of qualified open space for the south portion.; however, Staff has determined based on the qualifications for open space in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B, some of the areas counted do not qualify while others that do qualify aren’t counted. Staff has requested the Applicant revise the exhibit accordingly but has not yet received a revised plan in order to determine consistency with UDC standards, although it appears adequate qualified open space is proposed. All stormwater detention facilities counted toward qualified open space are required to be designed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11C. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of five (5) qualified site amenities are required to be provided for the development based on 117.10 acres of land per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. Amenities are proposed as follows: a swimming pool with a playground, picnic shelter and ½ basketball court in the 2.11 acre park at the entry to the development from McMillan Rd. in the northern portion of the development; another playground and picnic shelter in the 2.64 acre park at the entry of the development from McCrosson Ave. in the southern portion of the development; a picnic shelter in the 0.97 acre park also in the southern portion of the development; a long segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system along the west boundary of the southern portion of the development running along the north side of the Five Mile Creek to N. Glassford Way and north to McMillan Rd.; and many internal pedestrian pathways in excess of UDC standards. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): All ditches, laterals, canals or drainage courses lying on the subject property are required to be piped or otherwise covered unless improved as a water amenity or linear open space in which case they may remain open as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. The Five Mile Creek is located off-site between the north and south portions of this development on land owned by NMID; the Irrigation District’s easement is a minimum of 100 feet (50 feet from centerline each direction). The creek should be protected during construction as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.1. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 301 of 664 Page 11 The Noble Lateral is piped and runs along the east boundary of the site within a 30-foot wide easement. The McFadden Drain (shown on City maps as the Five Mile Creek) runs along the south boundary of this site on the adjacent property within an 85-foot wide easement (50’ left and 35’ right facing downstream). All irrigation easements for the Five Mile Creek, McFadden Drain and/or other facilities that encroach on this site should be depicted on the plat. If the easement is wider than 10 feet it’s required to be included in a common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise modified by City Council as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. Any encroachments within NMID’s easements will require a License Agreement. Floodplain: Many of the building lots adjacent to the Five Mile creek lie within the floodplain (i.e. FEMA Flood Zone A). A floodplain development permit is required to be obtained from the City Public Work’s Department prior to development occurring within the floodplain. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7, 11-3H-4D): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7 and 11-3H-4D. Fencing is proposed on the landscape plan as follows: 5-foot tall wrought iron fencing is proposed along the rear of building lots adjacent to the Five Mile Creek and the McFadden Drain; 4-foot tall vinyl fencing is proposed adjacent to internal common areas not visible from a public street and pathways; and a 6-foot tall vinyl fence is proposed along the perimeter of the development and adjacent to common areas that are visible from a public street. A 4-foot tall berm with a 6-foot tall concrete wall on top is proposed along the east boundary of the site adjacent to N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16 as noise abatement for residential properties from the future state highway as required by UDC 11-3H-4D (see exhibit in Section VII.C). An exhibit should be submitted with the final plat applications for Phases 5 and 9 (i.e. the phases containing lots that abut McDermott Rd./future SH-16) that depicts the centerline (or estimated centerline) of the future SH-16 to ensure the top of the berm/wall combination is a minimum of 10 feet higher than the elevation at the centerline of the state highway as required. A 6-foot tall vinyl fence is proposed along the rear of building lots abutting the street buffer along future SH-16 which will create a 15-foot wide corridor hidden between two fences/walls that may create CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) safety issues and possibly maintenance issues for landscaping between the two fences. Staff recommends the 6-foot tall closed vision fence is removed and a use easement recorded across the back side of the berm along McDermott/SH-16 benefitting adjacent building lots with allowance for side yard fences to be constructed to the wall on top of the berm; or, an open vision, 4-foot tall closed vision, or 4-foot tall closed vision with 2 foot open vision fencing on top could be constructed for visibility of the common area between the fence and wall on top of the berm. Staff recommends fencing (chain-link or wrought iron) is constructed on the south side of the multi-use pathway along the Five Mile Creek for public safety that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-6C. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for each lot within the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 302 of 664 Page 12 Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Contours should be depicted on the plat for all storm drainage facilities that demonstrate compliance with UDC 11-3B-11C [i.e. slopes are required to be less than or equal to three to one (3:1) (horizontal:vertical) for accessibility and maintenance]. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single-family detached structures as shown in Section VII.G. A variety of 1- and 2-story homes are proposed with a combination of front and rear entry garages in an assortment of building materials. Because the rear and/or sides of 2-story structures that face W. McMillan Rd., an arterial street; N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16, an arterial street/future state highway and entryway corridor; and N. McCrosson Ave., a collector street, will be highly visible, Staff recommends they incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop- outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single- story structures are exempt from this requirement VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation & Zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement and Preliminary Plat per the conditions included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on April 4 and 18, 2019. At the public hearing on April 18th, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Bob Taunton, Taunton Group; David Bailey, Beiley Engineering; Kevin Amar, Biltmore Company; Sonia Daleiden, Kittleson and Associates b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: Joe Yochum, West Ada School District; David McKinney d. Written testimony: Shawn Brownlee e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: Mark Niemeyer, Fire Chief; Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. Adequacy of proposed berm and wall as a buffer along the east boundary of the subdivision adjacent to future SH-16 – belief that additional buffering should be required; b. Provision of additional pathways and wider sidewalks to accommodate both bicyclists and pedestrians – in favor of extension of the multi-use pathway along the north side of the creek to McDermott Rd. for connection with the pathway in the Oaks Subdivision to the east – would like to see more of a direct pedestrian connection from internal pathways along Glassford to the school site to the south through Block 4. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. The extension of the multi-use pathway along the Five Mile Creek east of N. Glassford Way to McDermott Rd.; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 303 of 664 Page 13 b. The ability of the Fire Dept. to adequately service the proposed development within desired response times until construction of another fire station occurs; c. In favor of the mix of lot sizes proposed; d. Concern pertaining to adequacy of parking for the swimming pool 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Modification to conditions #A.1b and #A.1c in Section VIII in regard to the timing for construction of N. McCrosson Ave. and the pedestrian walkways along the entire frontage of the site along McCrosson Ave. and McMillan Rd. from the first phase of development to the earlier part of the second phase or at the time of substantial completion of the high school consistent with the WASD’s construction timeline for the high school with submittal of a letter of intent to that effect from WASD. b. The Commission was supportive of the Applicant’s request for Council approval of a waiver to hook up to City water and sewer services for the home(s) located within the future SH-16 right-of-way. c. Add a micro-path connection through Block 4 in the southern portion of the development for a more direct pedestrian connection to the school site to the south (reflected on the revised plans); d. Add a requirement for the provision of a minimum of 6 parking spaces at the swimming pool area (see condition #A.1l in Section VIII); e. Recommendation for the Applicant to work with the Park’s Dept. to determine multi-use pathway requirements consistent with the Pathways Master Plan, specifically along the creek; (The Park’s Dept. amended their conditions to not require a pathway along the north side of the creek east of Glassford Way to McDermott Rd – deleted condition #A.3g in Section VIII.) f. Allowance for the sidewalk along N. McDermott Rd. to be constructed with the last phase of development (see condition #A.2i in Section VIII); g. Modify the sound attenuation wall along the east boundary adjacent to future SH-16 to reflect a 12-foot tall berm (see condition #A.3j). 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. The plan for McMillan Rd.crossing SH-16 may shift from an overpass to SH-16 going over McMillan Rd. This scenario would likely result in a lesser amount of right-of-way needed along McMillan Rd. which might enable the out-parcel to possibly redevelop in the future with buildable lots. In this scenario an access to a local street should be provided with this development to that parcel as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3; this could be accomplished by the provision of a common driveway through Lot 36, Block 9. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 304 of 664 Page 14 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation & Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 305 of 664 Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 306 of 664 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 307 of 664 Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 308 of 664 Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 309 of 664 Page 19 B. Preliminary Plats (date: 2/12/2019 05/13/2019) & Phasing Plan (dated: 5/21/2019) REVISED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 310 of 664 Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 311 of 664 Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 312 of 664 Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 313 of 664 Page 23 C. Landscape Plan (date: 2/14/2019 5/10/2019) REVISED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 314 of 664 Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 315 of 664 Page 25 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 316 of 664 Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 317 of 664 Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 318 of 664 Page 28 D. Lot Size Rendering (dated: 2/14/19) - REVISED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 319 of 664 Page 29 E. Qualified Open Space Exhibit (dated: 2/12/19 5/13/19) REVISED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 320 of 664 Page 30 F. Parks and Pathways - REVISED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 321 of 664 Page 31 G. Conceptual Building Elevations/Perspectives (dated: 1/10/19) Tresidio: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 322 of 664 Page 32 Biltmore Elevations: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 323 of 664 Page 33 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 324 of 664 Page 34 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS Prior to the City Council hearing, the Applicant shall revise the preliminary plat (and associated plans and documents) to break the plat into two (2) separate preliminary plats north and south of the Five Mile Creek, obtain approval of new subdivision names from the Ada County Surveyor’s office, and submit additional application fees ($2,264). Done A revised qualified open space exhibit shall also be submitted prior to the City Council hearing that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plats and phasing plan, landscape plans and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained in the staff report. The two (2) preliminary plats shall be allowed to develop as one project in accord with the phasing plan for the overall development. b. The Developer shall construct a mid-mile collector street (N. McCrosson Ave.) from W. McMillan Rd. to the north boundary of the school property to the south (approximately 1,970’+/-) with the first earlier part of the second phase of development or at the time of substantial completion of the high school, consistent with the West Ada School District’s construction timeline for the high school. The Developer shall submit a letter of intent from the school district outlining their timeline for construction of the high school with submittal of the first final plat application. c. The Developer shall construct pedestrian walkways along the entire frontage of the site adjacent to N. McCrosson Ave. and W. McMillan Rd. with the first earlier part of the second phase of development or at the time of substantial completion of the high school, consistent with West Ada School District’s construction timeline for the high school, for safe access to the school site to the south for children walking to school. d. The Developer shall continue to coordinate with the Idaho Transportation Department as development occurs to ensure adequate area is provided for the future construction of SH-16, the overpass on McMillan Rd. over future SH-16, and other associated improvements. e. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be constructed on this site as required by the Park’s Department in accord with the Pathways Master Plan with landscaping along either side of the pathway as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C. f. The Five Mile creek, which lies on land owned by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District between the north and south portions of this development, shall be protected during construction. g. The existing homes located within the future right-of-way area for SH-16 along the east boundary of the site on Parcel No. S0432110100 and S0432110500 shall hook up to city water and sewer service within sixty (60) days after date of official notice from the City to do so; provided, that such services are within three hundred feet (300’) of any property line of the building to be served as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 unless otherwise waived by City Council. At such time, as municipal services are provided, the property shall be disconnected from private systems. The Applicant is requesting a waiver of this requirement as ITD right-of-way acquisition is about to commence. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 325 of 664 Page 35 h. The existing homes located within the future right-of-way area for SH-16 along the east boundary of the site on Parcel No. S0432110100 and S0432110500 shall not be expanded or enlarged. i. The Developer shall provide noise abatement along the east boundary of the site adjacent to future SH- 16 as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4D for residential uses adjoining state highways. j. The rear and/or sides of structures that face W. McMillan Rd., an arterial street; N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16, an arterial street/future state highway and entryway corridor; and N. McCrosson Ave., a collector street, shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. k. The Developer shall coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department on a combination donation and purchase transaction for Lot 2, Block 7 for the development of a future fire station and equipment service facility. The transfer to the Fire Department shall take place with recordation of the final plat phase that includes Lot 2, Block 7. A conditional use permit is required for a fire station (i.e. public/quasi-public use) in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2; compliance with the associated specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-30, Public or Quasi-Public Use is required. l. The parking lot for the swimming pool shall contain a minimum of six (6) parking spaces. 2. The preliminary plats for Gander Creek North (N) and Gander Creek South (S) included in Section VII.B, shall be revised as follows (as applicable): a. Include a note stating direct lot access via N. McCrosson Ave., W. McMillan Rd., N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16 is prohibited, except for Lot 2, Block 7 which is planned for a fire station and shall have direct access via N. McCrosson Ave. b. On the 57-foot wide typical street section detail on Sheet PP-2, depict root barriers for the 6-foot wide parkways that are a minimum of 18 inches below subgrade adjacent to the sidewalk and a 24 inches below subgrade adjacent to the curb extending 2 inches above grade. c. Depict a typical street section detail for the 20-foot wide alleys. Done d. Depict contours for all storm drainage facilities that demonstrate compliance with UDC 11-3B-11C [i.e. slopes are required to be less than or equal to three to one (3:1) (horizontal:vertical) for accessibility and maintenance]. e. Depict irrigation easements for the Five Mile Creek, McFadden Drain (shown on City maps as the Five Mile Creek), and any and all other facilities that encroach on this site. If the easement is wider than 10 feet it shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise modified by City Council as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. f. N. Arroyo Creek Ave. and N. Carmel Creek Ave. shall be alleys instead of 28’ public streets and shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. Done g. Lots 15 and 16 and 17, Block 4 (S); and Lots 38 and 40, Block 2 (S) should be revised to reflect a minimum 30-foot wide street frontage; and Lot 12, Block 6 (S) should be a minimum of 40-feet wide measured as a chord measurement. h. The face of Block 2 that fronts on W. Mill Creek Dr., east of N. Glassford Way, abutting the south side of the Five Mile Creek (790’+/-); and, the face of Blocks 2 and 7 that fronts on W. Redwood Creek Dr. that abut the north side of the McFadden Drain/Five Mile Creek along the project’s south boundary (800’+/- and 763’+/-, respectively) exceed the maximum block length of 750’ without an intersecting street or alley per UDC 11-6C-3F; revise accordingly unless otherwise approved by City Council. The Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 326 of 664 Page 36 UDC allows for City Council to approve block faces up to 1,200’ in length where block design is constrained by site conditions that include an abutting arterial street or highway, and a large waterway and/or a large irrigation facility, which is the situation in all three of these cases. Staff recommends Council approve the block faces as proposed. i. A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required along N. McDermott Rd. in accord with UDC 11-3A-17 to be constructed with the last phase of development. j. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide street buffer on Lot 2, Block 7 along N. McCrosson Avenue in a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C shall be revised as follows: a. The “Ninemile” creek and associated easement should be named “Five Mile” creek (Gander Creek South). b. A detail shall be included for Phases 5, 6 and 9 (i.e. the phases containing the lots that abut McDermott Rd./future SH-16) that depicts the centerline (or estimated centerline) of the future SH-16 in relation to the top of the berm/wall verifying it’s a minimum of 10 feet higher than the elevation at the centerline of the state highway as required by UDC 11-3H-4D.2. c. Minimum 5-foot wide landscape strips are required to be provided along each side of the multi-use pathway in Gander Creek North landscaped as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C; if NMID will not allow landscaping on their property, a common lot should be provided on the subject property to accommodate the pathway and/or associated landscaping as necessary. d. Class II trees shall be planted within 6-foot wide parkways along with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C. e. Depict fencing (chain-link or wrought iron) on the south side of the multi-use pathway along the Five Mile Creek in Gander Creek North for public safety that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-6C. f. The 6-foot tall closed vision fence along the east boundary of the subdivision adjacent to N. McDermott Rd./future SH-16 shall be removed and either a use easement recorded across the back side of the berm along McDermott/SH-16 benefitting adjacent building lots with allowance for side yard fences to be constructed to the wall on top of the berm; or, an open vision, 4-foot tall closed vision, or 4-foot tall closed vision with 2 foot open vision fencing on top could be constructed for visibility of the common area between the fence and wall on top of the berm. g. Extend the multi-use pathway along the north side of the Five Mile Creek from N. Glassford Way to the east boundary of the site consistent with the Pathways Master Plan. The Park’s Dept. amended this condition. h. Depict a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along N. McDermott Rd. in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. i. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide street buffer on Lot 2, Block 7 along N. McCrosson Avenue in a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2a, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. j. Modify the detail for the berm along the east boundary of the site adjacent to future SH-16 to reflect a 12 foot tall berm. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 327 of 664 Page 37 4. The existing ingress/egress easement (Inst. #98106235) for W. Lazy Diamond C Lane and an Idaho Power easement (Inst. #8958920) noted on the Gander Creek South plat and any other easements that are no longer needed shall be relinquished and/or vacated, as applicable, prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer on the phase in which they are located. The Applicant shall submit copies of the easement relinquishment(s) and/or proof of vacation of the easement(s) with the final plat application as applicable. 5. All stormwater detention facilities counted toward qualified open space are required to be designed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11C. 6. A floodplain development permit is required to be obtained from the Public Work’s Department prior to any and all development within the floodplain. 7. All existing structures are required to be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat for the phase of development in which they are located. 8. Submit a detail of the children’s play equipment and picnic shelters with the final plat application. 9. Install signage at each end of the alleys (currently depicted as N. Arroyo Creek Ave. and N. Carmel Creek Ave.) for addressing purposes for lots that front on mews. 10. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is required to be submitted to the Planning Division for the multi-use pathway in Gander Creek North; coordinate the details of the easement with Kim Warren, Park’s Department. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 1.2 The water system as proposed does not connect to the City's distribution system. A water main connection will not be made to the east on McMillan Road, east of N. Glassford Avenue, due to the planned SH-16 grade separation. A 12-inch water main connection will need to be made parallel with the sanitary sewer mainline, to the proposed 12-inch water main to be constructed by the Owyhee High School project in McDermott Rd. An 8-inch water main connection will need to be made to the south on the proposed Glassford Way to the proposed 12-inch main to be constructed by the Owyhee High School project. 12-inch water main needs to be constructed along the entire west boundary on McCrosson Ave across Five Mile Creek and connecting to the proposed water main to the south to be built be Owyhee High School Project. An 8 inch flush line needs to be constructed at the crossing of Five Mile Creek at McCrosson Ave. Phasing as proposed will require significant off-site improvements to connect water. Each phase must be modeled at final plat to ensure adequate fire flow. Water must be supplied from at least two mains for all phases of the development. 1.3 The west property boundary is also the sanitary sewer trunkshed boundary, therefore this development does not need to stub sewer to the west. Remove sewer main stub in W Quintal Street. The following sewer manholes have less than 3' of cover: SSMH A16 and F5-7. The southern portion of subdivision has multiple sewer design flaws. Sewer mains in Mill Creek Drive, Brandy Creek Ave, Buffalo Creek Drive and Battle Creek Avenue all dead end and do not connect east to the mainline in McDermott Road. Sewer in N Magical Creek Way dead ends and does not connect to the rest of the system as well. There are no sewer mains to service Block 2, lots 3-5 and Block 4, lots 2-3. 1.4 This development is subject to paying reimbursement fees for The Oaks Lift Station and Pressure Sewer Reimbursement Agreement, and the West Ada School District Reimbursement Agreement for Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 328 of 664 Page 38 Oaks Lift Station Pump Upgrades (currently under development) pursuant to meridian city code section 8-6-5 1.5 The March 7, 2019 Geo-Tech Report, prepared by SITE Consulting, LLC, submitted with this application highlights several site conditions (including but not limited to soil types, ground water, and construction methods) that will make development of this property and construction of homes somewhat challenging. The developer shall bear the responsibility of ensuring that all the requirements, including compaction of backfill material, foundation drains around homes, and on-site infiltration pits are conveyed to the home builders, and that they are closely adhered to. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub- grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898- 5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 329 of 664 Page 39 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C- 3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 330 of 664 Page 40 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/164180/Page1.aspx D. POLICE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/163880/Page1.aspx E. PARK’S DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=164267&page=1& http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/167815/Page1.aspx F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/163825/Page1.aspx G. SETTLER’S IRRIGATION DISTRICT Plans must be submitted to Settler’s Irrigation District for comment and review prior to construction. H. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/162580/Page1.aspx I. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/161961/Page1.aspx J. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/162390/Page1.aspx K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/168244/Page1.aspx L. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/164142/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the proposal to annex and develop the subject 117.10 acre property with R-8 zoning Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 331 of 664 Page 41 is consistent with the associated FLUM designation of MDR for this property. (See section V above for more information.) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statement of the residential district in that it will provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential and school uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 332 of 664 Page 42 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 333 of 664 Gander Creek North & South Subdivisions 117.10 Ac.-SWC McMillan Rd. & McDermott Rd. Applicant: Trilogy Development, Inc. Meridian City Council Hearing May 28, 2019 Application Requests Annex & Rezone Application: Comp Plan –MDR 3-8 units/ac. Annexation Area –125.68 ac. includes NMID parcel RUT (County) to R-8/DA –4-8 units/ac. –3.42 gross area (117.10 ac.) –4.15 net of ITD r-o-w & City parcel (96.54 ac.) Subdivision: Gander Creek North & South Subdivisions 401 SF detached lots /60 common lots/5 other lots Total open space (HOA) –16.7 ac. (14.26% -gross area) Qualified open space –11.97 ac. (10.2% -gross area) –12.11 % North –10.5 % South –10.2 % Combined 300’ setback for Hwy. 16 future r-o-w ACHD Staff Report –Final Approval 5/3/19 Waiver Request •Gander Creek North –Waive water & sewer connection requirement for 1 existing home in Hwy. 16 r-o-w –Parcel # S0432110100 –Original application stated 2 homes Location & Comp Plan Surrounding Future Land Use Star Comp Plan Update Adopted April 22, 2019 Oaks Lift Station Sewer Shed •Efficient use of existing City infrastructure •West boundary is major constraint for future development •No Gander Creek sewer stubs to west Future Sewer Master Plan West Ada SD-Heartland MOA Signed by West Ada SD & Heartland 9-27-18 –Enter binding agreement upon annexation –Heartland to extend mid-mile collector •100% Heartland cost –saves public $$$ •West Ada SD north boundary to McMillan Rd •Complete when Owyhee HS substantially complete & District is seeking CO •Projected Owyhee HS move in –July 2021 •Provides 2 points of public access to future schools Collector Street: Matches West Ada SD Community Development Principles •Housing choice –Incomes –Preferences –Life stages •Healthy community –Active, walkable & connected –Make the healthy choice the easy choice •Recreational opportunities –Wide range of users and ages •Activity areas for gathering & interaction •Connection to regional Five Mile pathway Meridian FD & Heartland LOI •Signed by Meridian Fire Chief & Heartland 2-27-19 •Heartland to donate approx. 2 ac. •Meridian to purchase approx. 2 ac. at Heartland’s avg. land acquisition cost (below market) •Enter purchase agreement by 5-1-19 (assumed Council approval April) •Close within 30 days ofrecording final plat for Phase 2 (Gander Creek South) Housing Choice: 6 Products/38’-80’ Lots Landscape Plan •Added South pool & parking •7 parking stalls at both pools •20’x50’ pools Parks & Pathways Internal/School Connectivity Highway 16 Sound Mitigation •Use easement extends rear yard •Removes public safety concern •10’ above Hwy. 16 center line elevation Block Lengths Exceed 750’ •Five Mile Creek & McFadden Drain preclude an intersecting street or alley •763’, 790’, 800’ block lengths = 1 lot extra width Highway 16 Design/Funding •Applications consistent with current ITD plans –300’ R-O-W –McMillan Rd. overpass side slopes •Possible Revisions: Amy Schroeder, ITD Email 5-20-19 –Prelim. study results favor Hwy. 16 elevated over McMillan Rd. –R-O-W width adjustment still under study through summer –Public meeting Sept./Oct. –NEPA (EIS) re-evaluation required –Updated noise study modeling by end of 2019 •Funding and Timing: –$90 million –R-O-W acquisition only –No funding appropriated for final design or construction –Construction timetable unknown Highway 16 Preferred Alignment Conceptual Phasing •Later phases (5-9) adjacent Hwy. 16 allow for subdivision adjustments at final plat Alternate Layout –No Overpass Project Images North Subdivision Entry from McMillan Rd. North Subdivision Entry from McMillan Rd. North Subdivision Pool North Subdivision Playground North Subdivision Playfield Alley-Load Housing on North Subdivision Park Conventional Front-Drive Housing South Subdivision Entry from McCrosson St. South Subdivision Park CjQ/rE IDA,----IN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 10 E Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Appeal of Purchasing Manager's Denial of Protest of 2019 Request for Proposals (MYR-1921-11034) By Perkins Cole on behalf of Neutron Holdings, Inc. dba Lime Meeting Notes: 6On+n,484 �b 1 /I, 2-6i� I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 10.E . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Appeal of P urchasing M anager's Denial of P rotest of 2019 Request for Proposals (M Y R-1921-11034) by P erkins C oie on behalf of Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Notice of Appeal and Request to Move Hearing Date C over Memo 5/22/2019 P rotest L etter C over Memo 5/22/2019 E xhibit A - R F P E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit B - L ime R F P R esponse E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit C - Samantha E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit D - J osh E varts E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit E - B ritton D avis E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit F - Scott Colaianni E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit G - Caleb Hood E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit H - Mike Barton E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit I - Emily Kane E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit J - 2019-02-05 Meeting Transcript E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit K - 2019-02-19 Meeting Transcript E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit L - Email Communication E xhibit 5/22/2019 E xhibit M - B ird P roposal E xhibit 5/22/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/22/2019 - 9:22 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 366 of 664 144464450.1 William K. Miller WMiller@perkinscoie.com May 21,2019 Chris Johnson City Clerk City of Meridian 33. E. Broadway Ave., Suite 104 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re:Notice of Appeal and Request to Move Hearing Date 2019 Request For Proposals, Project No. MYR-1921-11034 Dear Mr. Johnson: My firm represents Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime (“Lime”) with respect to Request for Proposals, Project No. MYR-1921-11034 (the “RFP”) issued by the City of Meridian (the “City”). On May 16, 2019, Lime submitted a protest letter to the City challenging the outcome of the RFP (the “Protest Letter”). On May 17, 2019, the City issued a written denial of that request (the “City’s Denial”). A.Notice of Appeal Lime hereby appeals the City’s Denial to the City Council and incorporates the Protest Letter, and the information and positions taken therein, as part of its appeal. Lime will submit additional materials and briefing, if any,in support of its appeal to the City by 12:00 p.m., May 23, 2019; provided that, Lime reserves the right to submit supplemental materials and briefing after that date based on documents it receives in response to its pending public records request (PRR 19-2855)(see below). B.Request to Move Hearing Date On May 16,2019, Lime submitted a public records request in support of its protest which seeks emails and other documents related to the RFP; in particular, Lime seeks emails between members of the evaluation committee related to the RFP process. The City recently informed Lime that it will provide a response to this request by May 31, 2019. The City’s Denial states that an appeal of the City’s Denial will be heard by the City Council at its meeting on May 28, 2019, which is three days before Lime is to receive a response to its public records request. As a result, Lime respectfully requests that the hearing date for its appeal be moved to June 4, 2019, which is the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Granting this request for a short, one-week continuance will not prejudice the City or the other Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 367 of 664 Chris Johnson May 21, 2019 Page 2 144464450.1 vendor in this process, Bird Rides Inc. (“Bird”),and is necessary to ensure that Lime receives adequate due process as with respect to its protest and appeal. Please contact me with questions or concerns. Very truly yours, William Miller Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 368 of 664 144414160.2 William K. Miller WMiller@perkinscoie.com May 16, 2019 Keith Watts Purchasing Department City of Meridian 33. E. Broadway Ave., Suite 106 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: 2019 Request For Proposals, Project No. MYR-1921-11034 Vehicle Sharing Program Dear Mr. Watts: On behalf of Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime (“Lime”), an applicant with respect to Request for Proposals, Project No. MYR-1921-11034 (the “RFP”) issued by the City of Meridian (the “City”), the undersigned protests and respectfully requests review of the City’s Notice of Intent to Award, dated May 6, 2019. This request, filed prior to 12:00 p.m. on May 16, 2019, is timely. See Exhibit L (email exchange with City extending deadline to May 16, 2019). A. Summary The City recently issued an RFP for vendors who are interested in participating in an e-scooter pilot program in Meridian. Other than Lime, the only other respondent to the RFP was Bird Rides Inc. (“Bird”), one of Lime’s main competitors in the e-scooter-sharing industry. After reviewing the parties’ proposals, the City selected Bird instead of Lime as the sole successful respondent. Based on our review of documents associated with the RFP process, it is apparent that one of the seven evaluators, Emily Kane (a Meridian Deputy City Attorney), harbored an unfair bias against Lime, which resulted in her awarding Lime just eight points out of 100. This substantially lowered Lime’s score. Notably, Ms. Kane (who is also believed to have assisted with drafting the RFP itself) filled out her grading sheet three days after all other graders. If Ms. Kane’s wildly divergent score is disregarded, Lime would have received an average score of 80.5 points from the other six evaluators. Lime has filed a public records request for (among other things) email communications by city employees related to this RFP, including communications by Ms. Kane, so that it can uncover the impetus behind Ms. Kane’s incongruent scoring. But setting her motives aside, one thing is certain: Ms. Kane’s scoring, which significantly and adversely effected Lime’s final score, is completely unsupported by the record and has no rational basis in fact. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 369 of 664 Keith Watts May 16, 2019 Page 2 144414160.2 To be clear, Lime is not seeking to prevent the City from entering into a franchise agreement with Bird. Rather, Lime requests that Ms. Kane’s unsupported scores be disregarded so that the City can also award a franchise agreement to Lime, in addition to Bird, in accordance with City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1818, the language of the RFP, and the City Council’s intent to select two vendors. B. Background on RFP Scoring Process 1. The RFP On March 15, 2019, the City issued the RFP, which sought proposals to establish a pilot program in Meridian under which the successful respondent would provide dockless, shared e-scooters for public use. See Exhibit A. Proposals were due by April 5, 2019, a deadline with which Lime complied. Although the RFP referenced an “exclusive” franchise agreement, the RFP clearly contemplated that the City could award franchise agreements to more than one respondent: The City of Meridian reserves the right to make an award to that/those highest ranked responsive and responsible contractor(s) whose Proposal(s) is/are most responsive to the needs of the City. Id. at 5. In fact, an award of multiple franchises is consistent with the City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1818 and the City Council’s intent that the City accept up to two vendors as part of this pilot program. See infra ¶ B(7). 2. Lime Met All Eligibility Requirements In order to be eligible for selection, respondents needed to meet certain enumerated criteria related to their experience in other markets, scooter hardware, and app technology. Specifically, the City required that: A. Respondent operates vehicle sharing programs in at least twenty cities and/or has provided 1,000,000 rides to date; B. Respondent deploys shared vehicles which are (1) labeled with current contact information, (2) able to stand upright when parked, and (3) in good repair; and C. Respondent connects an app to all deployed vehicles which (1) explains the method by which riders can report safety or maintenance issues, (2) informs riders of the location of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 370 of 664 Keith Watts May 16, 2019 Page 3 144414160.2 designated parking areas, (3) is capable of being remotely disabled, and (4) is capable of being located and controlled remotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. Id. at 12. As part of its proposal, Lime certified that it met all of the aforementioned eligibility criteria. 3. Lime’s Proposal Addressed All Other Required Topics The RFP required that all proposals include written narratives addressing fifteen topics (and various subtopics), which are listed on pages seven and eight of the RFP. On April 5, 2019, Lime timely submitted its proposal to the City, which comprehensively responded to the RFP’s requirements, detailing (among other things): • Lime’s experience operating a shared electric scooter service in more than 100 cities; • Lime’s proposed scooter sharing program, including its plan for a calculated, gradual deployment based on its experience deploying similar programs in other cities; • Lime’s cutting-edge, dockless scooter technology, including its parking and safety features; • Lime’s nationwide education and training initiatives; and • Lime’s community and law enforcement engagement. Exhibit B. Lime has recently relied on similarly written proposals to obtain approval to operate in various other mid-size cities like Meridian, including Omaha, Nebraska; Spokane, Washington; and Santa Monica, California. 4. Bird’s Proposal Was Likely Similar to Its Recent Proposals in Other Markets Where Lime Has Been the Successful Bidder Only one other company, Bird, submitted a proposal in response to the RFP. Bird’s proposal was likely similar to the proposals it had submitted in other cities where it competes with Lime. On several recent occasions, Lime’s proposals have outscored Bird’s proposals in other markets. One recent example is the application for e-scooter permits in Portland, which was due April 9, 2019, just two business days after proposals to Meridian’s RFP were due. In Portland, Lime received the permit but Bird did not, based on what were likely similar applications. Lime also won a request for proposal process in Spokane with an application that was due on April 8, 2019, one business day after the Meridian RFP was due. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 371 of 664 Keith Watts May 16, 2019 Page 4 144414160.2 Bird’s proposal to this RFP is also similar in many ways to the proposal submitted by Lime. Compare Exhibit A at 6 (“Our service is available in more than 100 cities in 20 countries on 5 continents.”) with Exhibit M at 5 (“[Bird] operate[s] in over 100 universities and cities across the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Latin America.”). 5. The Results of Meridian’s Selection Panel To evaluate the proposals submitted in response to this RFP, the City convened a selection panel consisting of seven individuals. According to the RFP’s “Proposed Schedule” (see Exhibit A at 9), the panel was to convene on April 18, 2019. It appears that three evaluators were employed by the City and four were citizens of Meridian. Evaluators used a grading sheet with five selection categories, each of which had a maximum value of 20 points. The scores for each category were tallied up for a total score for each respondent equal to 100 points. Based on our review of the grading sheets (attached as Exhibits C-I), Bird and Lime scored closely in every category with six of the seven evaluators, resulting in similar total point scores for each of those six evaluators. The table below shows a summary of those scores. GRADER NAME OCCUPATION DATE COMPLETED BIRD LIME Samantha [Unknown] Unknown Undated 78 75 Josh Evarts Meridian Developer Undated 90 74 Britton Davis Owner, Branches Artisan April 21, 2019 90 83 Scott Colaianni Meridian Police Department April 24, 2019 90 89 Caleb Hood Meridian Planning Department April 26, 2019 90 86 Mike Barton Minister, Meridian Presbyterian April 26, 2019 91 76 Emily Kane Meridian Deputy City Attorney April 29, 2019 92 8 Inexplicably, however, Ms. Kane, who submitted her grading three days after everyone else, awarded Lime a total score of just eight points. An analysis of Ms. Kane’s actual grading sheet is even more confounding. In the written “comments” section of her grading sheet, Ms. Kane dedicated 317 words to describing “cons” associated with Lime’s proposal, while dedicating just five words to “pros.” See Exhibit I. The other evaluators included almost no negative feedback for Lime in their comments sections, let alone the kind of consistent, negative feedback offered by Ms. Kane. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 372 of 664 Keith Watts May 16, 2019 Page 5 144414160.2 6. Ms. Kane’s Grading Sheet Indicates Clear Bias and Should Be Disregarded Chapter 14 of the Meridian City Code establishes the standards for ethics in local government, including municipal contracting. Chapter 14 expressly incorporates the Idaho Transparent and Ethical Government Act. See Meridian City Code § 1-14-7; I.C. §§ 74-401-06. These standards of conduct are not just concerned with actual conflicts of interest, but also conduct which creates “the appearance of conflict or incompatibility.” Meridian City Code § 1-14-6 (emphasis added). Specifically, with respect to contracting, Meridian City Code states that City employees “shall not participate directly by means of deliberation, approval or disapproval, or recommendation, in . . . the award of any contracts with the City, except as permitted under the City’s ordinances and under the laws of the State, where to his or her knowledge there is a financial interest, or personal interest other than that possessed by the public generally.” Meridian City Code § 1-14-8. It is apparent from the data that Ms. Kane harbored an improper interest in the outcome of this process. Although Lime is currently unable to pinpoint the source of that bias, on May 16, 2019, it filed a public records request seeking: All written documents, including electronically transmitted communications, relating in any manner to the 2019 Request For Proposals, Project No. MYR- 1921-11034 (the “RFP”), including but not limited to all communications between members of the evaluation committee (including, but not limited, to Emily Kane), city staff, and/or members of the City Council regarding the RFP, scooters, Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a/ Lime (“Lime”), Lime’s participation in the RFP process, Bird, and Bird’s participation in the RFP process. Lime is confident that this request will produce communications which will shed light on the circumstances surrounding Ms. Kane’s belated participation in the scoring process and the reason behind her clear bias against Lime. Further, although the RFP states that it was prepared by you (Keith Watts), Lime has been informed that Ms. Kane assisted with drafting the RFP, which will likely be confirmed by the City’s compliance with Lime’s public records request. If Ms. Kane assisted with drafting this RFP, that makes her divergent scoring even more concerning and problematic. 7. If Ms. Kane’s Score Is Disregarded, Lime Should Also Be Awarded a Franchise Agreement City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1818 creates a “non-exclusive Vehicle Sharing Program franchise for the operation of Vehicle Sharing Programs on Franchised Premises.” Ord. No. 19- 1818 § 8-3-2 (A) (emphasis added). It is clear from discussions by the City and City Council Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 373 of 664 Keith Watts May 16, 2019 Page 6 144414160.2 Members during City Council meetings that the City intended to select up to 2 qualified vendors. See Exhibit J at 9 (Councilor Milam: “I think if there are four companies we should have a better system for looking at them and picking the two that are going to be the best…”); id. at 2 (City Attorney William Nary: “[F]or the record purpose, for the folks in the audience who are watching, what you have in front of you tonight is a proposal to create a franchise program in the city that will be limited under this iteration to two franchisees.”); Exhibit K. Once Ms. Kane’s score is disregarded, it is beyond dispute that Lime is qualified to be awarded a franchise agreement, as demonstrated its qualifications outlined in its proposal, scope of operations in over 100 cities, and selection in other highly-selective RFP/permit processes in other jurisdictions during a comparable time period. C. Conclusion It is axiomatic that all public contracting in Idaho should be fair and unbiased. Here, it is apparent that one of the RFP evaluators was unfairly biased against Lime. As a result, Lime requests that Ms. Kane’s score be disregarded and that, based on its new score, Lime be awarded a franchise agreement with the City on substantially the same terms as Bird since its proposal met all of the City’s requirements and (setting aside Ms. Kane’s grading) scored highly with the selection panel. If the City is willing to grant Lime a franchise agreement, the reason for its Public Records Act request is moot, and Lime will therefore withdraw that request. Please contact me with questions or concerns. Very truly yours, William Miller Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 374 of 664 E IDIAN PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 33 East Broadway Ave., Ste 106 lVleridian, lD 83642 Phone: (208) 489-0416 Fax: (208) 887-4813 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PROJECT NO. MYR-1 921-11034 CONTRACT SPECI FICATIONS FOR: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM PROPOSALS IMUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.l\4. APRIL 5, 2019 DELIVER To: CITY OF MERIDIAN, PURCHASING DEPARTIVENT 33 EAST BROADWAY AVENUE, STE 106 MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Prepared by: KEITH WATTS NAME AND ADDRESS OF VENDOR SUBTVIITTING PROPOSAL NATVE DDRESS: DATE Email: IDAHO Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 375 of 664 PART REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CITY OF MERIDIAN Meridian, ldaho 83642 PROJECT # MYR-1 921-11 034 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGtr t. ll. il1. IV V. Cover Sheet. Table of Contents..... Notice Calling for Proposals lnstructions to Respondents Proposal Form. Questionnaire . Sample Agreement... ... ... ... 1 2 3 6 10 12 13 2of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 376 of 664 PART I NOTICE CALLING FOR PROPOSALS PURPOSE The City of Meridian seeks proposals to establish a pilot Vehicle Sharing Program to provide dockless, shared e-scooters for public use on public streets and sidewalks in the City of Meridian; paved, ground-level surfaces on property owned by the City of Meridian (excluding the Water Department and the Wastewater Reuse Facility); and pathways enumerated in the City of Meridian Pathways Master Plan (collectively, "franchised premises"). The successful Respondent will be offered an exclusive franchise agreement governing the terms and conditions of the program's operation in Meridian. !n entering into the franchise agreement, the City seeks to facilitate micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian while also protecting and enhancing the safety of the several users of streets and sidewalks in our community, including pedestrians, vehicular traffic, and shared vehicle riders. Following execution of the franchise agreement, the successful Respondent shall remit to the City Clerk a nonrefundable franchise fee in the amount of $25,000.00 annually. Half shall be due within three (3) business days of execution of the franchise agreement, and the other half shall be due on or before July 1 of each year. For new franchisees only, the franchise fee due and owing shall be a prorated amount, less $2,084.00 for each whole month of the calendar year that has passed prior to issuance of the franchise. Franchise fees remitted to the City may be invested in costs that may be incurred by the City in relation to Vehicle Sharing Programs, or in needed infrastructure to support Vehicle Sharing Programs including, but not limited to, signage, pathway improvements, pathway maintenance, and pathway repair. PRESENTATIONS Those respondents which are determined to be best qualified to undertake the services required under this Request for Proposals may be invited to make a presentation to the City. Further information may be provided to the prospective respondents after the initial selection. ELIGIBILITY ln order to be eligible for selection, Respondent must be able to answer "yes" to all questions listed in PART lV - ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONNAIRE. City may request verification of answers. BASIS FOR SELECTION ln evaluating eligible applications, the following factors will be considered: Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to [Vleridian (20 points); 3of20 a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 377 of 664 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on tt/eridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic (20 points); c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience (20 points); d. Consistency of proposed program with Clty policy, CARE values, and community values (20 points); and e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location (20 points). History from the current and previous projects and customers of the respondent may be used to evaluate some of the criteria. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to make an award on the basis of suitability to purpose or superior quality, or any other criteria the City believes to be in the best interest of the City. After the City has identified the proposal with the best value for the City, the City shall have the right to negotiate with the respondent over the final terms and conditions of the contract. These negotiations may include bargaining. The primary objective of the negotiations is to maximize the City's ability to obtain best value, based on the requirements and the evaluation factors set forth in the Request for Proposals. lf an agreement cannot be reached, the negotiation will be terminated and similar negotiations will occur with the second ranked respondent. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Mistakes must be corrected and the correction inserted; correction must be initialed in ink by the person signing the Proposal. The City reserves the right to waive any informalities or minor irregularities in connection with the Proposals received. All provisions of the City code are applicable to any Proposal submitted or contract awarded pursuant thereto. Within thirty (30) days after the Proposal opening, a contract may be awarded by the City to the lowest responsive and responsible Respondent, subject to the right of the City to reject all Proposals, as it may deem proper in its absolute discretion. The time for awarding a contract may be extended at the sole discretion of the City if required to evaluate Proposals or for such other purposes as the City may determine, unless the Respondent objects to such extension in writing with his Proposal. The City of Meridian does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, age, physical handicap, ownership by women or minorities or sexual orientation. 4of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 378 of 664 EXAMINATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Respondents shall carefully examine the specifications, and satisfy themselves as to their sufficiency, and shall not at any time after submission of the Proposal, dispute such specifications and the directions explaining or interpreting them. The City of Meridian reserves the right to make an award to thaUthose highest ranked responsive and responsible contractors (s) whose Proposal (s) is/are most responsive to the needs of the City. PURCHASE AGREEMENT DOCUMENTS A copy of the Notice lnviting Proposals, General Conditions and lnstructions to Respondents, Special Conditions, Additional Terms and Conditions, Specifications, Plans and / or Drawings, Proposal's Submittal, and any other related documents will remain on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent. lt is understood that these documents will form the basis of the purchase agreement upon award of the contract. All materials or services supplied by the Contractor shall be in conformance with all the specifications contained herein and shall be in compliance with any applicable Local, State, and Federal Laws and regulations. CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager 33 East Broadway Avenue, Suite 106 Meridian, lD 83642 (208)888-4433 Fax (208) 887-4813 kwatts@meridian citv.orq Any and all explanations desired by a respondent regarding the meaning or interpretation of this Request for Proposals or any part thereof must be requested in writing and directed to the person named as the Purchasing Representative and in accordance with section 1 "EXPLANATIONS TO RESPONDENTS". Violation(s) may be caused for rejection of the proposal. Dated: 3- ts -tq CITY OF MERIDIAN Keith atts,asing Manager 5of20 AWARD Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 379 of 664 PART II INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS 1. EXPLANATIONS TO RESPONDENTS There are twenty (20) total pages in this Request for Proposals. lt is the respondent's responsibility to ensure that all pages are included. lf any pages are missing, immediately request a copy of the missing page (s) by e-mailing your request to Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager at kwatts@meridiancitv.orq , RFP Project # MYR- 1921-11034. Any explanation desired by a respondent regarding the meaning or interpretation of the Request for Proposals, or any part thereof, must be requested in writing (via e-mail) and with sufficient time allowed for a reply to reach respondent before the submission of their proposal. Any interpretation made will be in the form of an addendum to the Request for Proposals, issued by the Purchasing Agent, and will be furnished to all prospective respondents of record. Oral explanations or instructions given before proposal opening will not be binding. 2. CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE WORK Before submitting a proposal, each respondent must (1) examine the Request for Proposals documents thoroughly, (2\ visit the site to familiarize himself/herself with local conditions that may, in any manner, affect cost, progress or performance of the work, (3) familiarize himself/herself with Federal, State and Local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations that may, in any manner, affect cost, progress or performance of the work; and (4) study and carefully correlate respondent's observations with the Request for Proposals. Failure to do so will not relieve respondent from responsibility for estimating properly the difficulty or cost of successfully performing the work. The City will assume no responsibility for any understanding or representations concerning conditions made by any of it's officers or agents prior to the execution of the contract, unless included in the Request for Proposals, or any addendum. 3. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS One (1) original, two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy (USB Drive) of the respondent's proposal will be received by the City until 4:00 p.m., [VlT on the due date stated above at the office of the Purchasing Agent, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Ste. 106, [Vleridian, ldaho 83642. The envelope must be sealed and the outside of the envelope must bear the notation: PROJECT # MYR-1 921 -11034 VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM APRIL 5, 2019 4:00 P.M. The Proposal must contain the following information: a. Completed proposal form submitted on PART lll - PROPOSAL FORM 6of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 380 of 664 b. Completed questionnaire submitted on PART lV - QUESTIONNAIRE c. Written narrative to include each and all of the following 1) Description of respondent's experience with shared vehicle programs, including how long the respondent has been engaged in this business, experiences in other venues, including under other similar contracts awarded to it, and work completed of similar type and magnitude. 2) A description of the proposed program, including which shared vehicles are to be offered for hire or use, and the number of shared vehicles to be deployed (both as planned initially and as projected when program is fully developed), hours of operation, deployment locations, fleet balancing approach, and proposed program start date. 3) Specifications of shared vehicles to be used in the program, including maximum speeds, identification with current franchisee contact information; method by which customers can notify local agent to report safety or maintenance issues; and whether able to: stand upright when parked, inform riders of the location of designated parking areas, be remotely disabled or controlled, condition and safety features to protect the safety of riders, pedestrians, motor vehicles, and property. 4) Plan for addressing public safety and other issues and incidents related to the shared vehicles' operation and/or parking, including response time, approach to shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. 5) Proposed role of City staff in program management, including fielding complaints or suggestions, enforcement of rider rules, and encountering or removing shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. 6) Conditions of operation that will protect the public health, safety, and welfare and mitigate effects of the program on vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or property. 7) Plan and capabilities for sharing vehicle and ridership data with City to inform and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, including anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within [Vleridian (e.9., trip start date, time, and location, duration; distance; trip end date, time, and location). 8) Rider rules, regulations, and terms of use, including whether the following conditions will be recommended or required for riders: minimum age, helmet use, licensed driver. 9) Plan for public outreach and education prior to and during franchise term, including plan to contact l\Ieridian business, school, and residential communities. 10)Plan for outreach and communication with fi/eridian Police Department regarding public safety issues prior to and during franchise term. 7 of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 381 of 664 11)Plan for outreach and communication with transportation authorities and pathway easement property owners regarding program's use of infrastructure prior to and during franchise term. 12)Plan, including currently available technology, to remotely regulate or control shared vehicle speeds and locations, particularly in City parks, pathways, and facilities. 13)Plan for locations and approach to installation of transmitters, if any, to identify parking locations to shared vehicles. 14)Description of successes and lessons learned in other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). 1S)Contact information for up to five (5) references from other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). 4. LATE PROPOSALS AND MODIFICATIONS Proposals and modifications thereof received after the exact time of closing of proposals listed on the cover of this solicitation will not be considered. 5. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS Unless otherwise specified, proposals may be withdrawn by written request received from respondent prior to the time set for closing of proposals. 6. INTENT OF THE CITY The objective of this Request for Proposals is to provide sufficient information to enable qualified respondents to submit written proposals. This Request for Proposals is not a contractual offer or commitment to purchase services. Contents of this Request for Proposals and respondent's proposal will be used for establishment of final contractual obligation. lt is to be understood that this Request for Proposals and the Respondent's proposal may be attached or included by reference in an agreement between the City and successful Respondent. 7. REQUIRED INSURANCE lnsurance requirements are listed in PART V - SAMPLE AGREEMENT 8. TERM The successful respondent shall be required to (a) sign a City contract (b) commence work under the contract within ten (10) calendar days after the date the successful respondent receives the Notice to Proceed, (c) perform the work diligently, and (d) complete the work by the completion date negotiated. 8of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 382 of 664 9. PUBLIC RECORDS The City of t\Ieridian is a public agency. All documents in its possession are public records. Proposals are public records and, except as noted below, will be available for inspection and copying by any person. lf any Respondent claims any material to be exempt from disclosure under the ldaho Public Records Law, the Respondent will expressly agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claim or suit arising from the City's refusal to disclose any such material. No such claim of exemption will be valid or effective without such express agreement. The City will take reasonable efforts to protect any information marked "confidential" by the Respondent, to the extent permitted by the ldaho Public Records Law. Confidential information must be submitted in a separate envelope, sealed and marked "Confidential lnformation" and will be returned to the Respondent upon request after the award of the contract. lt is understood, however, that the City will have no liability for disclosure of such information. Any proprietary or othenvise sensitive information contained in or with any Proposal is subject to potential disclosure. 12: PROPOSED SCHEDULE March 13,2019 RFP issued April 5, 2019 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL: All applications must be received by 4:00 p.m. (MST). By April 18,2019 Selection panel convenes and selects one eligible proposal By April 19, 2019 By May 2,2019 Selected Respondent notified; franchise agreement offered Franch ise negotiations complete; prospective franch isee m ust retu rn signed agreement by 12:00 p.m. (IVST). May 7, 2019 Execution of franchise agreement. 9of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 383 of 664 PART III PROPOSAL FORM ln response to the Request for Proposals, the undersigned respondent hereby proposes to furnish labor, material, travel, professional services, permits, supervision, equipment and all related expenses, and to perform all work necessary and required to complete the following project in strict accordance with the terms of this Request for Proposals and the final contract for: PROJECT # MYR-1 921-11 034 VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Respondent certifies that he/she has examined and is fully familiar with all of the provision of the Request for proposals and any addendum thereto; that he/she is submitting a proposal in strict accordance with the lnstructions to Respondents; and that he/she has carefully reviewed the accuracy of all materials submitted in response to this proposal. Respondent certifies that he/she has examined the proposal documents thoroughly, studied and carefully correlated respondent's observations with the proposal documents, and all other matters which can in any way affect the work or the cost thereof. Respondent agrees that this proposal constitutes a firm offer to the City which cannot be withdrawn by the respondent for sixty (60) calendar days from the date of actual opening of proposals. lf awarded the contract, respondent agrees to execute and deliver to the City within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of City's Conditional Notice of Award, the applicable Contract form, franchise fee, and insurance certificates. RESPONDENT'S BUS]NESS NAME: By: (signature in ink) Date: Agent: Title: 10 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 384 of 664 RESPON DENT'S LOCAL ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-[/AI L (PH) (E-t\4AlL) RES PON DENT'S CORPORATE AD DRESS/PH ON E/ E-IVIAI L (PH) (E-ruArL) NAIUE/ADDRESS OF REGISTERED AGENT IN IDAHO DECLARATION: The undersigned declares: that he/she holds the position indicating below as a corporate officer or the owner or a partner in the business entity submitting this Proposal; that the undersigned is informed of all relevant facts surrounding the preparation and submission of this Proposal, that the undersigned knows and represents and warrants to the City of tVleridian that this Proposal is prepared and submitted without collusion with any other person, business entity, or corporation with any interest in this Proposal. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct BY TITLE ADDRESS DATE 11 of 20 RESPONDENT: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 385 of 664 PART IV ELIGI BI LITY QU ESTIONNAI RE Respondent must answer "yes" or "no" to each of the following questions. Circle the correct answer. A. Does Respondent operate vehicle sharing programs in at least twenty (20) cities, and/or has Respondent provided 1,000,000 rides to date (in aggregate)? YES NO B. Will Respondent deploy shared vehicles which meet each and all of the following physical specifications? 1. Labeled with current contact information for the franchisee. 2. Able to stand upright when parked. 3. ln good repair so as not to interfere with or degrade public facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or to present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the safety of riders or the public. YES NO C. Will Respondent connect an app to all shared vehicles deployed which meets al! of the following specifications? 1. Explains the method by which riders can notify the local agent of the franchisee to report safety or maintenance issues. 2. lnforms riders of the location of designated parking areas. 3. Capable of being remotely disabled. 4. Capable of being located and controlled remotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. YES NO 12 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 386 of 664 PART V SAMPLE AGREEMENT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND FRANCHISEE FOR OPERATION OF SHARED VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ON CITY PROPERTY This MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND FRANCHISEE FOR OPERATION OF SHARED VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ON CITY PROPERTY ("Agreement") is made entered into this _ day of 20r9 ("Effective Date"), by and between Franchisee, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of State, ("Franchisee"), and the City of Meridian, Idaho, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the state of Idaho ("City"). 1. Statement of Purpose The City of Meridian has established, by ordinance, a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchise for the operation of Vehicle Sharing Programs on Franchised Premises. This Franchise is granted pursuant to the procedures and subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth in City's request for proposals for Project no. MYR- 1921 - I 1034, and Franchisee's response thereto, attached hereto as Exhibit A ("Proposal"). In consideration fbr City's grant of this franchise, City shall not operate a Vehicle Sharing Program in Meridian. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish terms and conditions governing Franchisee's use of Franchised Premises for its Vehicle Sharing Program. 2. Definitions The definitions codified at Meridian City Code section 8-3-1 shall apply to the terms used in this Agreement, as shall the following definitions: A. BEACON: A Bluetooth transmitter, placed by Franchisee, which broadcasts parking locations to nearby Shared Vehicles. B. ELECTRIC POWER-ASSISTED BICYCLE or E-BIKE: A vehicle that has two (2) or three (3) tandem wheels, has no floorboard, and is propelled either by human power or with the assistance of an electric motor. E-bikes are consumer products, as defined by l5 U.S.C. section 2085, rather than motor vehicles as defined by Idaho Code section 49- 123(lxh). C. ELECTRIC POWER-ASSISTED SCOOTER or E-SCOOTER: A vehicle that has two (2) or three (3) tandem wheels, has a f'loorboard designed to be stood upon when riding, and is propelled either by human power or with the assistance of an electric motor. E-scooters are consumer products, as defined by 15 U.S.C. section 2085, rather than motor vehicles as defined by Idaho Code section a9-123(l)(h). D. GEOFENCE: A virtual boundary around a geographical area monitored by a global positioning system or radio frequency identitlcation technology, which triggers a response from a shared vehicle when it enters or learres the geofenced area. Such response may 13 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 387 of 664 include, but shall not be limited to, decreased maximum speed or inoperability E. FRANCHISEE or VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM FRANCHISEE: A person who owns, manages, operates, or acts on behalf of a Vehicle Sharing Program. F. PROGRAM or VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM: The offer for hire or use, by self-service, of one or more shared vehicles. G. RESTRICTED AREA: Any location where shared vehicles may not be parked. H. RIDER: A person riding or using a shared vehicle I. SHARED VEHICLE: An e-bike, e-scooter, bicycle, or other vehicle offbred by a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee for hire or use by self-service 3. Franchise granted. City, for and in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement and agreed to be kept and performed by Franchisee, does hereby provide to Franchisee a license to allow riders to use vehicles as part of Franchisee's Vehicle Sharing Program on Franchised Premises, to be defined as: a. Paved, ground-level surfaces on property owned by the City of Meridian, excluding the Water Department and the Wastewater Reuse Facility; b. Pathways enumerated in the City of Meridian Pathways Master Plan, to the extent City is duly authorized to convey such license under the various instruments establishing such pathways; and c. The downtown streetscape within the City Core, as such terms are defined in Title 8, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, to the extent City is authorized by the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") under the Master License Agreement.fbr Regulalion and Maintenance o.f Sidewalk Facilities in the Meridian City Core entered into by City and ACHD on August 7, 2012. Franchisee shall not use Franchised Premises for any other purpose without the express written consent of City. 4. Term This Agreement shall be effective on the Effective Date first written above, and shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on DATE, unless earlier terminated by the method set forth herein. 5. City Commitments a. City Contact. City shall provide to Franchisee the name, e-mail address, and telephone number of specific City personnel ("City Contact") who shall serve as the liaison between City and Franchisee fbr administrative matters (e.g., if n shared vehicle needs to be moved or removed from Franchised Premises, etc.). Communication between Franchisee and City regarding administrative matters shall occur via e-mail or telephone between City Contact and Franchisee Contact. 14 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 388 of 664 b. Right of entry. City and City's contractors, employees, agents, and invitees, shall be authorized to, at all times, to inspect City's property and personal property located thereon, for the purposes of inspection for compliance with the terms of this Agreement. c. No support. City shall not provide support, monitoring, or administration services related to Franchisee's use and occupancy of Franchised Premises and/or Franchisee's personal property thereon. 6. FranchiseeCommitments a. Type and number of shared vehicles. (1) Initial deployment. By date, Franchisee shall deploy in Meridian no fewer than one hundred (100) e-scooters, and no more than number e-scooters to be used as shared vehicles. All shared vehicles shall meet the specifications of those described in Franchisee' s Proposal. (2) Increase. Every number days, Franchisee may request authorization from City to increase the number of shared vehicles offered under its Vehicle Sharing Program, by increment, up to a maximum of number shared vehicles. Franchisee Contact shall make its request for authority to increase the number of shared vehicles offered under its Vehicle Sharing Program in writing to City Contact, which request shall include a description of which and how many additional shared vehicles are to be offered for hire or use, the plan for addressing public safety issues related to the additional shared vehicles' operation and/or parking, and Franchisee's certification that all shared vehicles previously offered by Franchisee in Meridian were used, on average, at least three times per day in the previous month, with data verifying same. Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a complete application, the City Contact shall either authorize or deny the requested increase. The City Contact shall deny a request from Franchisee for an increase in the maximum number of shared vehicles offered under a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee Franchise where: (a) Data does not reflect that all shared vehicles offered by Franchisee under the previous version of the Vehicle Sharing Program franchise were used, on average, at least three times per day in the previous thirty (30) days. (b) The Franchisee has violated a term or condition of this Agreement or of law, or (c) The operation of the Program and/or any component thereof has varied materially from the description submitted with the Proposal. b. Franchise fee. Following execution of the tianchise agreement, the successful Respondent shall remit to the City Clerk a nonrefundable fianchise fee in the amount of $Amount. $Amount shall be due within three (3) business days of execution of this Agreement, and $Amount shall be due on or befbre July 1,2019. c. Franchisee Contact. Franchisee shall provide to City the name, e-mail address, and telephone number of specific Franchisee personnel ("Franchisee Contact") who shall serve as the liaison between City and Franchisee for administrative matters (e. g., rf an shared vehicle needs to be moved or removed fiom Franchised Premises, etc.). Communication between Franchisee and City regarding administrative matters shall occur via e-mail or telephone between City Contact and Franchisee Contact. 15 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 389 of 664 d. Beacons. [If Franchisee installs Beaconsl Franchisee shall provide to City an electronic interface that allows City to view and suggest locations of Beacons. Franchisee shall not install a Beacon without the permission of the owner of the real and/or personal property on which the Beacon is installed. e. Timely response; removal by City. Franchisee shall respond to any request to move, remove, or redistribute shared vehicles; reports of incomectly parked shared vehicles; or reports of unsafe/inoperable shared vehicles by relocating, re-parking, or removing the shared vehicle(s) at issue within two (2) hours of receiving notice. Franchisee shall comply within twenty-four (24) hours with City's order to remove all shared vehicles due to denial or revocation of an application for a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee Franchise, expiration of the franchise term, or tailure to timely remit all or any portion of the franchise fee or any portion thereof. In the event a shared vehicle is not relocated, re- parked, or removed within the tirnefiame specified herein; if any shared vehicle is parked in one location for more than seventy-two (72) hours without moving; or in exigent circumstances, such shared vehicle may be removed by City and taken to a City facility for storage at the expense of the Franchisee. City rnay charge Franchisee $250 per shared vehicle removed and stored by City. f. Good repair. Franchisee shall be solely responsible for monitoring shared vehicles to ensure that they are in good repair and that their use does not interfere with or degrade City's facilities, operations, systems, or equiprnent or present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the public health and safety. g. Quarterly data reports. To infbrm and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, Franchisee shall provide to the City, in the form and manner requested by City Contact, a quarterly report of anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within Meridian, to include, but not be limited to, the following data: trip start date, time, and location; duration; distance; and trip end date, time, and location. h. Hours of operation. Franchisee shall rerrove all shared vehicles from use, whether physically or by geofencing, between 1 l:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Franchisee understands and acknowledges that parks are closed every day between dusk (30 minutes after sunset) and dawn (30 minutes before sunrise), and may be closed by order of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Director. l.Shared vehicle specifications. Franchisees shall ensure that each shared vehicle used under a Vehicle Sharing Program is: 4. Labeled with current contact information for the franchisee and explains the method by which customers can notity the local agent of the franchisee to report safety or maintenance issues. 5. Able to stand upright when parked. 6. Capable of informing riders of the location of designated parking areas. 7. Capable of being remotely disabled. 8. Capable of being located and controlled rernotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. 9. In good repair so as not to interf-ere with or degrade public facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or to present an imminent or fbreseeable threat to the safety of riders or the public. 16 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 390 of 664 j. Rider information. Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisees shall inform riders of all regulations regarding the proper use and parking ofshared vehicles. Franchisee shall provide a mechanism by which riders may provide feedback to Franchisee, including feedback regarding parking areas or damaged shared vehicles. k. Parking shared vehicles on Franchised Premises. Franchisee acknowledges, understands, and agrees to comply with the provisions of Meridian City Code regarding parking of shared vehicles, including. without limitation, the requirement that shared vehicles be parked in a manner that leaves clear at least five feet (5') of the useable area of pathways and sidewalks. Franchisee shall park shared vehicles only in designated parking areas. In City parks, the designated parking area for shared vehicles shall be next to bicycle racks, unless otherwise indicated by a Beacon. l. Shared vehicles in City parks. Use of shared vehicles in City parks shall be subject to the following. (l) Franchisee shall establish geofences to prohibit shared vehicle use in or on the following areas: a. Playgrounds in regional parks; b. Special use parks; c. Tennis courts; and d. Storey Bark Park. (2) Franchisees shall use verifiable technology to ensure that in parks, riders shall not use a shared vehicle in excess of eight miles per hour. (3) Franchisee shall instruct and require riders to park shared vehicles upright, next to a public bicycle rack or at a parking location identified by a Beacon. (4) Franchisees deploying shared vehicles in parks shall park such shared vehicles upright, at a public bicycle rack or at a parking location identified by a Beacon. m. Public park. The parties hereto expressly acknowledge that the Franchised Premises are public spaces, the management and scl-reduling of which shall at all times be within the sole purview of City. City shall have the right to allow the use of Franchised Premises, and close all or any portion of Franchised Premises, for any and all purposes and under any and all conditions. At all times, Franchisee shall be on an equal footing with the general public regarding its use of Franchised Premises. Franchisee shall exercise any license granted by this Agreement only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and in accordance with any and all applicable laws and City policies. n. Public places. Franchisee acknowledges that the management and scheduling of parks, pathways, streets, and sidewalks shall at all times be within the sole purview of City and/or, where applicable, the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") or Idaho Transportation Department ("ITD"). City shall have the right to condition or the use of, andlor close all or any porlion of its property, fbr any and all purposes and under any and all conditions. At all times, Franchisee sliall be on an equal fboting with the general public regarding its use of public propefiy. Franchisee shall exercise any right granted by its franchise only in accordance with the terms of this Chapter: with any and all applicable laws; and with City, ACHD, and ITD policies. 17 of20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 391 of 664 o. Outreach. Prior to parking or using shared vehicles on the Franchised Premises, Franchisee will prepare for City's review and input a marketing and targeted community outreach plan to: a) Describe and promote the Vehicle Sharing Program; b) Educate the public regarding use of shared vehicles, including in parks and on pathways; and c) Inform the public about advisory safety measures and applicable regulations. 7. General provisions a. Limitations. A franchise issued pursuant to this Agreement is only valid for program operation within the public right-of-way within the city of Meridian. Franchisee must obtain permission to use or allow shared vehicles on property other than the public right- of-way, including property owned by private parties and public entities. Private property owners and government entities may restrict or prohibit the use of shared vehicles and/or the conduct of a Vehicle Sharing Program on their properly. b. Risks acknowledged; as-is condition. Franchisee acknowledges that its use of Franchised Premises carries risks, some of which are unknown, and accepts any and all such risks. Franchisee acknowledges that Franchisee has inspected the licensed areas and does hereby accept same as being in good and satisfactory order, condition, and repair. It is understood and agreed that City makes no warranty or promise as to the condition, safety, usefulness or habitability of Franchised Premises, and Franchisee accepts same on an "as is" basis, both as of the Effective Date of this Agreement and throughout the term of this Agreement and all related activities. c. Restoration or repair. Franchisee shall be responsible for all costs of restoration or repair of the Licensed Areas necessitated by darnage caused by Franchisee's use under this Agreement. d. No agency. It is understood and agreed that Franchisee is not, and shall not be considered, an agent of City in any manner or for any purpose whatsoever in Franchisee's use and occupancy of the Licensed Areas. Indemnification. Franchisee specifically indernnifies City and holds City harmless from any loss, liability, claim, judgment, or action tbr damages or injury to Franchisee, to Franchisee's personal property or equipment, and to Franchisee's employees, agents, guests or invitees arising out of or resulting trom the condition of Franchised Premises or any lack of maintenance or repair thereon and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of City or its employees. Franchisee further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any loss, liability, claim or action liom damages or injuries to persons or property in any way arising out of or resr.rlting tiom the use and occupancy of Franchised Premises by Franchisee or by Franchisee's agents, employees, guests or business invitees and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of City or its employees. If any claim, suit or action is filed against City fbr any loss or claim described in this paragraph, Franchisee, at City's option, shall defend City and assume all costs, including attorney's fees, associated with the defense or resolution thereof, or indemnify City for all such costs and fees incurred by city in the def'ense or resolution thereof. e 18 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 392 of 664 f. Insurance. Within two (2) working days of the Efl-ective Date of this Agreement, Franchisee shall submit to City proof of an insurance policy, issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in Idalio, protecting Franchisee and all of Franchisee's employees and/or agents from all clairns fbr damages to property and bodily injury, including death, which may arise from operations under or in connection with the Vehicle Sharing Program. Such insurance shall name the City as additional insured, and shall provide that the policy shall not terminate or be canceled prior to the expiration date without thirty (30) days' advance written notice to the City. Such insurance shall afford minimum limits of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per person bodily injury, five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per occurrence bodily injury, and five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per occurrence property damage. g. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience or for cause. Termination shall be effective five (5) calendar days following mailing of written notice. Franchisee agrees that upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, Franchisee shall remove all of its personal property from Franchised Premises and surrender same to City in the same good condition as received, reasonable wear and tear, act of God, act of nature, or damage by weather excepted. Franchisee agrees to surrender possession and occupancy of the Licensed Areas peaceably at the termination of this Agreement and any renewal or extension thereof. Franchisee shall be responsible for all costs of restoration or repair of the Licensed Areas necessitated by darnage caused by Franchisee's use under this Agreement. h. Notices. Communication between the Franchisee Contact and the City Contact regarding day-to-day matters shall occur via e-rnail or telephone. All other notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when personally served, or mailed by U.S. mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as follows: FRANCHISEE: Meridian: Company Name City of'Meridian Attn: Name, Title Attn: City Contact Address 33 E. Broadway Avenue Address Meridian ID 83642 i. No waiver. City's waiver on one or more occasion of any breach or default of any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach or default of the same or a diff-erent term, covenant or condition, nor shall such waiver operate to prejudice, waive, or affect any right or remedy City may have under this Agreement with respect to such subsequent default or breach by Franchisee. j No assignment. Franchisee shall not assign, sublet, or transf-er its rights under this Agreement, or any portion thereof, without the express written consent of City. k. Independent contractor. In all matters perlaining to this Agreement, Franchisee shall be acting as an independent contractor. and neitl-rer Franchisee nor any officer, employee, contractor, or agent of Franchisee shall be deemed an employee of City. Franchisee shall have no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in City. The 19 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 393 of 664 selection and designation of the personnel of City in the performance of this agreement shall be made by City. l. Compliance with laws. In performing the scope of services required hereunder, City and Franchisee shall comply with all applicable laws. ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. m. Attorney Fees. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailir-rg party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. n. Entire agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements. leases, or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. o. Applicable law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho. p. Approval required. This Agreemer-rt shall not become effective or binding until approved by both Organizer and by Meridian City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers to be effective as of the day and year first above written. Franchisee: COMPANY NAME: Name Title CITY OF MERIDIAN:Attest: BY: Tammy de Weerd, Mayor C..lay Coles, City Clerk 20 of 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 394 of 664 Vehicle Sharing Program Proposal for Project MYR-1921-11034 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO Neutron Holdings, Inc. DBA Lime ; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 395 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Experience 6 2. Description of Proposed Program 10 3. Vehicle Specifications 14 4. Safety Related to Parking & Operations 23 5. Partnership with the City 30 6. Safety Related to Traffic, Pedestrians & Property 32 7. Data Sharing 39 8. Rider Rules 43 9. Public Outreach & Education 44 10. Police Engagement 47 11. Pathway Easements & Engagement 48 12. Special Speed Zones 49 13. Parking Location Identification 50 14. Success & Lessons Learned 51 15. References 52 2 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 396 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Neutron Holdings, Inc. dba Lime 85 2nd St., First Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 April 5, 2019 ATTN: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager City of Meridian 33 East Broadway Avenue, Suite 106 Meridian, ID 83642 Lime is pleased to submit an application to operate shared electric scooter services as a means of alternative transportation to residents and visitors of Meridian. We look forward to developing a collaborative partnership with the City and build on a foundation of safety, sustainability, proactive problem-solving, and responsiveness. Our experience, scale, and operational expertise will ensure a successful pilot program, helping the City of Meridian diversify its mobility options, continue to adapt to rapid growth, and connect people to transit. Serving Boise since late 2018, we view this as the next step in building a long-term, sustainable partnership within the Treasure Valley. The enclosed application details our strategy to deploy a shared electric scooter fleet in Meridian. Lime intends to work with the City staff, Meridian Police Department, local businesses stakeholders and the community to tailor the deployment plan prior to the proposed Spring 2019 launch. Project Understanding, Goals, and Objectives Lime has been the company most present in the community and engaged with City staff well before the issuance of this RFP. We have met with leadership of large employers like Scentsy, and Blue Cross, and major landmarks like The Village. We have engaged, and gained the support of the Meridian Downtown Business Association—a critical stakeholder and beneficiary of shared electric scooters. We believe our engagement with City staff and the Meridian Police Department has been constructive and beneficial to the evolution of Meridian’s mobility system. This focus on partnership with local government, businesses, and community members ensures we deliver the most thoughtful, responsive, and well-integrated program to the residents and visitors of Meridian. 3 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 397 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM At Lime, our mission is to provide on-demand first- and last-mile transportation solutions that help people seamlessly move throughout the community to meet their daily needs. We understand the City’s interest to provide a diverse array of sustainable mobility options that will help people experience Meridian without the need for a car. We also recognize the importance of a well-planned, smooth, and collaborative launch, leaving community members overwhelmingly satisfied and appreciative of the new transportation tools made available to them. While Lime seeks to connect people to reliable, safe, and active mobility, our mission in Meridian is much broader. Our plan for Meridian positions the city to better handle growth in visitors and residents alike, encourages patronage of local businesses, and helps major employers like Scentsy get their employees around in this fast-growing city. The Lime-S will serve as a tool to advance sustainable mobility, connecting the people of Meridian to an ever more prosperous community. With our hardware, software, and community affairs expertise, Lime is uniquely suited to deliver these objectives. Whether connecting to new residential developments, helping visitors explore downtown, or delivering more patrons to The Village, we envision incorporating Lime-S－our electric scooter product－into the daily travel routines of people throughout Meridian and beyond. A Proven Track Record Lime is the most qualified company to serve Meridian based both on breadth of experience and local knowledge. As the world’s largest dockless scooter sharing company, we have developed the most sophisticated scooter sharing operation on the market. We take great pride in our relentless focus on the safety and quality of our scooters as well as our commitment to industry-leading operations. Meanwhile, our continued engagement in the community with business leaders and community organizations will help us be the most aware, engaged, and responsive company serving in the City. At no cost to Meridian, we are ready and able to offer a convenient and easy-to-use mobility system that is an efficient, healthy, and affordable way to get around town. This includes providing discounted, unbanked, and non-smartphone access to low-income individuals through our Lime Access program. This proposal outlines the suggested parameters of this scooter pilot program. Thank you for the opportunity to let us serve Meridian, in partnership with the community. We look forward to answering any questions, and eagerly await the 4 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 398 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM opportunity to provide transportation solutions that will benefit residents and visitors alike. Warmly, Jessie Lucci Regional General Manager People authorized to represent Lime: Jessie Lucci Regional General Manager P: 847.868.4463 jessie.lucci@li.me Jonathan Hopkins (Primary Contact) Director, Strategic Development p. 360.957.5468 jonathan.hopkins@li.me 5 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 399 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 1. Experience 1.A. History Meridian, like cities worldwide, faces significant challenges related to rapid growth. In Meridian this includes strains in the transportation system, challenges with downtown parking, very limited access to public transit and obstacles to serving residents and visitors throughout the city and at all income levels. After two years of service in the United States, we will employ our deep experience to address these challenges locally, as well as across the region. In addition, we have invested in staff and community partnerships in Meridian and across Idaho, contributing to civic life and the local economy. Lime, a U.S.-based company, founded in January 2017 and headquartered in San Francisco, California, provides a network of 100% carbon-free, shared scooters to help address the transportation challenges cities face, without the need for public subsidies or charitable support. ●Our service is available in more than 100 cities in 20 countries on 5 continents. We have over 10 million users who have taken over 34 million rides. 6 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 400 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ●Lime was originally founded as a bikeshare company, and our dockless fleet initially included standard bikes (Lime-B), electric bikes (Lime-E). Due to demonstrated strong customer preference for scooters, our scooter fleets are growing around the world. We also launched a car-sharing pilot program in Seattle in 2018. ●Lime is a member of several national associations, including; People For Bikes, the Association for Commuter Transportation, Transportation for America, Road to Zero, the Consumer Technology Association, and collaborate with efforts at NACTO. ●Lime has served Boise and Boise State University since October 2018 in a successful launch, leading Boise City Council to explore tripling the number of scooters allowed in the city. Our Impact The transformative power of Lime scooters in a community has resulted in very positive impacts. Forty percent of Lime users completed a work or school commute on their most recent trip, and 64% nationwide used scooters to connect to public transit in the past month. Through our Lime Access program, we serve riders at all income levels. Lime Access provides half-price rides for low-income eligible riders, cash payment, and smartphone-free access. 7 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 401 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Our Community Investment Lime works hard to serve the community through affordable mobility, community engagement, and economic investment. Below are several examples of previous and ongoing efforts: ●Engaged regularly with residents in every market by sponsoring free community events and making presentations to transportation, safety, and climate stakeholders and other community groups. ●Launched and running “Respect The Ride,” Lime’s road safety and education campaign, which includes providing over a quarter of a million free helmets and investing over $3 million in rider safety efforts. In just the first week, 15,000 riders signed the pledge every day. ●Through Lime Hero, we enable thousands of dollars in donations from our riders to local non-profits around the country to multiply our impact in the community. 1.B. Experience in Other Venues By working collaboratively with municipal partners, Lime has quickly become the national leader in dockless mobility. It is through our close partnership with cities, careful focus on operations, and commitment to high quality scooters that we have had such success around the country and are now operating in more than 100 locations. In some cases, our pilot programs have already been extended by unanimous vote of city councils (e.g., Greensboro, NC). In many of our programs, Lime was chosen as a sole operator of a program. The references below capture our experience operating shared electric scooter programs in cities of similar size and scope to Meridian. 8 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 402 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM PROGRAM TITLE AND DESCRIPTION CONTACT INFORMATION Tulsa, Oklahoma Scooter Share Permit Lime worked hand-in-hand with Tulsa City staff to develop and advance a dock-free mobility permit structure. Lime began service to Tulsa in October and operates a fleet of 400 scooters. Nick Doctor Chief of Community Development & Policy City of Tulsa, Office of the Mayor 175 East 2nd Street, Suite 1500 Tulsa, OK 74103 918-633-5303 ndoctor@cityoftulsa.org Lubbock, TX Scooter Share Permit Lime was awarded a contract to be the exclusive scooter share provider at the Texas Tech University. We also worked closely with the City of Lubbock to develop and implement a dock-free mobility permit. Lime currently operates more than 1,000 scooters in Lubbock and Texas Tech. Craig Cotton Transportation Demand Manager Texas Tech University Box 43161 Lubbock, Texas 79409 806.834.5040 craig.cotton@ttu.edu W. Jarrett Atkinson City Manager City of Lubbock 806-775-2016 (v) City of Tacoma, WA Scooter Share Permit In 2018, Lime worked with the City of Tacoma to develop a 60-day pilot to launch 250 vehicles. Lime now operates 500 scooters at no cost to the City. The 60-day pilot has been extended to one year as the city develops permanent regulations. We pay the City a fee of $14.22 per scooter per year to assist with program management and enforcement. Lime Hero, Lime’s donation module, sponsors Downtown on the Go, Downtown Tacoma’s Transportation Management Association. After the recent departure of Bird from the market, Lime is now the only provider in Tacoma. Kurtis Kingsolver Public Works Department City of Tacoma 747 Market Street Tacoma, WA 98402 253.591.5380 kkingsol@ci.tacoma.wa.us Boise, ID Scooter Share Permit Lime launched 250 scooters in Boise in October 2018 under a city permit. Since the launch, university students, visitors and downtown workers have used the scooters extensively. As a result, city council has directed staff to propose a program to double the number of scooters per company in the city in 2019. Craig Croner Administrative Services Manager City of Boise 150 North Capitol Boulevard Boise, Idaho 83702 208.972.8150 ccroner@cityofboise.org 9 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 403 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 2. Description of Proposed Program 2.A. Types of Vehicles Lime proposes a scooter-only program for Meridian, based upon strong consumer preference for these devices. We believe this will enable a long-term sustainable program. Vehicle specifications can be found in Section 3. 2.B. Deployment Plan A successful deployment starts before the first scooter hits the street. Lime’s local operations manager begins ongoing engagement with major local stakeholders at this time. As we gear up for launch, we will proactively inform and offer briefing opportunities to the Meridian Chamber of Commerce, Meridian Downtown Business Association, merchants, leadership at The Village and other community groups. We will also offer collaborative engagement and social media education opportunities in partnership with the Meridian Police Department and other respected leaders and institutions that help shape community norms. Lime plans to introduce 100 scooters on the launch day. Lime will continue to increase the number of scooters based upon demonstrated escalation in ridership and scooter utilization rates. Typically, if scooters are achieving more than three rides per day, we will increase the fleet to accommodate the growing demand. As scooters are added, the fleet is able to effectively serve an increasing proportion of the city. Additionally, our algorithms are able to detect higher demand locations and trip patterns in order to achieve increasingly effective deployment locations. This gradual approach to deployment allows our team to work with adjacent businesses and neighborhoods, respond to and accommodate concerns, and achieve a very effective and welcome rollout as mobility options grow to new areas of the city. Our initial assessment is that the Meridian market will support between 250 to 400 scooters in the first year, which would achieve distribution across the entire city and beyond simply serving the major business districts. Due to subtle variations in the urban form, trip needs and user preferences, the exact number of vehicles needed is difficult to perfectly predict without testing. Therefore, we believe the best measure of appropriate fleet size is based upon number of trips per vehicle per day (TVD). If properly-deployed scooters are achieving more than 3 TVD, that would indicate the 10 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 404 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM need to expand the fleet due to demand. A very low TVD is an indicator that the fleet may need to be reduced (this often occurs during bad weather or when the temperature is consistently below 40°F). As the most experienced operator of shared dockless mobility services in the U.S., Lime fully appreciates the necessity of having a fully-developed operations team and plan in place. That is why everywhere we operate we maintain a fully outfitted warehouse within the metro area, and we hire full-time local operations staff to help with maintaining, deploying and rebalancing Lime vehicles. Aaron Kindall, who leads our Boise team and has maintained relationships with the Meridian community, brings operational expertise and deep community knowledge to this RFP. He will maintain ongoing dialogue with the City to achieve a seamless launch. 2.C. Hours of Operation Lime operations staff are typically on duty 24 hours. Our “juicing” (charging) operations typically result in scooters having highest availability from 7am to 9pm. Juicers collect scooters for recharging after 7pm and deploy them before 7am each morning. During the overnight hours, a lower volume of charged scooters will remain available in the highest-demand areas. Our operations staff augments juicer activity to ensure proper supply and equitable distribution of scooters. 2.D. Deployment Locations Our draft initial deployment plan is illustrated in the map above left. Prior to launch, we will continue to refine this plan through engagement with City staff, community groups and the business community. Vehicles will be typically deployed each morning in organized groupings of approximately four vehicles, parked similar to the photos above right, presenting a clean and orderly feel. 11 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 405 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM This deployment plan is our draft approach for launch. Business preferences will shape some deployment locations. Some businesses may ask for deployments (Lime Hubs) adjacent to their businesses, while we will respect other businesses’ preferences for non-adjacent locations. Additionally, ridership data will cause the morning deployment patterns to evolve so that users have the most convenient access to these new mobility options. 2.E. Fleet Balancing Approach Our operations team actively manages our scooter fleet, rebalances scooters, and responds to any support calls as part of our standard operations. Fleet balancing is achieved in the following ways: ●The Daily Patrol Team: Daily patrol teams typically begin the day by deploying scooters to Lime hotspots. Throughout the day, additional teams will conduct full sweeps of the service area. They will re-park any misplaced scooters, fix any scooters that need repair, or bring damaged scooters back to the warehouse for repair. The teams will also wipe down scooters as they go. ●Local Brand Ambassadors: In addition to leveraging the Lime Marketing Team, we hire part-time Brand Ambassadors to help educate, promote and integrate into the local community. ●Lime Juicers: Our operational efforts will be supported by our team of “Lime Juicers.” Juicers are members of the community who pick up scooters when they reach low levels of battery, recharge the scooters and then redeploy them later that day or the following morning. Being a Lime Juicer allows local residents to earn additional cash in their extra time, putting money back into the local community. Since our launch in Boise in October 2018, nearly 200 community members have served as juicers and earned a total of $44,000 (most of which goes to our 89 most active juicers). The majority of Boise’s active juicers earn an average of approximately $150/month from participating - providing additional spending money to some and helping others make ends meet. We expect residents of Meridian to participate and achieve similar benefits. Due to our approach to fleet management, locations of most scooters are reset throughout the city each morning based upon evolving demand patterns and community input. The deployment locations are determined through algorithms that respond to high ridership areas, combined with local knowledge of locations where 12 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 406 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM the scooters will most seamlessly integrate into the urban fabric. This daily deployment approach of most scooters helps lower the number of citizen complaints. 2.F. Proposed Start Date Lime is prepared to launch scooters as early as 3-5 days after the franchise agreement is finalized. Should franchise agreement negotiations be complete by May 2, 2019, then Lime will be prepared to launch with a minimum of 100 scooters on May 7, 2019. Preparation for launch will include ongoing outreach to staff, businesses and collaboration with the Meridian Police Department. 13 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 407 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 3. Vehicle Specifications 3.A. Lime-S Gen 2.5 and Gen 3 Our dockless mobility fleet is a first- and last-mile solution that will help enable more transit use and reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. Our GPS-enabled technology allows riders to locate and unlock our entire shared electric scooter fleet using our mobile app and then simply lock the e-scooter in any commonly accepted parking spot. Lime may initially offer up to two versions of its Lime-S scooter product for Meridian’s customers—Lime-S Gen 2.5 and Gen 3. Lime’s recently-announced Lime-S Gen 3 scooter features bigger wheels, improved suspension, aluminum framing, dual-wheel braking, a 2.8” digital display, and a host of other features that make it the safest, most sustainable shared scooter available on the market. This model is currently being piloted in several markets and will be available in 2019. An image of Lime-S Gen 3’s specifications and features is displayed below, along with more information about both scooter models.. 14 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 408 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Safety Features & State/Federal Standards Lime’s design and specs are in continual iteration based on user feedback and testing to create the best riding experience. Lime-S is UN 38.3 and FCC compliant. All of our certificates for Lime-S 2.5 and 3.0 can be found in this Google Drive folder. Vandalism/Theft Resistance Lime’s scooter hardware and operations provide various features to address potential vandalism and prevent theft. Our approach to preventing and minimizing the impact of vandalism is multifaceted. Scooters are “touched” on a daily basis, undergoing a 4-point inspection, including removal of vandalism. In addition, Lime’s local operation teams are notified of scooter cleaning and vandalism repair needs through the following mechanisms: ●In-app functionality allows customers to indicate when a scooter has been vandalized and a report is sent to Lime’s operation team; ●A rider calls or emails our customer service center informing us that a scooter is vandalized and in need of repair or cleaning; or ●As our team retrieves scooters each night, the team identifies maintenance issues that require attention. When somebody tries to move a scooter while it is locked, the scooter will start beeping and will apply a braking force to the rear wheel. In the unlikely event that a scooter is stolen, GPS hardware located on the scooter can help operations staff or law enforcement authorities retrieve the mobility device. Weight, Materials & Design Features The table below lists the specifications of the Lime-S Gen 2.5 and Lime-S Gen 3.0, the two versions of our scooter that we currently deploy. 15 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 409 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime-S Vehicle Specification Table Lime-S 2.5 Lime-S GEN 3 SIDE VIEW PHOTO OF DEVICE DRIVETRAIN Motor directly embedded within front wheel. Motor directly embedded within rear wheel. LENGTH 1020 mm 1165 mm MOTOR 300 Watts 300 Watts HEIGHT 1310 mm 1205 mm PEDALS N/A N/A BACK LIGHT Turns on when scooter is unlocked. Gets brighter when brakes are applied. Turns on when scooter is unlocked. Gets brighter when brakes are applied. BRAKES ● Electrical regenerative brake on rear wheel. ● Mechanical drum brake on front wheel. ● Step brake on rear wheel. ● Electrical regenerative brake on rear wheel. ● Mechanical drum brake on front wheel. FRONT LIGHT Always on at full strength when scooter is in a trip. Always on at full strength when scooter is in a trip. WHEELS / TIRES 8 inch solid (not inflated) tires 10 inch solid (not inflated) tires ADJUSTABLE SEATPOST N/A N/A 16 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 410 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime-S Vehicle Specification Table Lime-S 2.5 Lime-S GEN 3 BELL Mounted on the handlebar next to the brake, the user operates the bell by pulling down and releasing a button. Mounted on the handlebar next to the brake, the user operates the bell by pulling down and releasing a button. BELLS, WARNING MECHANISM Scooter beeps and turns on electrical brake if moved while locked. Scooter beeps and turns on electrical brake if moved while locked. POWER 9.6 Ah @ 42 V Battery 15.9 Ah @ 42 V Battery FRAME Aluminum Aluminum BASKET N/A N/A REAR HUB N/A N/A FENDERS Fixed fenders for both front and rear wheel. Fixed fender on front wheel. Step brake fender on rear wheel. 17 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 411 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description Image TRADE DRESS AND DECAL PLACEMENT Lime’s trade dress is features prominently in multiple locations on the scooter, including the front of the stem. CONTACT INFORMATION Motor directly embedded within front wheel. Motor directly embedded within rear wheel. RIDER EDUCATION INFORMATION ● Park properly (ie.by the curbside) ● DO NOT ride on sidewalk or block traffic ● 18+years old to ride for safety ● Helmet is required ● Email us at support@li.me ● Call/Text 1-888-LIME-345 18 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 412 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description Image DEVICE ID Lime’s device IDs are located in two places: on the side of the scooter stem, and on top of the scooter stem below the QR code. 19 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 413 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description Image DEVICE LOCKING MECHANISM & ANTI-THEFT DEVICES The locking system includes three parts: ● The chip in the center control unit that receives the lock/unlock commands ● The motor controller board in the base section ● The motor at the back of the scooter where it applies the braking When rider tries to move the scooter while it is locked, the scooter will start beeping and will apply a braking force to the rear wheel. 20 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 414 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description Image 24-HOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE CONTACT INFORMATION Lime’s 24-hour customer service contact information is located on the top end of the scooter stem facing the rider. LOCALIZED SAFETY INFORMATION Lime has “NO RIDING ON SIDEWALKS” in 48-point font at the baseboard of the scooter. 21 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 415 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 3.B. Critical Staff-Requested Information ●Maximum Powered Speed: 15 mph ●Unit Identification: Company contact labeling identified on the previous page. ●Customer Service contact: 888-LIME-345 or support@li.me. Local operations. manager contact will be provided to key City staff and business associations. ●Parking Dynamics: Scooters store vertically with a kick-stand. ●Parking Information: Currently, parking and no-parking zones—when identified in collaboration with City staff—are identified within the Lime app. While Lime continues to innovate with respect to parking messaging to shape user behavior, the Gen 3 Scooter has the capability to display messages to riders warning of possible improper parking locations in the future. ●Remote Lock-Down: All Lime scooters can be disabled centrally. This can be executed in the case of a weather event or other in extremis circumstance. ●Safety Features: In addition to scooter specifications illustrated above, additional safety information is outlined in Section 6. 22 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 416 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 4. Safety Related to Parking & Operations 4.A. Technological Innovations As noted throughout this proposal, Lime is continually innovating around all aspects of our service: hardware, software, operations, and public engagement. We are eager to work with the City of Meridian to address specific concerns or opportunities present in this community, and will continue to leverage our global presence to improve locally. Lime’s recent launch of the Gen 3 scooter is a direct result of customer and City partner feedback that we have been into our continual improvement processes. Examples of pending improvements that are currently being tested in other markets include new approaches to parking guidance, new technologies for identifying and curbing sidewalk riding, and new methods for engaging people who are not following local rules. 4.B. Parking & Safety Lime is committed to utilizing a variety of tools and technologies we have developed over the course of our deep experience operating scooter share systems to ensure our riders are safe and compliant with applicable laws. These efforts improve safety for all users of the public right of way by reducing tripping hazards and ensuring access for people with disabilities. Our efforts include continuously developing and promoting targeted messaging focused on appropriate riding and parking behavior, implementing product features that accomplish similar goals, and having an active on-the-ground presence to reinforce these efforts. Notification Systems and Rider Incentives We will work tirelessly to comply with all parking requirements outlined in the RFP document. Should geofenced station areas be required, we will work with the City to support the identification of appropriate locations, as well as implementation and management of such stations. We have developed a number of mechanisms to incentivize and disincentivize parking behavior. Many of our efforts have paid off, with over 69.76% of users in Portland, for example, reporting their awareness of local rules related to parking and 23 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 417 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM appropriate riding as a direct result of in-app (49.72%) or on-vehicle (20.04%) education. Lime is continually enhancing the role technology plays in proper parking, including gamifying the mobility share experience so that customers will be incentivized to ride and park responsibly, or disincentivized for bad behavior - like fines and fees, or the inability to end a ride with improper parking. Examples of Lime approaches to parking include the following: ●Preferred Parking Zones: Lime seeks to collaborate with local jurisdictions such as the City of Meridian to identify preferred parking locations as well as locations that are to be considered inappropriate for parking. Having identified preferred parking zones, we can designate preferred parking zones within our app’s map view. These zones show up as blue zones so riders can easily navigate to these preferred parking areas. We have included screenshots of this functionality, as well as an in-app notification after a rider completes a trip within such a parking area, below. ●No Parking Zones: Within the same map view, we can designate zones “no parking zones” where riders are not permitted to park. These zones show up as red zones so riders can easily avoid these no-parking areas. When riding into these areas, we display a clear warning message informing riders that they may be issued a fine if they park in this zone. Often times, we will implement additional messaging through the app to educate users of the areas where they are not allowed to park. ●Photo Verification: Before riders are able to end a trip, we require them to take a photo of the parked vehicle. We launched a “Parked or Not” feature in July 2018 as another mechanism to remind users of how to properly park and to incentivize them to park properly. Parked or Not is a game in which Lime riders look at randomized photos and anonymously select whether or not the scooter in that photo has been parked properly. Using the information collected through these ratings, we are able to: ○Identify riders who park incorrectly, provide feedback on their parking and offer additional resources to help them properly park a scooter; ○Encourage engaged riders to take an active role in educating fellow riders in their communities; and ○Use statistical models to provide real-time feedback and develop machine learning to enhance the accuracy of future ratings. 24 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 418 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 25 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 419 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Image: screenshots of Lime parking areas (in blue) from Austin, TX; image of app after parking scooter in preferred parking area from Austin, TX. Some cities have identified preferred parking locations and have painted parking boxes, often with decals overlaid on top of those boxes (examples below). Each personal vehicle parking space converted to a corral is estimated to accommodate 10+ scooters. As desired, we are eager to work with Meridian to identify & designate similar areas, and can provide scooter stencil templates, if useful. Images: Parking decal and parking boxes in Austin, TX; parking box in San Diego, CA Finally, Lime has found great success engaging with the local business community to develop “host” relationships with businesses who are eager to have parking located 26 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 420 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM outside their venue. We look forward to building on the lessons we’ve learned doing this in over 100 other cities. 4.C. Safety Enhanced Through Preventative Maintenance Over the last two years, Lime has optimized our maintenance and operations model, and we continue to make adjustments based on rider and City partner feedback. This has led to an ethos of operational excellence unique to Lime. Our approach to maintenance, cleaning, and repair of scooters is multifaceted. Scooters are “touched” on a daily basis. Lime’s location operation team are notified of scooter maintenance needs through the following mechanisms: ●In-app functionality allows customers to indicate when a scooter is having a maintenance issue and a report is sent to Lime’s operation team; ●A rider calls or emails our customer service center informing us that a scooter is in need of maintenance support; or ●As our team retrieves scooters each night, the team identifies maintenance issues that require attention. Preventative Maintenance Lime has also established additional operational guardrails to ensure maintenance, cleaning, and repair occurs in a timely fashion. First, we automatically put scooters with two low-star trip ratings into maintenance mode. The scooter is flagged for our operations team to take a closer look at that particular scooter and try and identify the reason for receiving low ratings. An in-app report from a user also automatically puts that scooter into maintenance mode. Our field patrol teams and juicers also ensure that each time they touch a scooter it is in proper working condition through a seven point check system. Second, all scooters are cleaned and undergo basic maintenance before each deployment. We work to keep scooters in operable condition and replace parts as needed. This ensures that the lifespan of a scooter is extended for as long as possible. Lime operations staff also check the fleet approximately every 60-90 rides and perform required maintenance. Maintenance is completed by our staff at our warehouse. The operations field staff check the fleet by sampling the fleet at random and entering that feedback into our operator app. Operations App 27 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 421 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM In addition to the on-the-ground operations team described previously, the Lime Operations App encompasses a host of features to ensure proper operational efficiency on a daily basis. All operations staff are properly trained with all of the in-app tools in order to maintain our fleet of scooters in good repair. Through the app, our Operations team has access to the specifications, status, and location of all scooters in Meridian. The Operations team receives alerts when a scooter has a reduced charge, or when it is horizontal and may need to be re-parked. Lime is the only operator to have an automatic alert sent to the operations team when a scooter has tipped over. Lime continues to make improvements to this application to ensure our Operations team has the best tools to ensure parking compliance. Scooters flagged for retrieval will be assigned a maintenance task in the operations app for completion by the operations team. These include, but not limited to, the following criteria: ●Any device knocked over ●Any device reported as damaged or broken ●Any device with low battery level ●Any device left out of the service area The operations app also assists with deployment and distribution. Deployment zones are indicated in the app, including the following information: ●Address of deployment ●Number of scooters needed at the locations ●Picture instructions of how to properly park scooters without impeding pedestrian traffic 4-point inspection Our operators must fulfill a 4-point inspection on each vehicle to meet good repair. The maintenance checklist includes: 1.Safety a.Brakes b.Lights c.Wheels d.Structural integrity 2.Functionality 28 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 422 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM a.Lock/unlock b.Ring (audible sound aiding users to find scooter) c.Visible in app 3.Communications a.Online b.GPS c.IMEA in system 4.Appearance a.Clean b.Branding 4.D. Responding to Complaints Lime supports a 24/7 global rider and community support center, including language support in over 20 languages. Our Support headquarters is based out of our San Francisco headquarters. Support is available through the app and also by email, phone, or text message at 888.546.3345 (888.LIME.345). The easiest way to reach our Support team is directly through our app, which also includes an extensive Help Desk section for easy answers to common questions on the go. Locally, Lime will hire a Rapid Response team to address customer complaints. This team is typically available for 12 hours each day on weekdays and weekends. Their job is to respond to all customer complaints within 2 hours and help manage, remove and re-park scooters in question. In addition, they proactively monitor the system to identify any issues that may arise. We pride ourselves on fast and friendly service for every aspect of a rider’s journey journey from setting up a rider’s wallet and billing to completing a trip. Our team's first priority is safety and our special Emergency Response Team (within our Support Operations), works 24/7 to manage our incoming contacts as well as to monitor social media to alert our entire field and local operations to any urgent issue in any market. In addition to our ERT team we offer a full Safety Claims team to handle any incidents from lost personal items, up to and including property or injury incidents. When damaged scooters are reported to our customer service team, a customer service agent puts the scooter in maintenance mode to prevent another user from riding it. The issue is then dispatched to our local operations team, who inspects it and either fixes it onsite or brings the scooter back to the local warehouse. 29 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 423 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 5. Partnership with the City At Lime, our goal is to establish a strong partnership with the City of Meridian to improve mobility within existing City resource constraints. Lime seeks to minimize the amount of effort required by City staff to facilitate transformative mobility options for the city. 5.A. Program Management Cities typically appoint a program manager who serves as a point of contact for the franchisee. Upon selection and agreement on terms, Lime’s local operations team typically participates in a kickoff meeting with City staff to share information about system launch and plan ongoing collaboration. In some cities, a cadence of engagement is established for bi-weekly, monthly, or quarterly meetings. Typically the amount of engagement needed decreases as the program becomes established. 5.B. Complaints & Suggestions Lime recommends that residents, business owners, and Lime customers share issues by phone at 888-LIME-345 or by email to support@li.me. Lime’s response procedure is outlined above in Section 4.D. Cities will occasionally receive complaints directly, in which case they can be forwarded by email to Lime’s Operations Manager for Meridian, whose direct contact information will be provided to the appropriate City staff. General comments and concerns are also often relayed during collaboration meetings between the City’s program manager and Lime’s Operations Manager. 5.C. Enforcement Lime utilizes tools outlined in Section 4 to educate users and encourage user behavior in accordance with City Code. Jurisdiction’s approach to enforcement is typically a local decision that is often consistent with how the jurisdiction would handle enforcement for bicycle riders. 5.D. Relocating Vehicles 30 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 424 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime’s operations team is able to respond to complaints of misplaced vehicles usually within 2 hours and never more than 4 hours between the hours of 8am and 8pm. Occasionally, City staff may choose to relocate a mis-parked scooter. Lime recommends that City staff—should they choose to intervene—simply move a vehicle as opposed to impounding vehicles. Because the vehicles are easily relocated, this best preserves limited City resources. Lime can reimburse for the City’s effort in the event City staff moves a vehicle. 31 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 425 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 6. Safety Related to Traffic, Pedestrians & Property Lime has operated for longer and in more cities than any other dockless mobility company, enabling us to develop some of the most advanced approaches to safety. Our regional communications team, local operations staff, and community affairs manager will work with the City to maximize rider communications related to safe operation of scooters in compliance with local code. 6.A. Public Safety Education and Training Lime offers a variety of education and training methods for our riders. First, our in-app education is mandatory for any first-time users of Lime to review, and is available at any time for riders to access. These modules cover topics such as where to ride a scooter (in a bike lane or on the side of the street; not on the sidewalk), how to park a scooter (e.g. next to a bike rack, or along the furniture zone of the sidewalk away from pedestrian flow), and safety reminders (e.g. wearing a helmet, not riding limited access highways or freeways). In addition to our in-app education, we offer in-person training opportunities at public events and through Lime Brand Ambassadors. By having Lime staff available and recognizable in the community, we create organic opportunities for riders and non-riders alike to ask questions and learn about the service. See Section 6.B. for further examples of in-app and online education materials. We also provide additional in-app notifications and user nudges to further educate riders. See Section 4. Program Operations (under Parking Notification Systems and Rider Incentives) for more details. Respect The Ride Campaign As part of our continued commitment to public safety and education, Lime is investing over $3 million to help empower people across the world to ride responsibly. The Respect The Ride campaign utilizes a multi-pronged approach to rider 32 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 426 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM education, equipping our community with the resources necessary to make each trip a safe and enjoyable experience. More details about our Respect The Ride campaign can be found online at https://www.li.me/respect-the-ride. After the first week, more than 75,000 people had signed the Respect The Ride pledge, expressing a united commitment to safe streets, accessible sidewalks and responsible riding. With 15,000 pledges per day we know just how strongly this issue resonates with every member of the community, both riders and non-riders alike. The first 25,000 respondents who signed the pledge received a free Lime helmet as part of the company’s $3 million investment mentioned above. Another 225,000 helmets will be distributed free of charge across Lime’s global markets in the months since Respect the Ride launched, and we are committed to giving away helmets at local and community events. Our long-term goal in engaging riders with Respect The Ride is to help set the global standard for responsible micro-mobility usage, and create a community of riding much like the biking community has accomplished. The multi-pronged campaign includes local advertising, a series of new product safety features and the industry’s first Education and Safety Summit. Riders who commit to the pledge are agreeing to: ●Ride responsibly at all times ●Wear a helmet while riding ●Abide by all traffic laws and speed limits ●Ride only within designated areas such as streets and bike lanes ●Park properly out of the way of pedestrian walkways, service ramps and metro stops ●Be aware of automobiles, pedestrians and fellow riders Helmet Distribution Lime distributes helmets at select events. In the recent Respect the Ride campaign, we asked for riders to sign a pledge of good behavior while using Lime, in exchange for a free helmet. On a more regular, ongoing basis, we will distribute helmets at launch, as well as in an ongoing basis at community events such as street fairs, farmers’ markets, and at designated pop-up events. 6.B. Mitigating Traffic, Pedestrian & Property Effects 33 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 427 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Users all receive educational messaging in order to encourage safe riding around pedestrians and traffic, and to encourage parking and scooter use that does not negatively affect private property. Below are screenshots of our in-app messaging: 1.Riders are encouraged to wear helmets 2.Riders must obey all traffic laws 3.Proper parking procedures 4.Operating an electric scooter on the sidewalk is prohibited 5.Mechanism(s) for customers to notify operator of safety or maintenance issues Screenshots illustrating how to ride and where a helmet, and where to ride and park with care. Screenshots illustrating a reminder on locking up after the ride and rules and regulations. 34 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 428 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Screenshots illustrating directions for how to report any issues and educational materials. 35 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 429 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Screenshots from our Website 36 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 430 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 37 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 431 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 38 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 432 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7. Data Sharing 7.A. Lime Provides Data in MDS Standard Lime is proud to support the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) standard in sharing data with cities. MDS is a data standard proposed by the Los Angeles Department of Transportation that has since then been widely adopted and implemented in Europe (Vienna, Warsaw, Marseille, etc.) and North America (Detroit, Seattle, Minneapolis, Providence, Arlington, Alexandria, Charlottesville, etc.). It is also used for data analysis by such city partners as Remix, Populus, and Ride Report. MDS will offer cities real-time, always updated access to the following sets of data. ●Trips: Including the entire trip route in GeoJSON format ●Vehicle List: By status, including details on why a vehicle is unavailable ●GBFS: An older format that lists all available vehicles in an easily consumed fashion MDS is a very rich format, allowing the City access to deep and accurate data in real time. Using MDS allows continuous data monitoring and compliance, and the data 39 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 433 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM that is being shown in MDS is the same that powers all of our applications, meaning it is the most accurate representation of Lime vehicles and trips available. The trips data in particular is returned in GeoJSON format, which is a widely accepted data standard that is usable in nearly all GIS tools. Furthermore, as an ever-evolving and maintained standard, you would get the advantage of best practices recommended by cities like yours to improve how data is shared and consumed. Additionally, Lime will provide access to a real-time data insights dashboard (sample screenshot provided below), which offers high-level aggregate data in an easily digestible format. We will work closely with city staff to make the information useful and relevant for applications like compliance and city planning. 7.B. Dashboard for City Staff The images below represent the typical real-time dashboard City staff get access to as a part of Lime’s programmatic support to cities. Access is continuous and the numbers are delivered in real time. 40 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 434 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7.C. Heat Maps for Transportation Planners Aiding transportation planners to respond to evolving demands on the transportation network, Lime provides a heatmap tool within the dashboard so City staff can identify areas of high utilization. This can inform future investments without the expensive expenditure of limited funding on consultants reports (see screenshot below). 41 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 435 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7.B. Trip Start and End Points Lime can provide anonymized start and end point data in latitude/longitude format, per the MDS standard. 7.C. Annual Survey Lime is prepared to assist the City with the design and distribution of an annual user survey, from which can be gathered general demographic data, user preferences and user behaviors. Lime can group trips in heat maps based upon zone of origin and destination, such as for the purpose of determining travel paths for users accessing a major transit hub. This approach can assume trip purpose, but not ascertain it. 7.D. Free Tools for Transportation Planners Lime-provided data can be leveraged to assist City transportation planners at no cost to the city. 42 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 436 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 8. Rider Rules 8.A. Rider Terms of Use Lime’s user agreement can be found here: https://www.li.me/user-agreement 8.B. Minimum Age The minimum age authorized by Lime on scooters is 18. Lime users acknowledge this requirement in the user agreement. 8.C. Helmet Use Lime strongly encourages the use of helmets, reinforced by in-app messagings. In our terms of service, users agree to comply with local helmet laws. 8.D. Licensing Lime does not require users to present a drivers’ license in order to use Lime. Instead, users renting via the app possess a cell phone and a credit card. 43 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 437 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 9. Public Outreach & Education 9.A. General Strategy Dockless scooter share is cutting-edge technology, and Lime works hard to educate customers and residents on proper usage and parking. Before we launch, we focus on working with community stakeholders and press to educate new Lime users on the benefits as well as the operational responsibilities of dockless scooter sharing. This effort has already started, as our operations staff has already met one or more times with the Meridian Police Department, Scentsy, Blue Cross, The Village, and the Meridian Downtown Business Association and spoken to local media. Lime’s public education and outreach continues throughout the duration of the pre-launch, launch, and ongoing operations periods. We will continue to engage and provide informational sessions to key institutions such as the Meridian Downtown Business Association, the Meridian Chamber of Commerce and vendors at the Village. We will also reach out to new groups to educate on scooters, which also provides new avenues to hear about areas where we can contribute to better solutions. Lime is committed to utilizing a variety of tools and technologies we have developed over the course of our deep experience operating scooter share systems to ensure our riders are safe and compliant with applicable laws. This includes continuously developing and promoting targeted messaging focused on appropriate riding and parking behavior, implementing product features that accomplish similar goals, and having an active on-the-ground presence to reinforce these efforts. 9.B. Traditional and Social Media Given the excitement that surround launch of service in a city, we are able to capitalize on traditional media attention to remind the community of norms and laws relating to riding scooters, as well as how they can contact customer service to remedy issues such as misparked vehicles. Our Marketing, Communications, and Public Relations team is well-versed in working within the Treasure Valley and already have connections with the proper marketing and communications channels. The excitement similarly means that social media efforts by our team garner public attention as well. Lime communicates to riders through the following platforms: 44 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 438 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ●Lime website (www.li.me), ●Lime Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/limebike/), ●Lime Twitter (https://twitter.com/limebike), ●Lime Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/limebike/?hl=en), and ●The Lime blog (https://www.li.me/blog) Lime’s website provides redundant functionality in addition to what is offered in the app environment. This includes regular company updates of new app content, safety videos and educational materials for our riders and partnering stakeholders, press kits for local media and much more. Lime is also the only company to invest significant resources into creating a dedicated Lime safety webpage and video series and have already partnered with KC Streetcar on a scooter safety video. We frequently share these to current and prospective riders via social media, email campaigns and other web-based channels. Our Message The messages Lime shares via all channels revolve around safety, proper use, and the advancement of urban and civic life. Messaging also includes helmet promotion, highlighting great scooter uses such as connection to transit, and how to use scooters properly consistent with local laws. These helpful reminders aid public understanding on where the vehicles should be parked and ridden as well as other important norms. 9.C. Stakeholder Collaboration By building strong partnerships and building effective lines of communication, our team will be responsive to community interests and build a system the community values. In order to provide for a seamless launch that meets or exceeds community expectations, our team will engage the following organizations: 45 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 439 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM BUSINESS STAKEHOLDERS SCHOOL STAKEHOLDERS RESIDENTIAL STAKEHOLDERS ► Meridian Downtown Business Association ► Meridian Chamber of Commerce ► Scentsy ► Blue Cross ► The Village ► Meridian Crossroads Note: Because scooters are not authorized for users under 18, Lime staff will communicate through school district leadership to administrators at area High Schools about scooter rules, and provide a contact in case of any concerns. ► Verasso Village ► Regency at River Valley ► The Fields ► High Point on Overland ► Central Park Commons * Organizations listed in bold have already been the subject of ongoing collaboration. 46 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 440 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 10. Police Engagement 10.A. Ongoing Engagement Lime has already been in regular contact with the Meridian Police Department (MPD). We have established the building blocks of an effective relationship to share concerns and solutions to achieve a smooth launch. MPD will have a direct contact with our Operations Manager to deal with issues as they arise. Engagement events with the Los Angeles Police Department 10.B. Community Engagement Opportunities with MPD In preparation for launch, our team will bring scooters to multiple shifts of police deployments to showcase how they operate, let officers ride them, and build a dialogue around encouraging positive use. This dialogue will showcase the company’s role in shaping user behavior and tools at our disposal to aid officer’s work. Additionally, this positive relationship will help Lime and officers together spot emerging trends so we can continue to positively shape user behavior in Meridian. A positive, collaborative relationship with the MPD enables proactive efforts to shape community norms relating to scooter use. Given MPD’s creative use of social media and effective leadership on matters of public concern, the Meridian scooter launch presents an opportunity for officers to be part of the storytelling effort. We look forward to creatively presenting scooter best practices to the public in partnership with the MPD should the department be interested. 47 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 441 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 11. Pathway Easements & Engagement 11.A. Transportation Officials Prior to launch and ongoing after launch, Lime Operations staff will work with City of Meridian transportation officials as well as officials of the Ada County Highway District to ensure a common understanding of e-scooter operations and pathways to resolve any issues should they develop. 11.B. Private Property & Easement Property Owners Lime proposes to initially introduce Lime-S throughout Old Town, the downtown core, and The Village, and to expand from there as demand dictates. In some cases, these involve major privately-owned spaces accessed by the public. We will proactively engage with private property owners in this service area to understand their needs and establish feasible solutions when available. We will also learn if they have an interest in hosting dedicated scooter parking on-site or prefer to abstain. Hosting scooter parking can be a terrific way to align the e-scooter program with the objectives of private property owners in the area, providing a boost to business revenue or residential access. In fact, after learning more about the e-scooter program, property owners often choose to participate in Lime’s Juicer program as a means to generate discretionary income. 48 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 442 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 12. Special Speed Zones 12.A. Technology Lime continues to experiment with ways to effectively control speed in zones of special concern within cities. We have the ability to establish speed limit zones, which are in trial status in areas that have specific speed limitations. This is usually determined in conjunction with the local municipality. Scooters will automatically slow down to the designated speed limit when the user rides into a speed limit zone. The effectiveness and user experience of these tools continues to evolve and may be available for use in select areas of Meridian. 12.B. Recommendations Lime recommends the City and Lime jointly evaluate the need and appropriateness of these still-evolving tools on a case-by-case basis in select areas of major concern during the term of the franchise agreement. 49 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 443 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 13. Parking Location Identification 13.A. Transmitters Lime does not use transmitters or transponders to identify preferred parking areas. This is not required to establish preferred parking areas. 13.B. Other Parking Indicators for Users A number of cities have chosen to institute physical pavement markings in high-use areas to help users identify appropriate parking areas. In some cases, these physical markers can also be reflected digitally in the app (see Section 4.B. for examples). 50 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 444 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 14. Successes & Lessons Learned 14.A. Limes (Successes) Characteristics of our most successful deployments include: ●Flexible scooter caps allowing for increases in vehicles as demand grows (and similarly reduces during seasons demand decreases) ●Generally consistent rules and access between adjacent cities, universities, and other jurisdictions ●Efforts by jurisdictions and Lime to provide physical visual parking cues that correspond to indicators in the app. ●In our research, over 30% of users would have used a car or ride-hailing had all-electric, spatially-efficient scooters not been available. ●In Portland, 85% of scooter riders said they would recommend it to a friend, and 62% of residents viewed scooters favorably. ●In Auckland, businesses are ecstatic about scooters because they perceive shared scooters as causing an increase in sales for downtown merchants. 14.B. Lessons ●Lime’s LimeAccess program provides low-income residents access to scooter transportation at half price. We have learned that working with local partners is critical to raising awareness of this program and growing numbers of participants. ●Scooter users prefer protected bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes, and bike paths over using scooters on sidewalks or the open road, citing safety as the main reason. 51 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 445 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 15. References Lime references and contact information can be found in Section 1.B. of this submission. 52 / 52 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 446 of 664 City of Meridian INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:________ Bird ______________________________________________________________ Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 16 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 16 c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 14 d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 16 e. Respondent’s ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 16 TOTAL: 100 78 Rated by:______ Samantha ________________________________________Date:_________________________ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 447 of 664 City of Meridian INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:____ Lime __________________________________________________________________ Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 16 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 14 c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 15 d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 16 e. Respondent’s ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 14 TOTAL: 100 75 Rated by:___ Samantha _________________________________________Date:_________________________ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 448 of 664 City of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSE Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective m icromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 18 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 18 c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 17 d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 18 e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 19 TOTAL 100 90 Rated Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 449 of 664 City of Meridian INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:____ Lime __________________________________________________________________ Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 16 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 14 c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 16 d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 14 e. Respondent’s ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 14 TOTAL: 100 74 Rated by:___ Josh Evarts _________________________________________Date:_________________________ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 450 of 664 City of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:_Bi INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective m icromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 16 They can easily grow from the small amount starting. They balance the scooters. They have enhanced fleets of employees to enable the transportation. b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 18 They have shown thorough research into Meridian and the way the citizens use the city. They can utilize incentives to help Meridian further its goals. c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 19 They have experience in natural disasters as well as all across the US and other countries. d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 18 Their mission follows the values. They provide daily inspection to each vehicle. e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 19 They can regulate speed based on location, they require a valid license and therefore they execute on their 18 years age policy. They can disable all remotely. They showed valid practice in Hurricane Florence. They can prevent rides from ending r rnfil rrahinla ic narlzad nnrran{lrr TOTAL 100 90 Rated by:_Britton Date:_4t21t2019_ 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 451 of 664 City of Meridian INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:__________________Lime_______________________________________ Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 16 Lime has a large breadth of experience. It is just one option-scooters. They have a gradual approach. They have a full team to deploy them. b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 18 They will enable scooters in the areas of most use and will work with groups to integrate the scooters smoothly. They do not require licenses nor helmets. They enable good parking habits. c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 19 Great experience across the country. d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 16 They do have customer service 24/7 hotline, as well as rapid response available during day hours and they respond within 2 hours. e. Respondent’s ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 14 They can disable all devices remotely but no mention is made to speed. They require age of 18, but they do not need a valid license. TOTAL: 100 83 Rated by:_____Britton Davis_________ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 452 of 664 City of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-1 1 034 6,,J INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSER: Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective m icromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 t{6ro/ Eo/-r*'.. b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 /7 E l/./ *2, y'*Z ,'//1 z Cu:/2,'- ,A/ C,/f Z{ ,/t,/r"^ 2.. ,4- -T z/.-to/rz^ c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 /{ f /o,a// o{ ,/,*,/ ,4 hr*,y'e/ //a- Oa l, t /d/ ,/eV/Vme-./ Vz)-.j, .fucl ,/' af.r/.4 -y'zlzz, /t/Q2 //*n 72*n ,.Ltrrzrz. ,9a, .A d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 /6 n/a/ nrUL ,t)icuoel e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 t7 -T frlt du &l^,-/ Tlc /h72"/ n/at /7 Gaac/ TOTAL:100 70 Rated Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 453 of 664 Gity of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-1'1034 ltu INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSER: Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective m icromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 t{ 6""o/ E*7to,pav b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 $ 7 2,r/oc/ fur, 2,/ tTzra c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 t1 //r"/ Tle /r/o,y' /- fl, /4, t /or/ /ev/7,n,^/ 7vl-t-r. d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 t6 //t/ /*/, 7/rs/u,,./ e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 t//eh,/ t/at Gzo/ TOTAL 100 61 Rated / Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 454 of 664 Gity of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 b.,a INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSER Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 tor0 5^l i> a l;J+(e a* ellu\Q^ce . pa Lo\(e,r^5; g,, (r' t:-1h* ,bt\ tx"; h b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 rOto learn iee'ng luohlxl or,.A l;l'q 'fi't 'r re1;s\^|run l"/.'r"1"q f t1n Wo,4't r,ral vhv ch e7+di r*' 'a ';11 sff^l on n*.tr\.;Oi \\ ' 1 c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 l?fi"ptencrs sea M lur] d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 tb [ 9rls-\r,,n 1'", v 'P to'\ta, A b. ,{ ,1 b\ e Jb N-21' ,JJrn r s vuclo5 L^A o,.l"*9. ("u/ groflost ) {qr1 e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 r{Q ro t ,// <1, 1.*^ ru.l[ N .)' +vq *. T<rh^o(,JJ 6n-\ *[^*1 + ,oo rl'-t "Pta-c\/\^S t[V^ptC TOTAL:100 qD +l okL DO 7bRated Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 455 of 664 City of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSER \rn2 Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 l6 }.}o coAco,^5 .r:\\ *1,,e)- Prou.+{- 1?^r 5e r/v I c c . +?ab ; (:11 o b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 t1 Br11es'l A,;1p,r^.e l! 5c< i) ia +.1' *c1ts\rz']vn ?roL(ss.. /o,,.r(er n +or \,s9,^.-/ ea.s). il is 4qr A,rr.of 5 *Lo otc(+55, A{p,* c lX ic +^c \.' fu p\r1^z^* lrogasa[ . AU; t.rr+l.;a,- -ttv vo\t-o^v *l'* or .f7[ic(zl 'i local,' c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 tt" |,J o [o{ ccryg ,/"\,'.t11{. to ^^?eJ^^-c P(o?reJ . -D*C-, r et'flzX.rn cL ' a".d. Sor,lrta p\o,^: 5o"^d! qa,od(o-d. ' io^[. wt.( "+;. cd""rlm&1 lipper 0 t,li {q b^* t'1^ut- vr.lrcS d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 1o U 'n^r1 .r n d..v shJ Vvrr,\t v. ^ ev. o^/ 'noel y , 0.k s k/\ t T e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 t8 lo.ln nd\r,{ .{ See tt5 ^o + ,r#+\- "AW b*lkU4t^k TOTAL:100 86 KL(,o ZLRated by: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 456 of 664 City of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-I921-11034 / INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET lLt) rl u, a*-'^J Q-zo't] Max Points Asslgned Poinls Comments a. Abill$ of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility tran sportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 1.fi rh Wt- &A*,[o -'fu6* {1uayr.r-rkfi{ 1 P,,adui+rqa & b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, riller, and pedestrian safetf effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 rd 4*e b "q&Alc c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility prog ramming, including orstomer service plans and experience 20 1{oS* d. Gonsistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 2A r1 9? e. Respondent's abillty to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of deviees as to speed and location 2A t4 o? TOTAL:100 tt Rated Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 457 of 664 City of Meridian Name Of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Max Points Asslgned Poinls Commenls a. Abili$ of Respondent and proposed program to facilitiate safe, balanced, effective micromobility tran sportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 W tio pw tDr.,sn a^a* ?s&.rulPtl drT q*Pw ih,rFtP Doir'J k..*P?r\ b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian buslnesses: and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 \1. *tur,g, l$, *ala &v d,JoeL A*1L {l',;ohoo pttu,Lb c. Damonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobili$ programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 w Frn+I l7rtf )\i &t; -* Di! JW*)' I &0".rg*trtrw d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and comrnunity values 20 4 OP e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devlces as to speed and location 20 Y6 t^OY TOTAL:100 1b Rated Il,ro tu,J -v6-t\ D- rJ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 458 of 664 Gity of Meridian Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET PROPOSER:_BlR n Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective m icromobi I ity tra nsportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 18 Pros: DL required to verify age (pp3, 25) + duplicate prevention (p29); customer support options (p12); safety-related feedback (p14); required safety video (p'16). Cons: No tip detection (p18) b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 18 Pros: Customized in-app features and communications (pp3,10); off streets at nighU6am daily deployment (pp3, 25); customized safety banners (p16); move from private property on request (p33) c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 20 Pros: Quality control (p9); sees City "as a partner with whom we will work together to implement innovations and make our services as high- functioning and equitable as possibly, NOT AS A REGULATOR OR AN ADDITIONAL HAND TO OVERSEE OUR OPERATIONS' (p22); acknowledges importance of establishing relationships before and during program (p33); customized dashboard (p26); customer complaint plan (p22) d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 16 Pros: Proposal reflects understanding of Meridian City Code (p16); good media roll-out plan (p21); ride credits to incentivize rider understanding of rules (p31 ). Cons: weak organization outreach, generalized/incorrect references to local stakeholders (p32); no description of customer service, accountability, respect; implies that riding on sidewalks is not allowed, though MCC allows/requires on some streets (p4); vendor told City Council and staff that they use beacons but proposal reflects that they don't cunently (p34) e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 20 Pros: Photo verification of proper parking (p4) + enforcement and incentive plan (p34); vehicle speed caps (p10); remote monitoring (p10); preferred parking and enforcement (pp1 1 , 16, 'l 8); geofencing and no-riding zones (p19); governed speed limits (p25) TOTAL:100 92 Rated by:_Emily Kane I-\afa .__:4t29119- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 459 of 664 City of Meridian INDIVIDUAL PROPOSER SUMMARY SHEET Name of RFP: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM RFP NO: MYR-1921-11034 PROPOSER:__LIME____________________________________________________________________ Max Points Assigned Points Comments a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian 20 4 Cons: Proposer states it will minimize effort required by City (p30) but proposes to outsource enforcement to City (p30); deployment plan lacks details, noncommittal, "draft approach" (p12); refers to "local knowledge" (p12) but does not say whose knowledge; lots of "typical" (eg p11); little commitment/plan (p30); no drivers license or age ID verification (p43); "gamifying the mobility share experience" does not seem targeted for adults seeking micromobility transportation options (p24). b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety; effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic 20 2 Pros: Acknowledges limited public transport, parking (p6). Cons: Communication of rules to riders is a "pending improvement" (p23); methods of communication not specified; references "new methods," "variety of tools and technologies," "reducing trip hazards," "ensuring access," "targeted messaging," "product features," with no specifics as to plan for who/what/when/how (p23). c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience 20 2 Cons: No customer service plan described for Meridian; little analysis of impact on citizens - communication is focused on preventing complaints (p13); no description of competence/successes in other cities; no description of customer service plans in other cities; successes/lessons learned section does not demonstrate competence (or lessons learned), just general statements of presence/implementation. d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values 20 0 Cons: Proposed program is inconsistent with City Code in critical respects, e.g. overnight operations (p12), no riding on sidewalks (pp21, 23); no description of customer service, accountability, respect; public outreach vague - mentions "community stakeholders," "press," "tools and technologies," "promoted targeted messaging," "implementing product features," "proper marketing and communications channels," with no specifics as to plan for who/what/when/how (p44). e. Respondent’s ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location 20 0 Cons: future (not present) capability to tell riders where to park (p22) - the answer to RFP park IV.C.2 should have been NO; wonders if "geofenced station areas" will be required - unclear what that is referencing and vague plan for addressing whatever it is; establishing speed limit zones is in "trial status" (p49); transmitters not used for parking either so unclear what responsibility proposer intends to take for establishing, communicating, or enforcing parking rules (p50) - even deployment plan is unclear as proposer refers to "hubs," "hotspots," "deployment locations," "deployment zones," without definition or explanation (pp12, 28). TOTAL: 100 8 Rated by:__Emily Kane______________________________________________________Date:__4/29/19_______________________ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 460 of 664 From:Jonathan Hopkins To:Keith Watts Cc:Ashley Scott; Chris Johnson; Malmen, Erika E. (BOI); Miller, William (BOI) Subject:Re: Meridian RFP Date:Monday, May 13, 2019 11:23:58 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png Thank you very much, Keith. Much appreciated. On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:22 AM Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, you are correct. The due date for a protest will be noon Thursday, May 16th. Keith Watts, CPPB | Purchasing Manager City of Meridian | Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department – Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitymeridian.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 11:18 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott@li.me>; Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org>; Malmen, Erika E. (Perkins Coie) <EMalmen@perkinscoie.com>; Miller, William K. (Perkins Coie) <WMiller@perkinscoie.com> Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 508 of 664 Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Keith, that is correct. We requested the Bird RFP as well but have not received it. Assume once we receive it the clock will start ticking 3 working days. On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> wrote: Good morning Johnathan, I am assuming you are requesting Bird’s proposal when you requested the RFP’s. If so I have sent it to the Clerk’s office. Please confirm that is your request so that the Clerk can release those documents. You are correct on the protest deadline, it is due no later than Noon on Wednesday, May 15th. Thanks Jonathan, Keith Watts, CPPB | Purchasing Manager City of Meridian | Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department – Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitymeridian.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 6:42 PM To: Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 509 of 664 Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott@li.me>; Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Keith, confirming you mean 3 business days, so if we are to protest the protest is due Wednesday, May 15. Is this correct? Thank you, —Jonathan On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:37 AM Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> wrote: You’re welcome Jonathan. Keith Watts, CPPB | Purchasing Manager City of Meridian | Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department – Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitymeridian.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 510 of 664 Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 8:35 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott@li.me>; Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Ok thank you, Keith. On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:33 AM Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, you will have 3 days from the date you receive your response from your public records request. Keith Watts, CPPB | Purchasing Manager City of Meridian | Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department – Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitymeridian.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 8:30 AM To: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott@li.me>; Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 511 of 664 Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Following up, Keith. Please confirm the due date for any protest. Thank you. On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 8:54 AM Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> wrote: Keith, please confirm the deadline for submitting a protest. Thank you. On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:56 AM Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> wrote: Jonathan, I have updated your request in our system. While I don’t expect there to be a delay, any modification does reset the clock. You should expect an initial response no later than end of business on May 14. Chris From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 9:52 PM To: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott@li.me>; Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Good afternoon: I wanted to provide a clarification on our public records request, that might not be necessary but wanted to clarify: 1. With our request for the RFPs, we are also requesting all grading materials from the evaluation committee. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 512 of 664 2. Keith, could you clarify the date and time of the deadline for filing any protest? 3. If the public records are not provided prior to the deadline, can we request an extension of the protest deadline if we so desire? Thank you for all being so helpful and answering our questions, —Jonathan On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:05 PM Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> wrote: Jonathan, I have already entered in the request. You will receive an initial response no later than 5pm MDT on May 9. The response may be records responsive to your request, or may state the need for an extension. The City has up to ten business days to provide a response, or provide a reason they cannot respond. For your records, the request is PRR 19-2598. You will receive correspondence via email once records are gathered/reviewed. Please let me know if you have any questions. Chris From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 3:02 PM To: Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Cc: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Thanks Keith. Chris, could you let us know the timeline for completion of the request, once Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 513 of 664 you know it? Thank you both! —Jonathan On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:52 PM Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, I am forwarding this to our City Clerk for processing. Hi Chris, please create a public records request for Jonathan for this email. Thanks Chris. Keith Watts, CPPB | Purchasing Manager City of Meridian | Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department – Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitymeridian.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 514 of 664 From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 11:11 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Sorry. Inadvertent send. Questions: 1. Is there more information the city can provide as to generally why Bird was scored higher than Lime in all of the categories? 2. Under Meridian and Idaho laws, are proposals a matter of public record? If so, can you please release those for review? Thank you. —Jonathan Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—Northwest Jonathan.Hopkins@li.me Your ride anytime. On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:08 AM Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkins@li.me> wrote: Keith, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 515 of 664 Thanks for updating us on the Meridian scooter RFP results. Questions: —Jonathan Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—Northwest Jonathan.Hopkins@li.me Your ride anytime. -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 516 of 664 Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me -- Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW jonathan.hopkins@li.me Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 517 of 664 City of Meridian Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 518 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 519 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 520 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 521 of 664 Ending a Ride At the end of the trip, Bird’s customized in-app messaging notifies riders to park Birds out of public pathways and at bike racks, near public transit stops, or in corrals, where available. Riders lock their vehicle and end the ride using the app. At the end of every ride, riders are instructed to take a photo of their Bird to “verify proper parking.” The prompt also reminds riders of proper parking etiquette. The photos are collected as a way to verify proper parking. This enables us to track parking behavior and identify and follow up with riders who may need additional education on safe parking behavior. Repeat offenders can have their accounts suspended and, in some cases, terminated. Beginning a Ride Through the Bird smartphone app, riders can see the closest Bird on a map, walk to it and unlock it, and begin a ride. Riders will be instructed to wear a helmet and to not ride on sidewalks. Safety reminders are also included on labels that are placed on each Bird. After putting on a helmet, riders are instructed to push the vehicle forward a few times with their feet to engage the motor. Chargers Bird will employ a network of Chargers from Meridian who are independent contractors responsible for helping set up and maintain vehicles in the community. Working in close coordination with Bird, Chargers access the “Operator Mode” of the Bird app to identify where to place nests (small groupings of fully charged and recently-inspected vehicles) in the morning. Chargers also use the operator mode of the application to identify where to pick up Birds to bring them in for inspection and charging. Similar to riders, all Chargers are required to photograph the nests they’ve set up. The photographs are reviewed and approved by our operations team. If the operations team receives a photo of a nest that does not meet our requirements, that Charger is given feedback and issued a warning. Birds are picked up regularly for charging and any necessary repairs by Chargers. This helps keep riders safe and Birds in good condition. Bird Watchers As described more fully in Section 2 (above), upon receiving a report through Bird Support or Community Mode, Bird Watchers can be dispatched to correct any issues, including poor parking, rebalancing, and more. Bird is dedicated to the regular maintenance and improvement of our fleet. Over the last year and a half of operating experience, we’ve evolved our vehicle designs to be safer, more reliable, and consistent for our riders. Bird performs a daily inspection on each vehicle every day through our comprehensive program of Chargers, Bird Watchers, and Mechanics (all described in Section 2 above). All Bird repairs are performed by Bird employees in-house. When a Bird is in need of repair, the Bird app hides damaged vehicles from riders on the map and disallows a rider trip to start until a trained Mechanic has inspected and repaired the vehicle. This ensures vehicles needing maintenance or repair are not used until the problems have been addressed. When a vehicle is marked as inoperable or damaged, our team will locate and either provide on-the-spot maintenance, or remove that vehicle from the road to be repaired. Damaged Birds are replaced immediately by fully-operational Birds so that our overall fleet size remains static. Regular maintenance and repairs are performed by our team of Meridian-based employees throughout the day. Should a vehicle have more significant repair needs, we remove it from the fleet to be repaired. Birds are not returned to the road until they complete our comprehensive quality assurance inspection. We have a variety of touch points for maintenance as detailed below. Pre-launch Preventative Maintenance Bird’s maintenance program begins before a Bird reaches the road,. During the value added production process where Bird’s technology is added to vehicles, each Bird undergoes a 14 point quality assurance inspection and that is signed off by the engineering team members performing the assembly as well as the inspection managers. Then, each Bird is submitted to hands- on validation testing with respect to braking, steering, and throttle control. These steps ensure Bird scooters are deployed at their maximum level of performance and service. Mechanic Training and Function Bird has a rigorous training program for Mechanics. To be eligible to become a Bird Mechanic, a baseline level of vehicle repair knowledge must first be demonstrated. Bird then trains each of its Mechanics in the various functions and capabilities of each of its scooter models and the variety of repair needs that may surface in its functional life. In addition, Bird has developed specialization teams to focus on certain vehicle components like Bird’s on-board computer brain, handlebar fixtures, and disc brake repair. When a vehicle is delivered to a service center, it is inbounded by our trained team of Mechanics, inspected, triaged, and tagged. Birds then move through the multi-tiered logistic warehouse repair flow, receiving service from Mechanics who specialize in specific repair points until the Bird has passed all quality assurance protocols. Vehicles Beyond Repair If a vehicle requires significant repairs, it will be sent to our vehicle facility near Meridian for inspection. Our team of technicians and engineers will thoroughly inspect the vehicle and repair it if possible. Should the vehicle no longer be safe for use, it is broken down into its component parts. Reusable parts are tested and verified for function and safety and then reused on other vehicles requiring repairs. 4) Plan for addressing public safety and other issues and incidents related to the shared vehicles' operation and/or parking, including response time, approach to shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. Parking Strategy We share a collective responsibility to keep our neighborhoods safe and clean. For Bird, this means keeping our sidewalks clear. While we have already taken many steps in other markets to ensure compliance with local and state laws related to parking, riding, and roadway safety, we are continuously developing more effective enforcement, messaging tools, and strategies, including better incentives and disincentives to encourage good parking behavior. We will treat Meridian with the same care, attention, and respect. We understand the need to respond quickly to any issues or complaints. The following is an overview of strategies that we have implemented, or are working towards implementing, to ensure that Birds are always parked in a responsible, legal, and compliant way that does not disrupt the community. Education In-App and Online Education Bird is committed to educating riders and the community about safety rules and regulations at the time of sign-up and before every ride. Information provided on each Bird will inform riders of how to operate the device safely. In-app messaging will instruct riders on responsible riding and parking practices. •Obey all applicable vehicle code requirements. •Strongly encourage the use of helmets.•Park and ride in appropriate locations. Bird explicitly instructs riders on the proper way to park scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not blocking driveways, entrances, access ramps, etc.) in the Bird app, on our website, and through outbound communications (email, push, and in-app notifications). The Bird app features a comprehensive, animated safety video that all Bird riders are required to watch and engage with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video, riders are shown how to ride and park vehicles in a responsible, legal, and compliant way. This includes showing riders that they are required to park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and not to block access to ramps, driveways, doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language, to be as universally accessible as possible. We can also implement Meridian-specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each ride begins, and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward to continuing to work with Meridian to customize this messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages and rules of the road. As noted in other sections, riders are required to submit end-of-ride photos that allow us to monitor parking behavior and adjust our online education efforts based on the feedback. ! NO SIDEWALKS TIPPED OVER BIRD ALERT ID:XDHVG B,.ES/E-B,.ES 81 S&22TE5S 37 as many injuries reported on scooters 5ESU/TS 1/2,1-U5,ES 96,50 &A//S 5E&E,VE' ,1 4 021T+S 19 &A//S )52 0 E-S&22T E5 ,1-U5,ES /,)E-T+5EATE1,1 * &A //S 0 A UST,1, TE;AS E-scooters are as safe as bicycles According to data collected by the Austin Emergency Medical Services and a subsequent analysis by Austin Public Health, 37 scooter injuries were reported among approximately one million scooter rides during a five-month period. This compares to 81 reported bicycle injuries over the same period. Four months of EMS records show few e-scooter related injuries. See https://mailchi.mp/kcmo.org/few-injuries-related-to-electric-scooters See http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=307564 2 3 By The 1umbers .A1SAS &,T<, 0,SS2U5, )our months of E0S records show less than five e-scooter injuries per month A manual review of nearly 100,000 EMS records logged between July 2018 through October 2018 shows only 19 accidents involving electric scooters, according to the Kansas City Fire Department. Case Study: Portland, Oregon ,n January, 2019, the Portland %ureau of Transportation P%OT released its much anticipated 2018 E-Scooter Findings 5eport. P%OT concluded that shared e-s cooters are just as safe as ot her modes of transportation 34% With 34 percent of Portland scooter riders stating they replaced car trips with e-scooter trips, an increase in e-scooter use has the potential to contribute to a reduction in serious injuries and fatalities. Ot her Ney safety related findings from the study include •S idewalN riding was more than x less prevalent on streets with protected biNe lanes. •After more than 700,000 trips, there were only 2 reports of pedestrian injury and no indication that either one was severe. ,n recognition of the strong linN between driving and overall crash risN, the study highlighted the potential of increased e-scooter ridership to maNe streets safer for everyone After reviewing emergency department and urgent care clinic data, we found that e-scooters have risks similar to other parts of the transportation system. We did not find a disproportionate risk that would discourage the city from allowing a scooter ride-share pilot. --Portland Environmental Health Director Jae Douglas, Ph.D. “ ” 7) Plan and capabilities for sharing vehicle and ridership data with City to inform and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, including anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within Meridian (e.g. trip start date, time, and location, duration; distance; trip end date, time, and location). We support the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) API, which includes a tokenized feed of detailed trip data such as trip route, duration, and distance, in addition to battery level and vehicle ID. We also host an open General Bikeshare Feed Specification (GBFS) availability feed, which can allow the City and third parties to access information on all currently available vehicles. We also support city-specific data-sharing dashboards, which include: •Real-time aggregated, anonymized data. •Ridership heat maps with ride start-and-end information. •Rider frequency. •Contact information for a dedicated Government Relations representative.•Real-time maps of all Birds and all active rides in the City. SERVING UCLA Data Dashboard & Tech Support Premium dashboard with white glove tech support, which will: ●Track all Bird vehicles and trips ●Calculate transition from car trips to Bird trips for compliance with C02 emissions reduction commitments ●Plan transit integration with popular Bird traffic routes ●Help improve multimodal infrastructure planning ●Plan Bird parking locations based on flight patterns ●Help determine how Bird ridership is deterring intracampus Rideshare trips The Bird API allows you to access in-depth data on Bird operations in your city. Built to the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) standard, developed by the LADOT, our application program interface (API) can provide you with a wide range of information on vehicle availability, trips, and status changes. To streamline the process of pulling real time data, you should ping Bird’s API endpoints every 2-3 minutes, pulling only the data for that time window. This will also improve performance of any applications updating based on MDS data. When pulling large amounts of historical data, allow your system to properly ingest, process, load and store data by limiting your queries to one month periods and not making more than one call every five seconds. Make smaller, more frequent calls Space out large requests TYPES OF INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE API BEST PRACTICES HOW TO GET STARTED 1.Login at the provided [yourcity].open.bird.co landing page using your city email address. (Let your Bird contact know if you need access). 2.Click on your username in the upper right hand corner and select ‘settings’ from the drop down menu. 3.To enable collaboration with other cities and identify where Bird can complement your mobility menu 4.Use this token to make an API request. For example, let’s say you want to get availability information. You send a GET to https://mds.bird.co/availability. As the headers you’ll send: Because MDS request require an authentication header you can not use a web browser. You will need to use a different method, such as a command line interface or API development environment. If you’re integrating data into a 3rd party tool, that partner will often have helpful sample code for how to integrate into their platform. Don’t access the API through a web browser Leverage partners for sample code if needed TRIP INFORMATION Trip length including both duration and distance Start & end time timestamp for when trips and events happen Route including lat/log at ride start and end and regular observed points on route Cost including both standard and actual cost Vehicle information Vehicle status such as available, reserved, unavailable, and removed Events that change status including service period, rider usage, maintenance, and battery level Event location shared as a GeoJSON with latitude and longitude coordinates Vehicle ID unique vehicle identification number also visible on the vehicle $ Getting started with your Bird MDS API !27 8) Rider rules, regulations, and terms of use, including whether the following conditions will be recommended or required for riders: minimum age, helmet use, licensed driver. Rider Rules Bird explicitly instructs riders on rules of the road through the Bird app, on our website, and through outbound communications (email, push, and in-app notifications). This includes the proper way to ride and park scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not blocking driveways, entrances, access ramps, etc.). Additionally, the Bird app features a comprehensive, animated safety video that all Bird riders are required to watch and engage with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video, riders are shown how to ride and park vehicles in a responsible, legal, and compliant way. This includes showing riders that they are required to park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and not to block access to ramps, driveways, doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language, to be as universally accessible as possible. We can also implement Meridian-specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each ride begins, and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward to continuing to work with Meridian to customize this messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages and rules of the road. 9) Plan for public outreach and education prior to and during franchise term, including plan to contact Meridian business, school, and residential communities. Education In-App and Online Education Bird is committed to educating riders and the community about safety rules and regulations at the time of sign-up and before every ride. Information provided on Bird scooters will inform riders on how to operate the device safely, including the following safety precautions as well as best riding and parking practices: •Obey all applicable vehicle code requirements •Strongly encourage the use of helmets •Park in appropriate locations •Financial penalties for violation of any of the above As mentioned previously, Bird explicitly instructs riders on the proper way to park e-scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not blocking driveways, entrances, access ramps, etc.) in the Bird app, on our website, and through outbound communications (email, push, and in-app notifications). The Bird app features a comprehensive, animated safety video that all Bird riders are required to watch and engage with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video, riders are shown how to ride and park vehicles in a responsible, legal, and compliant way. This includes showing riders that they are required to park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and not to block access to ramps, driveways, doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language, to be as universally accessible as possible. We can also implement Meridian-specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each ride begins, and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward to continuing to work with Meridian to customize this messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages and rules of the road. As noted in other sections, riders are required to submit end-of-ride photos that allow us to monitor parking behavior and adjust our online education efforts based on the feedback. San Antonio, Texas Bird began operating in San Antonio in June 2018, and the City passed a 6-month dockless pilot program i n O c t o b e r 2 0 1 8 . T h e rules set out in the pilot program ensure safe and equitable service by enforcing a minimum rider age of 16 (Bird requires all riders to be 18 or over), making bike lanes and/or streets the primary areas where riders should use Bird, and not setting a limit on the number of vehicles Bird can operate across San Antonio. Bird follows a strict utilization operational model, meaning that we will only add more Birds to a given market if there is an average of 2 rides per vehicle per day. This ensures we are meeting, but not exceeding, rider demand. After months of thoughtful deliberation, the City of San Antonio decided that the best way to ensure that it’s residents will have access to this accessible, sustainable transportation option was by allowing Bird to responsibly allocate vehicles based on utilization - as opposed to implementing a “top down” cap that is inflexible and doesn’t take account of ridership patterns, seasonality, etc. Memphis, Tennessee In June 2018, the City of Memphis invited Bird to help them tackle their transportation challenges. After a series of meetings with City Staff, the parties agreed to an Interim Operating Agreement, which enables Bird to follow the utilization cap fleet management model, placing no cap on Bird’s fleet sizes. Memphis has since emerged as a pioneer in the dockless mobility movement and is the first City to implement designated Bird parking spots. We continue to have a great working relationship with the City of Memphis and look forward to continuing to grow Bird’s fleet to achieve our shared mobility goals. Dallas, Texas Dallas City Council announced a dockless vehicle ordinance in June 2018, the same month in which Bird began operating in the City. Over the last six months, we have formed close relations with the Dallas Department of Transportation (DOT), in large part because their dockless vehicle regulations prioritize both safety and innovation. These regulations state that e-scooters should be ridden in bike lanes whenever available, and should be parked out of the public right-of-way - two guidelines that Bird communicates to all riders prior to their first ride through an in-app tutorial. Dallas also does not limit the number of vehicles Bird operates in Dallas. Similar to San Antonio, this allows Bird to expand our fleet according to utilization and ultimately provide a more accessible and equitable service for all. Indianapolis, Indiana Bird worked closely with Indianapolis through the Summer of 2017 on developing a regulatory framework that permitted 1,500 vehicles for the first 30 days of operations, with the ability to scale up to 6,000 vehicles. This fleet size enabled Bird to provide a more equitable service to the community by scaling beyond areas of the City with the highest concentration. This also enabled residents to consistently rely on Bird for their daily transportation needs as they navigate to/from the city as well as within it. However, while having an adequate fleet size is necessary for providing an equitable and reliable service, Bird recommends utilization caps - as this allows supply to scale with demand, and not oversaturate or undersupply markets. As metropolitan populations increase and more cars are added to already congested streets - traffic tightens, parking difficulties escalate, infrastructure lags behind, commute times increase, and air and noise pollution threaten the climate and our quality of life. Now is the perfect time for cities to invest in sustainable, people-centric transportation solutions, and Bird looks forward to partnering with cities as they ideate and create regulations for dockless mobility services in their community. Hurricane Florence Case Study Background In September of 2018, Hurricane Florence, a Category 4 hurricane with sustained winds of 130 mph, hit the Southeast region of the United States. This tragic event primarily affected the states of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia—including the following cities Bird operates in: Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Norfolk. This was the first weather event of its kind to occur since Bird began its operations in the Southeast region. In order to adequately prepare Hurricane Florence, Bird—in partnership with city officials—took a number of actions to prepare for the storm. The following is an overview of how Bird prepared and executed its operational plan during Hurricane Florence. The Execution Prior to Florence reaching U.S. soil, Bird mobilized our network of on-the-ground employees and trained chargers to prepare for the storm, alerting them of the actions that needed to take place. The most intensive, and important, action that needed to take place was removing vehicles from the road in a timely manner, prior to the beginning of the storm. Bird immediately cleared the map of all Birds to prohibit usage, and within days, the team had successfully removed thousands of Birds in Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Norfolk. Throughout the storm, Bird’s operations team continued monitoring the incoming storm and provided real-time status updates to our employees, city partners, chargers, and riders to promote transparency and ensure safety. Once the storm had passed, Bird worked closely with local municipalities to determine when it was safe for Birds to return to city streets. Prior to resuming service and enabling rides, all Birds were thoroughly inspected for any damages, and only those deemed safe to ride were returned to streets. Raleigh Charlotte Greensboro Winston-Salem Richmond Norfolk Virginia Beach APPENDIX A: TERMS OF SERVICE APPENDIX B: RENTAL AGREEMENT E IDIAN:--- PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 33 East Broadway Ave., Ste 106 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208) 489-0416 Fax: (208) 887-4813 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PROJECT NO. MYR-1921-11034 CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS FOR: VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM PROPOSALS MUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. APRIL 5, 2019 DELIVER TO: CITY OF MERIDIAN, PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 33 EAST BROADWAY AVENUE, STE 106 MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Prepared by: KEITH WATTS NAME AND ADDRESS OF VENDOR SUBMITTING PROPOSAL NAME: ADDRESS: DATE:. Email: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CITY OF MERIDIAN Meridian, Idaho 83642 PROJECT # MYR-1921-11034 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART PAGE CoverSheet.....................................................................1 Table of Contents..............................................................2 Notice Calling for Proposals ................................................. 3 II. Instructions to Respondents ................................................ 6 III. Proposal Form.....................................................................10 IV. Questionnaire................................................................. 12 V. Sample Agreement........................................................... 13 2of20 .;_ NOTICE CALLING FOR PROPOSALS PI IPPORF The City of Meridian seeks proposals to establish a pilot Vehicle Sharing Program to provide dockless, shared e -scooters for public use on public streets and sidewalks in the City of Meridian; paved, ground -level surfaces on property owned by the City of Meridian (excluding the Water Department and the Wastewater Reuse Facility); and pathways enumerated in the City of Meridian Pathways Master Plan (collectively, "franchised premises"). The successful Respondent will be offered an exclusive franchise agreement governing the terms and conditions of the program's operation in Meridian. In entering into the franchise agreement, the City seeks to facilitate micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian while also protecting and enhancing the safety of the several users of streets and sidewalks in our community, including pedestrians, vehicular traffic, and shared vehicle riders. Following execution of the franchise agreement, the successful Respondent shall remit to the City Clerk a nonrefundable franchise fee in the amount of $25,000.00 annually. Half shall be due within three (3) business days of execution of the franchise agreement, and the other half shall be due on or before July 1 of each year. For new franchisees only, the franchise fee due and owing shall be a prorated amount, less $2,084.00 for each whole month of the calendar year that has passed prior to issuance of the franchise. Franchise fees remitted to the City may be invested in costs that may be incurred by the City in relation to Vehicle Sharing Programs, or in needed infrastructure to support Vehicle Sharing Programs including, but not limited to, signage, pathway improvements, pathway maintenance, and pathway repair. PRESENTATIONS Those respondents which are determined to be best qualified to undertake the services required under this Request for Proposals may be invited to make a presentation to the City. Further information may be provided to the prospective respondents after the initial selection. ELIGIBILITY In order to be eligible for selection, Respondent must be able to answer "yes" to all questions listed in PART IV — ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONNAIRE. City may request verification of answers. BASIS FOR SELECTION In evaluating eligible applications, the following factors will be considered: a. Ability of Respondent and proposed program to facilitate safe, balanced, effective micromobility transportation options for residents of and visitors to Meridian (20 points); 3 of 20 b. Appropriateness of proposed program for Meridian, particularly as to traffic, rider, and pedestrian safety, effect on Meridian businesses; and reduction of vehicular traffic (20 points); c. Demonstrated competence in the implementation of micromobility programming, including customer service plans and experience (20 points); d. Consistency of proposed program with City policy, CARE values, and community values (20 points); and e. Respondent's ability to regulate, and demonstrated practice of remotely regulating, rider use of devices as to speed and location (20 points). History from the current and previous projects and customers of the respondent may be used to evaluate some of the criteria. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to make an award on the basis of suitability to purpose or superior quality, or any other criteria the City believes to be in the best interest of the City. After the City has identified the proposal with the best value for the City, the City shall have the right to negotiate with the respondent over the final terms and conditions of the contract. These negotiations may include bargaining. The primary objective of the negotiations is to maximize the City's ability to obtain best value, based on the requirements and the evaluation factors set forth in the Request for Proposals. If an agreement cannot be reached, the negotiation will be terminated and similar negotiations will occur with the second ranked respondent. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Mistakes must be corrected and the correction inserted; correction must be initialed in ink by the person signing the Proposal. The City reserves the right to waive any informalities or minor irregularities in connection with the Proposals received. All provisions of the City code are applicable to any Proposal submitted or contract awarded pursuant thereto. Within thirty (30) days after the Proposal opening, a contract may be awarded by the City to the lowest responsive and responsible Respondent, subject to the right of the City to reject all Proposals, as it may deem proper in its absolute discretion. The time for awarding a contract may be extended at the sole discretion of the City if required to evaluate Proposals or for such other purposes as the City may determine, unless the Respondent objects to such extension in writing with his Proposal. The City of Meridian does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, age, physical handicap, ownership by women or minorities or sexual orientation. 4of20 EXAMINATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Respondents shall carefully examine the specifications, and satisfy themselves as to their sufficiency, and shall not at any time after submission of the Proposal, dispute such specifications and the directions explaining or interpreting them. AWARD The City of Meridian reserves the right to make an award to that/those highest ranked responsive and responsible contractors (s) whose Proposal (s) is/are most responsive to the needs of the City. PURCHASE AGREEMENT DOCUMENTS A copy of the Notice Inviting Proposals, General Conditions and Instructions to Respondents, Special Conditions, Additional Terms and Conditions, Specifications, Plans and / or Drawings, Proposal's Submittal, and any other related documents will remain on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent. It is understood that these documents will form the basis of the purchase agreement upon award of the contract. All materials or services supplied by the Contractor shall be in conformance with all the specifications contained herein and shall be in compliance with any applicable Local, State, and Federal Laws and regulations. CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager 33 East Broadway Avenue, Suite 106 Meridian, ID 83642 (208)888-4433 Fax (208) 887-4813 kwatts meridiancity.orq Any and all explanations desired by a respondent regarding the meaning or interpretation of this Request for Proposals or any part thereof must be requested in writing and directed to the person named as the Purchasing Representative and in accordance with section 1 "EXPLANATIONS TO RESPONDENTS". Violation(s) may be caused for rejection of the proposal. Dated: -3-/-15-19 CITY OF MERIDIAN i Keith Watts, Pur asing Manager 5 of 20 INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS 1. EXPLANATIONS TO RESPONDENTS There are twenty (20) total pages in this Request for Proposals. It is the respondent's responsibility to ensure that all pages are included. If any pages are missing, immediately request a copy of the missing page (s) by e -mailing your request to Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager at kwatts meridiancity. orq , RFP Project # MYR- 1921-11034. Any explanation desired by a respondent regarding the meaning or interpretation of the Request for Proposals, or any part thereof, must be requested in writing (via e-mail) and with sufficient time allowed for a reply to reach respondent before the submission of their proposal. Any interpretation made will be in the form of an addendum to the Request for Proposals, issued by the Purchasing Agent, and will be furnished to all prospective respondents of record. Oral explanations or instructions given before proposal opening will not be binding. 2. CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE WORK Before submitting a proposal, each respondent must (1) examine the Request for Proposals documents thoroughly, (2) visit the site to familiarize himself/herself with local conditions that may, in any manner, affect cost, progress or performance of the work, (3) familiarize himself/herself with Federal, State and Local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations that may, in any manner, affect cost, progress or performance of the work; and (4) study and carefully correlate respondent's observations with the Request for Proposals. Failure to do so will not relieve respondent from responsibility for estimating properly the difficulty or cost of successfully performing the work. The City will assume no responsibility for any understanding or representations concerning conditions made by any of it's officers or agents prior to the execution of the contract, unless included in the Request for Proposals, or any addendum. 3. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS One (1) original, two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy (USB Drive) of the respondent's proposal will be received by the City until 4:00 p.m., MT on the due date stated above at the office of the Purchasing Agent, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Ste. 106, Meridian, Idaho 83642. The envelope must be sealed and the outside of the envelope must bear the notation: PROJECT # MYR-1921-11034 VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM APRIL 5, 2019 4:00 P.M. The Proposal must contain the following information: a. Completed proposal form submitted on PART III - PROPOSAL FORM. 6of20 b. Completed questionnaire submitted on PART IV — QUESTIONNAIRE. c. Written narrative to include each and all of the following: 1) Description of respondent's experience with shared vehicle programs, including how long the respondent has been engaged in this business, experiences in other venues, including under other similar contracts awarded to it, and work completed of similar type and magnitude. 2) A description of the proposed program, including which shared vehicles are to be offered for hire or use, and the number of shared vehicles to be deployed (both as planned initially and as projected when program is fully developed), hours of operation, deployment locations, fleet balancing approach, and proposed program start date. 3) Specifications of shared vehicles to be used in the program, including maximum speeds, identification with current franchisee contact information; method by which customers can notify local agent to report safety or maintenance issues; and whether able to: stand upright when parked, inform riders of the location of designated parking areas, be remotely disabled or controlled, condition and safety features to protect the safety of riders, pedestrians, motor vehicles, and property. 4) Plan for addressing public safety and other issues and incidents related to the shared vehicles' operation and/or parking, including response time, approach to shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. 5) Proposed role of City staff in program management, including fielding complaints or suggestions, enforcement of rider rules, and encountering or removing shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. 6) Conditions of operation that will protect the public health, safety, and welfare and mitigate effects of the program on vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or property. 7) Plan and capabilities for sharing vehicle and ridership data with City to inform and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, including anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within Meridian (e.g., trip start date, time, and location; duration; distance; trip end date, time, and location). 8) Rider rules, regulations, and terms of use, including whether the following conditions will be recommended or required for riders: minimum age, helmet use, licensed driver. 9) Plan for public outreach and education prior to and during franchise term, including plan to contact Meridian business, school, and residential communities. 10)Plan for outreach and communication with Meridian Police Department regarding public safety issues prior to and during franchise term. 7of20 11)Plan for outreach and communication with transportation authorities and pathway easement property owners regarding program's use of infrastructure prior to and during franchise term. 12)Plan, including currently available technology, to remotely regulate or control shared vehicle speeds and locations, particularly in City parks, pathways, and facilities. 13)Plan for locations and approach to installation of transmitters, if any, to identify parking locations to shared vehicles. 14)Description of successes and lessons learned in other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). 15)Contact information for up to five (5) references from other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). 4. LATE PROPOSALS AND MODIFICATIONS Proposals and modifications thereof received after the exact time of closing of proposals listed on the cover of this solicitation will not be considered. 5. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS Unless otherwise specified, proposals may be withdrawn by written request received from respondent prior to the time set for closing of proposals. 6. INTENT OF THE CITY The objective of this Request for Proposals is to provide sufficient information to enable qualified respondents to submit written proposals. This Request for Proposals is not a contractual offer or commitment to purchase services. Contents of this Request for Proposals and respondent's proposal will be used for establishment of final contractual obligation. It is to be understood that this Request for Proposals and the Respondent's proposal may be attached or included by reference in an agreement between the City and successful Respondent. 7. REQUIRED INSURANCE Insurance requirements are listed in PART V — SAMPLE AGREEMENT. E:���:7►'�I The successful respondent shall be required to (a) sign a City contract (b) commence work under the contract within ten (10) calendar days after the date the successful respondent receives the Notice to Proceed, (c) perform the work diligently, and (d) complete the work by the completion date negotiated. 8of20 9. PUBLIC RECORDS The City of Meridian is a public agency. All documents in its possession are public records. Proposals are public records and, except as noted below, will be available for inspection and copying by any person. If any Respondent claims any material to be exempt from disclosure under the Idaho Public Records Law, the Respondent will expressly agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claim or suit arising from the City's refusal to disclose any such material. No such claim of exemption will be valid or effective without such express agreement. The City will take reasonable efforts to protect any information marked "confidential" by the Respondent, to the extent permitted by the Idaho Public Records Law. Confidential information must be submitted in a separate envelope, sealed and marked "Confidential Information" and will be returned to the Respondent upon request after the award of the contract. It is understood, however, that the City will have no liability for disclosure of such information. Any proprietary or otherwise sensitive information contained in or with any Proposal is subject to potential disclosure. 12. PROPOSED SCHEDULE March 13, 2019 RFP issued. April 5, 2019 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL: All applications must be received by 4:00 p.m. (MST). By April 18, 2019 Selection panel convenes and selects one eligible proposal. By April 19, 2019 Selected Respondent notified; franchise agreement offered. By May 2, 2019 Franchise negotiations complete; prospective franchisee must return signed agreement by 12:00 p.m. (MST). May 7, 2019 Execution of franchise agreement. 9of20 PART III PROPOSALFORM In response to the Request for Proposals, the undersigned respondent hereby proposes to furnish labor, material, travel, professional services, permits, supervision, equipment and all related expenses, and to perform all work necessary and required to complete the following project in strict accordance with the terms of this Request for Proposals and the final contract for: PROJECT # MYR-1921-11034 VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Respondent certifies that he/she has examined and is fully familiar with all of the provision of the Request for proposals and any addendum thereto; that he/she is submitting a proposal in strict accordance with the Instructions to Respondents; and that he/she has carefully reviewed the accuracy of all materials submitted in response to this proposal. Respondent certifies that he/she has examined the proposal documents thoroughly, studied and carefully correlated respondent's observations with the proposal documents, and all other matters which can in any way affect the work or the cost thereof. Respondent agrees that this proposal constitutes a firm offer to the City which cannot be withdrawn by the respondent for sixty (60) calendar days from the date of actual opening of proposals. If awarded the contract, respondent agrees to execute and deliver to the City within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of City's Conditional Notice of Award, the applicable Contract form, franchise fee, and insurance certificates. RESPONDENT'S BUSINESS NAME: By: Date: Agent: Title: (signature in ink) 10 of 20 RESPONDENT'S LOCAL ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-MAIL RESPONDENT'S CORPORATE ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-MAIL PH E -MAI NAME/ADDRESS OF REGISTERED AGENT IN IDAHO: DECLARATION: The undersigned declares: that he/she holds the position indicating below as a corporate officer or the owner or a partner in the business entity submitting this Proposal; that the undersigned is informed of all relevant facts surrounding the preparation and submission of this Proposal, that the undersigned knows and represents and warrants to the City of Meridian that this Proposal is prepared and submitted without collusion with any other person, business entity, or corporation with any interest in this Proposal. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. RESPONDENT BY: TITLE: ADDRESS: DATE: 11 of 20 PART IV ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONNAIRE Respondent must answer "yes" or "no" to each of the following questions. Circle the correct answer. A. Does Respondent operate vehicle sharing programs in at least twenty (20) cities, and/or has Respondent provided 1,000,000 rides to date (in aggregate)? YES NO B. Will Respondent deploy shared vehicles which meet each and all of the following physical specifications? 1. Labeled with current contact information for the franchisee. 2. Able to stand upright when parked. 3. In good repair so as not to interfere with or degrade public facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or to present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the safety of riders or the public. YES NO C. Will Respondent connect an app to all shared vehicles deployed which meets all of the following specifications? 1. Explains the method by which riders can notify the local agent of the franchisee to report safety or maintenance issues. 2. Informs riders of the location of designated parking areas. 3. Capable of being remotely disabled. 4. Capable of being located and controlled remotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. YES NO 12 of 20 aTH A SAMPLE AGREEMENT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND FRANCHISEE FOR OPERATION OF SHARED VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ON CITY PROPERTY This MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND FRANCHISEE FOR OPERATION OF SHARED VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM ON CITY PROPERTY ("Agreement") is made entered into this day of 32019 ("Effective Date"), by and between Franchisee, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of State, ("Franchisee"), and the City of Meridian, Idaho, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the state of Idaho ("City"). 1. Statement of Purpose The City of Meridian has established, by ordinance, a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchise for the operation of Vehicle Sharing Programs on Franchised Premises. This Franchise is granted pursuant to the procedures and subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth in City's request for proposals for Project no. MYR-1921-11034, and Franchisee's response thereto, attached hereto as Exhibit A ("Proposal"). In consideration for City's grant of this franchise, City shall not operate a Vehicle Sharing Program in Meridian. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish terms and conditions governing Franchisee's use of Franchised Premises for its Vehicle Sharing Program. 2. Definitions The definitions codified at Meridian City Code section 8-3-1 shall apply to the terms used in this Agreement, as shall the following definitions: A. BEACON: A Bluetooth transmitter, placed by Franchisee, which broadcasts parking locations to nearby Shared Vehicles. B. ELECTRIC POWER -ASSISTED BICYCLE or E -BIKE: A vehicle that has two (2) or three (3) tandem wheels, has no floorboard, and is propelled either by human power or with the assistance of an electric motor. E -bikes are consumer products, as defined by 15 U.S.C. section 2085, rather than motor vehicles as defined by Idaho Code section 49- 123(1)(h). C. ELECTRIC POWER -ASSISTED SCOOTER or E -SCOOTER: A vehicle that has two (2) or three (3) tandem wheels, has a floorboard designed to be stood upon when riding, and is propelled either by human power or with the assistance of an electric motor. E -scooters are consumer products, as defined by 15 U.S.C. section 2085, rather than motor vehicles as defined by Idaho Code section 49-123 (1)(h). D. GEOFENCE: A virtual boundary around a geographical area monitored by a global positioning system or radio frequency identification technology, which triggers a response from a shared vehicle when it enters or leaves the geofenced area. Such response may 13 of 20 include, but shall not be limited to, decreased maximum speed or inoperability. E. FRANCHISEE or VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM FRANCHISEE: A person who owns, manages, operates, or acts on behalf of a Vehicle Sharing Program. F. PROGRAM or VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM: The offer for hire or use, by self-service, of one or more shared vehicles. G. RESTRICTED AREA: Any location where shared vehicles may not be parked. H. RIDER: A person riding or using a shared vehicle. I. SHARED VEHICLE: An e -bike, e -scooter, bicycle, or other vehicle offered by a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee for hire or use by self-service 3. Franchise granted. City, for and in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement and agreed to be kept and performed by Franchisee, does hereby provide to Franchisee a license to allow riders to use vehicles as part of Franchisee's Vehicle Sharing Program on Franchised Premises, to be defined as: a. Paved, ground -level surfaces on property owned by the City of Meridian, excluding the Water Department and the Wastewater Reuse Facility; b. Pathways enumerated in the City of Meridian Pathways Master Plan, to the extent City is duly authorized to convey such license under the various instruments establishing such pathways; and C. The downtown streetscape within the City Core, as such terms are defined in Title 8, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, to the extent City is authorized by the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") under the Master License Agreement for Regulation and Maintenance of Sidewalk Facilities in the Meridian City Core entered into by City and ACHD on August 7, 2012. Franchisee shall not use Franchised Premises for any other purpose without the express written consent of City. 4. Term This Agreement shall be effective on the Effective Date first written above, and shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on DATE, unless earlier terminated by the method set forth herein. 5. City Commitments a. City Contact. City shall provide to Franchisee the name, e-mail address, and telephone number of specific City personnel ("City Contact") who shall serve as the liaison between City and Franchisee for administrative matters (e.g., if n shared vehicle needs to be moved or removed from Franchised Premises, etc.). Communication between Franchisee and City regarding administrative matters shall occur via e-mail or telephone between City Contact and Franchisee Contact. 14 of 20 b. Right of entry. City and City's contractors, employees, agents, and invitees, shall be authorized to, at all times, to inspect City's property and personal property located thereon, for the purposes of inspection for compliance with the terms of this Agreement. c. No support. City shall not provide support, monitoring, or administration services related to Franchisee's use and occupancy of Franchised Premises and/or Franchisee's personal property thereon. 6. Franchisee Commitments a. Type and number of shared vehicles. (1) Initial deployment. By date, Franchisee shall deploy in Meridian no fewer than one hundred (100) e -scooters, and no more than number e -scooters to be used as shared vehicles. All shared vehicles shall meet the specifications of those described in Franchisee's Proposal. (2) Increase. Every number days, Franchisee may request authorization from City to increase the number of shared vehicles offered under its Vehicle Sharing Program, by increment, up to a maximum of number shared vehicles. Franchisee Contact shall make its request for authority to increase the number of shared vehicles offered under its Vehicle Sharing Program in writing to City Contact, which request shall include a description of which and how many additional shared vehicles are to be offered for hire or use, the plan for addressing public safety issues related to the additional shared vehicles' operation and/or parking, and Franchisee's certification that all shared vehicles previously offered by Franchisee in Meridian were used, on average, at least three times per day in the previous month, with data verifying same. Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a complete application, the City Contact shall either authorize or deny the requested increase. The City Contact shall deny a request from Franchisee for an increase in the maximum number of shared vehicles offered under a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee Franchise where: (a) Data does not reflect that all shared vehicles offered by Franchisee under the previous version of the Vehicle Sharing Program franchise were used, on average, at least three times per day in the previous thirty (30) days. (b) The Franchisee has violated a term or condition of this Agreement or of law, or (c) The operation of the Program and/or any component thereof has varied materially from the description submitted with the Proposal. b. Franchise fee. Following execution of the franchise agreement, the successful Respondent shall remit to the City Clerk a nonrefundable franchise fee in the amount of $Amount. $Amount shall be due within three (3) business days of execution of this Agreement, and $Amount shall be due on or before July 1, 2019. c. Franchisee Contact. Franchisee shall provide to City the name, e-mail address, and telephone number of specific Franchisee personnel ("Franchisee Contact") who shall serve as the liaison between City and Franchisee for administrative matters (e.g., if an shared vehicle needs to be moved or removed from Franchised Premises, etc.). Communication between Franchisee and City regarding administrative matters shall occur via e-mail or telephone between City Contact and Franchisee Contact. 15 of 20 d. Beacons. [If Franchisee installs Beacons] Franchisee shall provide to City an electronic interface that allows City to view and suggest locations of Beacons. Franchisee shall not install a Beacon without the permission of the owner of the real and/or personal property on which the Beacon is installed. Timely response; removal by City. Franchisee shall respond to any request to move, remove, or redistribute shared vehicles; reports of incorrectly parked shared vehicles; or reports of unsafe/inoperable shared vehicles by relocating, re -parking, or removing the shared vehicle(s) at issue within two (2) hours of receiving notice. Franchisee shall comply within twenty-four (24) hours with City's order to remove all shared vehicles due to denial or revocation of an application for a Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisee Franchise, expiration of the franchise term, or failure to timely remit all or any portion of the franchise fee or any portion thereof. In the event a shared vehicle is not relocated, re - parked, or removed within the timeframe specified herein; if any shared vehicle is parked in one location for more than seventy-two (72) hours without moving; or in exigent circumstances, such shared vehicle may be removed by City and taken to a City facility for storage at the expense of the Franchisee. City may charge Franchisee $250 per shared vehicle removed and stored by City. f. Good repair. Franchisee shall be solely responsible for monitoring shared vehicles to ensure that they are in good repair and that their use does not interfere with or degrade City's facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the public health and safety. g. Quarterly data reports. To inform and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, Franchisee shall provide to the City, in the form and manner requested by City Contact, a quarterly report of anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within Meridian, to include, but not be limited to, the following data: trip start date, time, and location; duration; distance; and trip end date, time, and location. h. Hours of operation. Franchisee shall remove all shared vehicles from use, whether physically or by geofencing, between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Franchisee understands and acknowledges that parks are closed every day between dusk (30 minutes after sunset) and dawn (30 minutes before sunrise), and may be closed by order of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Director. i. Shared vehicle specifications. Franchisees shall ensure that each shared vehicle used under a Vehicle Sharing Program is: 4. Labeled with current contact information for the franchisee and explains the method by which customers can notify the local agent of the franchisee to report safety or maintenance issues. 5. Able to stand upright when parked. 6. Capable of informing riders of the location of designated parking areas. 7. Capable of being remotely disabled. 8. Capable of being located and controlled remotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. 9. In good repair so as not to interfere with or degrade public facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or to present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the safety of riders or the public. 16 of 20 j. Rider information. Vehicle Sharing Program Franchisees shall inform riders of all regulations regarding the proper use and parking of shared vehicles. Franchisee shall provide a mechanism by which riders may provide feedback to Franchisee, including feedback regarding parking areas or damaged shared vehicles. k. Parking shared vehicles on Franchised Premises. Franchisee acknowledges, understands, and agrees to comply with the provisions of Meridian City Code regarding parking of shared vehicles, including, without limitation, the requirement that shared vehicles be parked in a manner that leaves clear at least five feet (5') of the useable area of pathways and sidewalks. Franchisee shall park shared vehicles only in designated parking areas. In City parks, the designated parking area for shared vehicles shall be next to bicycle racks, unless otherwise indicated by a Beacon. 1. Shared vehicles in City parks. Use of shared vehicles in City parks shall be subject to the following. (1) Franchisee shall establish geofences to prohibit shared vehicle use in or on the following areas: a. Playgrounds in regional parks; b. Special use parks; c. Tennis courts; and d. Storey Bark Park. (2) Franchisees shall use verifiable technology to ensure that in parks, riders shall not use a shared vehicle in excess of eight miles per hour. (3) Franchisee shall instruct and require riders to park shared vehicles upright, next to a public bicycle rack or at a parking location identified by a Beacon. (4) Franchisees deploying shared vehicles in parks shall park such shared vehicles upright, at a public bicycle rack or at a parking location identified by a Beacon. m. Public park. The parties hereto expressly acknowledge that the Franchised Premises are public spaces, the management and scheduling of which shall at all times be within the sole purview of City. City shall have the right to allow the use of Franchised Premises, and close all or any portion of Franchised Premises, for any and all purposes and under any and all conditions. At all times, Franchisee shall be on an equal footing with the general public regarding its use of Franchised Premises. Franchisee shall exercise any license granted by this Agreement only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and in accordance with any and all applicable laws and City policies. n. Public places. Franchisee acknowledges that the management and scheduling of parks, pathways, streets, and sidewalks shall at all times be within the sole purview of City and/or, where applicable, the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") or Idaho Transportation Department ("ITD"). City shall have the right to condition or the use of, and/or close all or any portion of its property, for any and all purposes and under any and all conditions. At all times, Franchisee shall be on an equal footing with the general public regarding its use of public property. Franchisee shall exercise any right granted by its franchise only in accordance with the terms of this Chapter; with any and all applicable laws; and with City, ACHD, and ITD policies. 17 of 20 o. Outreach. Prior to parking or using shared vehicles on the Franchised Premises, Franchisee will prepare for City's review and input a marketing and targeted community outreach plan to: a) Describe and promote the Vehicle Sharing Program; b) Educate the public regarding use of shared vehicles, including in parks and on pathways; and C) Inform the public about advisory safety measures and applicable regulations. 7. General provisions a. Limitations. A franchise issued pursuant to this Agreement is only valid for program operation within the public right-of-way within the city of Meridian. Franchisee must obtain permission to use or allow shared vehicles on property other than the public right- of-way, including property owned by private parties and public entities. Private property owners and government entities may restrict or prohibit the use of shared vehicles and/or the conduct of a Vehicle Sharing Program on their property. b. Risks acknowledged; as -is condition. Franchisee acknowledges that its use of Franchised Premises carries risks, some of which are unknown, and accepts any and all such risks. Franchisee acknowledges that Franchisee has inspected the licensed areas and does hereby accept same as being in good and satisfactory order, condition, and repair. It is understood and agreed that City makes no warranty or promise as to the condition, safety, usefulness or habitability of Franchised Premises, and Franchisee accepts same on an "as is" basis, both as of the Effective Date of this Agreement and throughout the term of this Agreement and all related activities. c. Restoration or repair. Franchisee shall be responsible for all costs of restoration or repair of the Licensed Areas necessitated by damage caused by Franchisee's use under this Agreement. d. No agency. It is understood and agreed that Franchisee is not, and shall not be considered, an agent of City in any manner or for any purpose whatsoever in Franchisee's use and occupancy of the Licensed Areas. Indemnification. Franchisee specifically indemnifies City and holds City harmless from any loss, liability, claim, judgment, or action for damages or injury to Franchisee, to Franchisee's personal property or equipment, and to Franchisee's employees, agents, guests or invitees arising out of or resulting from the condition of Franchised Premises or any lack of maintenance or repair thereon and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of City or its employees. Franchisee further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any loss, liability, claim or action from damages or injuries to persons or property in any way arising out of or resulting from the use and occupancy of Franchised Premises by Franchisee or by Franchisee's agents, employees, guests or business invitees and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of City or its employees. If any claim, suit or action is filed against City for any loss or claim described in this paragraph, Franchisee, at City's option, shall defend City and assume all costs, including attorney's fees, associated with the defense or resolution thereof, or indemnify City for all such costs and fees incurred by City in the defense or resolution thereof. 18 of 20 f. Insurance. Within two (2) working days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Franchisee shall submit to City proof of an insurance policy, issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in Idaho, protecting Franchisee and all of Franchisee's employees and/or agents from all claims for damages to property and bodily injury, including death, which may arise from operations under or in connection with the Vehicle Sharing Program. Such insurance shall name the City as additional insured, and shall provide that the policy shall not terminate or be canceled prior to the expiration date without thirty (30) days' advance written notice to the City. Such insurance shall afford minimum limits of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per person bodily injury, five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per occurrence bodily injury, and five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) per occurrence property damage. g. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience or for cause. Termination shall be effective five (5) calendar days following mailing of written notice. Franchisee agrees that upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, Franchisee shall remove all of its personal property from Franchised Premises and surrender same to City in the same good condition as received, reasonable wear and tear, act of God, act of nature, or damage by weather excepted. Franchisee agrees to surrender possession and occupancy of the Licensed Areas peaceably at the termination of this Agreement and any renewal or extension thereof. Franchisee shall be responsible for all costs of restoration or repair of the Licensed Areas necessitated by damage caused by Franchisee's use under this Agreement. h. Notices. Communication between the Franchisee Contact and the City Contact regarding day-to-day matters shall occur via e-mail or telephone. All other notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when personally served, or mailed by U.S. mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as follows: FRANCHISEE: Meridian: Company Name City of Meridian Attn: Name, Title Attn: City Contact Address 33 E. Broadway Avenue Address Meridian ID 83642 i. No waiver. City's waiver on one or more occasion of any breach or default of any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach or default of the same or a different term, covenant or condition, nor shall such waiver operate to prejudice, waive, or affect any right or remedy City may have under this Agreement with respect to such subsequent default or breach by Franchisee. j. No assignment. Franchisee shall not assign, sublet, or transfer its rights under this Agreement, or any portion thereof, without the express written consent of City. k. Independent contractor. In all matters pertaining to this Agreement, Franchisee shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither Franchisee nor any officer, employee, contractor, or agent of Franchisee shall be deemed an employee of City. Franchisee shall have no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in City. The 19 of 20 selection and designation of the personnel of City in the performance of this agreement shall be made by City. 1. Compliance with laws. In performing the scope of services required hereunder, City and Franchisee shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. m. Attorney Fees. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. n. Entire agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements, leases, or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. o. Applicable law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho. p. Approval required. This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by both Organizer and by Meridian City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties shall cause this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers to be effective as of the day and year first above written. Franchisee: COMPANY NAME: Name Title CITY OF MERIDIAN: Attest: :• Tammy de Weerd, Mayor C.Jay Coles, City Clerk 20 of 20 PANY HERS ADDRESS: 85 2nd Street San Francisco, California 94105 Jessie Lucci Regional General Manager 847-868-4463 jessie.lucci@li.me Jonathan Hopkins GR Contact. 360-957-5468 jonathan. hopki ns& i.me 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Experience 0 2. Description of Proposed Program 10 3. Vehicle Specifications 14 4. Safety Related to Parking & Operations 23 S. Partnership with the City 30 6. Safety Related to Traffic, Pedestrians & Property 32 7. Data Sharing 39 8. Rider Rules 43 9. Public Outreach & Education 44 10. Police Engagement 47 11. Pathway Easements & Engagement 48 12. Special Speed Zones 49 13. Parking Location Identification 50 14. Success & Lessons Learned 1S. References S1 S2 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Neutron Holdings, Inc. dba Lime 85 2nd St., First Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 April 5, 2019 ATTN: Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager City of Meridian 33 East Broadway Avenue, Suite 106 Meridian, ID 83642 Lime is pleased to submit an application to operate shared electric scooter services as a means of alternative transportation to residents and visitors of Meridian. We look forward to developing a collaborative partnership with the City and build on a foundation of safety, sustainability, proactive problem -solving, and responsiveness. Our experience, scale, and operational expertise will ensure a successful pilot program, helping the City of Meridian diversify its mobility options, continue to adapt to rapid growth, and connect people to transit. Serving Boise since late 2018, we view this as the next step in building a long-term, sustainable partnership within the Treasure Valley. The enclosed application details our strategy to deploy a shared electric scooter fleet in Meridian. Lime intends to work with the City staff, Meridian Police Department, local businesses stakeholders and the community to tailor the deployment plan prior to the proposed Spring 2019 launch. Project Understanding, Goals, and Objectives Lime has been the company most present in the community and engaged with City staff well before the issuance of this RFP. We have met with leadership of large employers like Scentsy, and Blue Cross, and major landmarks like The Village. We have engaged, and gained the support of the Meridian Downtown Business Association—a critical stakeholder and beneficiary of shared electric scooters. We believe our engagement with City staff and the Meridian Police Department has been constructive and beneficial to the evolution of Meridian's mobility system. This focus on partnership with local government, businesses, and community members ensures we deliver the most thoughtful, responsive, and well -integrated program to the residents and visitors of Meridian. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIi^' CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM At Lime, our mission is to provide on -demand first- and last -mile transportation solutions that help people seamlessly move throughout the community to meet their daily needs. We understand the City's interest to provide a diverse array of sustainable mobility options that will help people experience Meridian without the need for a car. We also recognize the importance of a well-planned, smooth, and collaborative launch, leaving community members overwhelmingly satisfied and appreciative of the new transportation tools made available to them. While Lime seeks to connect people to reliable, safe, and active mobility, our mission in Meridian is much broader. Our plan for Meridian positions the city to better handle growth in visitors and residents alike, encourages patronage of local businesses, and helps major employers like Scentsy get their employees around in this fast-growing city. The Lime -S will serve as a tool to advance sustainable mobility, connecting the people of Meridian to an ever more prosperous community. With our hardware, software, and community affairs expertise, Lime is uniquely suited to deliver these objectives. Whether connecting to new residential developments, helping visitors explore downtown, or delivering more patrons to The Village, we envision incorporating Lime-S—our electric scooter product—into the daily travel routines of people throughout Meridian and beyond. A Proven Track Record Lime is the most qualified company to serve Meridian based both on breadth of experience and local knowledge. As the world's largest dockless scooter sharing company, we have developed the most sophisticated scooter sharing operation on the market. We take great pride in our relentless focus on the safety and quality of our scooters as well as our commitment to industry-leading operations. Meanwhile, our continued engagement in the community with business leaders and community organizations will help us be the most aware, engaged, and responsive company serving in the City. At no cost to Meridian, we are ready and able to offer a convenient and easy-to-use mobility system that is an efficient, healthy, and affordable way to get around town. This includes providing discounted, unbanked, and non-smartphone access to low-income individuals through our Lime Access program. This proposal outlines the suggested parameters of this scooter pilot program. Thank you for the opportunity to let us serve Meridian, in partnership with the community. We look forward to answering any questions, and eagerly await the OYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM opportunity to provide transportation solutions that will benefit residents and visitors alike. Warmly, 1-1"'r Jessie Lucci Regional General Manager People authorized to represent Lime: Jessie Lucci Jonathan Hopkins (Primary Contact) Regional General Manager Director, Strategic Development P: 847.868.4463 p. 360.957.5468 iessie.lucci&li.me ionathan.hopkinsCdlime 4-0' YOUR RIDE ANYTIME s/S2 Arlington Needham Bedford Newton Bothell us Belmont Quincy Chelsea Revere Seattle .� UW Everett Waltham Tacoma Malden Watertown Medford Winthrop Melrose Xb Golden Valley South Bend Milton Providence Edina Notre Dame Ithaca N !� Yonkers Boise St. Mary's 0 White Plains Plainfield Holy Cross Detroit Keyport Alameda Elkhart UniversityofToledo Charlottesville Albany South Bend East Lansing 0 Boston Oakland `Tahoe osUlin Silver Spring Walnut Creek 0 Chieago Calumbus Baltimore San Jose Indianapolis Ralei h George eor etown Salt Lake 0 Bloo�ton00O g OWashingtonDC Mountain View Durham Arlington EI Cerrito Denver Cincinnati Duke C SUMB St. LouisO Xavier University 0 NC Skate SL U Louisville 0 NC Central Los Angeles UCLA' 0 Clayton Ferguson ECU Tulsa yt Charlotte UNC -Greensboro Monrovia Riverside Durham Tech N.C.A&T Long Beach Scottsdale Oklahoma City 0 0 Camp Lejeune Santa Monica Mesa Norman Nashville Greensboro Culver City 0Memphis 0 Atlanta Montgomery Country Santa Barbara Lubbock Plano Little Rock 0 San Diego Texas Tech Dallas Georgia Southern National City Orlando Imperial Beach 0 USA North Miami 0 UT Austin Miami Shores North Bay Village Miami San Antonio Austin UCF 0 South Miami Key Biscayne OLLU 0 Miami Dade Corpus Christi Miami Springs Miami Lakes CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime was originally founded as a bikeshare company, and our dockless fleet initially included standard bikes (Lime -B), electric bikes (Lime -E). Due to demonstrated strong customer preference for scooters, our scooter fleets are growing around the world. We also launched a car -sharing pilot program in Seattle in 2018. • Lime is a member of several national associations, including; People For Bikes, the Association for Commuter Transportation, Transportation for America, Road to Zero, the Consumer Technology Association, and collaborate with efforts at NACTO. • Lime has served Boise and Boise State University since October 2018 in a successful launch, leading Boise City Council to explore tripling the number of scooters allowed in the city. Our Impact The transformative power of Lime scooters in a community has resulted in very positive impacts. Forty percent of Lime users completed a work or school commute on their most recent trip, and 64% nationwide used scooters to connect to public transit in the past month. Through our Lime Access program, we serve riders at all income levels. Lime Access provides half-price rides for low-income eligible riders, cash payment, and smartphone-free access. 39,a% 51% of riders in our major urban markets reported using Lime to travel to or from work, school or appointments during their most recent trip. This means that Lime is connecting communities with essential daily activities. of riders in our major urban markets reported a total household income of under $75,000 last year This means that Lime is providing critical mobility access to middle income Americans. QYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Our Community Investment Lime works hard to serve the community through affordable mobility, community engagement, and economic investment. Below are several examples of previous and ongoing efforts: • Engaged regularly with residents in every market by sponsoring free community events and making presentations to transportation, safety, and climate stakeholders and other community groups. • Launched and running "Respect The Ride," Lime's road safety and education campaign, which includes providing over a quarter of a million free helmets and investing over $3 million in rider safety efforts. In just the first week, 15,000 riders signed the pledge every day. • Through Lime Hero, we enable thousands of dollars in donations from our riders to local non -profits around the country to multiply our impact in the community. I.B. Experience in Other Venues By working collaboratively with municipal partners, Lime has quickly become the national leader in dockless mobility. It is through our close partnership with cities, careful focus on operations, and commitment to high quality scooters that we have had such success around the country and are now operating in more than 100 locations. In some cases, our pilot programs have already been extended by unanimous vote of city councils (e.g., Greensboro, NC). In many of our programs, Lime was chosen as a sole operator of a program. The references below capture our experience operating shared electric scooter programs in cities of similar size and scope to Meridian. OYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Tulsa, Oklahoma Scooter Share Permit Nick Doctor Lime worked hand-in-hand with Tulsa City staff to Chief of Community Development & develop and advance a dock -free mobility permit Policy structure. Lime began service to Tulsa in October and City of Tulsa, Office of the Mayor operates a fleet of 400 scooters. 175 East 2nd Street, Suite 1500 Tu Isa, OK 74103 918-633-5303 ndoctor@cityoftu Isa.org Lubbock, TX Scooter Share Permit Craig Cotton Lime was awarded a contract to be the exclusive scooter Transportation Demand Manager share provider at the Texas Tech University. We also Texas Tech University worked closely with the City of Lubbock to develop and Box 43161 implement a dock -free mobility permit. Lime currently Lubbock, Texas 79409 operates more than 1,000 scooters in Lubbock and Texas 806.834.5040 Tech. craig.cotton(ottu.edu Boise, ID Scooter Share Permit Craig Croner Lime launched 250 scooters in Boise in October 2018 Administrative Services Manager under a city permit. Since the launch, university City of Boise students, visitors and downtown workers have used the 150 North Capitol Boulevard scooters extensively. As a result, city council has directed Boise, Idaho 83702 staff to propose a program to double the number of 208.972.8150 scooters per company in the city in 2019. ccroner@cityofboise.org AN YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 9/Lj) W. Jarrett Atkinson City Manager City of Lubbock 806-775-2016 (v) City of Tacoma, WA Scooter Share Permit Kurtis Kingsolver In 2018, Lime worked with the City of Tacoma to develop Public Works Department a 60 -day pilot to launch 250 vehicles. Lime now operates City of Tacoma 500 scooters at no cost to the City. The 60 -day pilot has 747 Market Street been extended to one year as the city develops Tacoma, WA 98402 permanent regulations. We pay the City a fee of $14.22 253.591.5380 per scooter per year to assist with program kkingsol@ci.tacoma.wa.us management and enforcement. Lime Hero, Lime's donation module, sponsors Downtown on the Go, Downtown Tacoma's Transportation Management Association. After the recent departure of Bird from the market, Lime is now the only provider in Tacoma. Boise, ID Scooter Share Permit Craig Croner Lime launched 250 scooters in Boise in October 2018 Administrative Services Manager under a city permit. Since the launch, university City of Boise students, visitors and downtown workers have used the 150 North Capitol Boulevard scooters extensively. As a result, city council has directed Boise, Idaho 83702 staff to propose a program to double the number of 208.972.8150 scooters per company in the city in 2019. ccroner@cityofboise.org AN YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 9/Lj) CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 2. Description of Proposed Program 2.A. Types of Vehicles Lime proposes a scooter -only program for Meridian, based upon strong consumer preference for these devices. We believe this will enable a long-term sustainable program. Vehicle specifications can be found in Section 3. 2.13. Deployment Plan A successful deployment starts before the first scooter hits the street. Lime's local operations manager begins ongoing engagement with major local stakeholders at this time. As we gear up for launch, we will proactively inform and offer briefing opportunities to the Meridian Chamber of Commerce, Meridian Downtown Business Association, merchants, leadership at The Village and other community groups. We will also offer collaborative engagement and social media education opportunities in partnership with the Meridian Police Department and other respected leaders and institutions that help shape community norms. Lime plans to introduce 100 scooters on the launch day. Lime will continue to increase the number of scooters based upon demonstrated escalation in ridership and scooter utilization rates. Typically, if scooters are achieving more than three rides per day, we will increase the fleet to accommodate the growing demand. As scooters are added, the fleet is able to effectively serve an increasing proportion of the city. Additionally, our algorithms are able to detect higher demand locations and trip patterns in order to achieve increasingly effective deployment locations. This gradual approach to deployment allows our team to work with adjacent businesses and neighborhoods, respond to and accommodate concerns, and achieve a very effective and welcome rollout as mobility options grow to new areas of the city. Our initial assessment is that the Meridian market will support between 250 to 400 scooters in the first year, which would achieve distribution across the entire city and beyond simply serving the major business districts. Due to subtle variations in the urban form, trip needs and user preferences, the exact number of vehicles needed is difficult to perfectly predict without testing. Therefore, we believe the best measure of appropriate fleet size is based upon number of trips per vehicle per day (TVD). If properly -deployed scooters are achieving more than 3 TVD, that would indicate the n YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM need to expand the fleet due to demand. Avery low TVD is an indicator that the fleet may need to be reduced (this often occurs during bad weather or when the temperature is consistently below 400F). As the most experienced operator of shared dockless mobility services in the U.S., Lime fully appreciates the necessity of having a fully -developed operations team and plan in place. That is why everywhere we operate we maintain a fully outfitted warehouse within the metro area, and we hire full-time local operations staff to help with maintaining, deploying and rebalancing Lime vehicles. Aaron Kindall, who leads our Boise team and has maintained relationships with the Meridian community, brings operational expertise and deep community knowledge to this RFP. He will maintain ongoing dialogue with the City to achieve a seamless launch. 2.C. Hours of Operation Lime operations staff are typically on duty 24 hours. Our "juicing" (charging) operations typically result in scooters having highest availability from lam to Spm. Juicers collect scooters for recharging after 7pm and deploy them before lam each morning. During the overnight hours, a lower volume of charged scooters will remain available in the highest -demand areas. Our operations staff augments juicer activity to ensure proper supply and equitable distribution of scooters. 2.D. Deployment Locations Our draft initial deployment plan is illustrated in the map above left. Prior to launch, we will continue to refine this plan through engagement with City staff, community groups and the business community. Vehicles will be typically deployed each morning in organized groupings of approximately four vehicles, parked similar to the photos above right, presenting a clean and orderly feel. YOUR RIDE ANYTIT=11 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM This deployment plan is our draft approach for launch. Business preferences will shape some deployment locations. Some businesses may ask for deployments (Lime Hubs) adjacent to their businesses, while we will respect other businesses' preferences for non -adjacent locations. Additionally, ridership data will cause the morning deployment patterns to evolve so that users have the most convenient access to these new mobility options. 2.E. Fleet Balancing Approach Our operations team actively manages our scooter fleet, rebalances scooters, and responds to any support calls as part of our standard operations. Fleet balancing is achieved in the following ways: • The Daily Patrol Team: Daily patrol teams typically begin the day by deploying scooters to Lime hotspots. Throughout the day, additional teams will conduct full sweeps of the service area. They will re -park any misplaced scooters, fix any scooters that need repair, or bring damaged scooters back to the warehouse for repair. The teams will also wipe down scooters as they go. • Local Brand Ambassadors: In addition to leveraging the Lime Marketing Team, we hire part-time Brand Ambassadors to help educate, promote and integrate into the local community. • Lime Juicers: Our operational efforts will be supported by our team of "Lime Juicers." Juicers are members of the community who pick up scooters when they reach low levels of battery, recharge the scooters and then redeploy them later that day or the following morning. Being a Lime Juicer allows local residents to earn additional cash in their extra time, putting money back into the local community. Since our launch in Boise in October 2018, nearly 200 community members have served as juicers and earned a total of $44,000 (most of which goes to our 89 most active juicers). The majority of Boise's active juicers earn an average of approximately $150/month from participating - providing additional spending money to some and helping others make ends meet. We expect residents of Meridian to participate and achieve similar benefits. Due to our approach to fleet management, locations of most scooters are reset throughout the city each morning based upon evolving demand patterns and community input. The deployment locations are determined through algorithms that respond to high ridership areas, combined with local knowledge of locations where 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIh 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM the scooters will most seamlessly integrate into the urban fabric. This daily deployment approach of most scooters helps lower the number of citizen complaints. 2.F. Proposed Start Date Lime is prepared to launch scooters as early as 3-5 days after the franchise agreement is finalized. Should franchise agreement negotiations be complete by May 2, 2019, then Lime will be prepared to launch with a minimum of 100 scooters on May 7, 2019. Preparation for launch will include ongoing outreach to staff, businesses and collaboration with the Meridian Police Department. OYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 13/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 3. Vehicle Specifications 3.A. Lime -S Gen 2.5 and Gen 3 Our dockless mobility fleet is a first- and last -mile solution that will help enable more transit use and reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. Our GPS -enabled technology allows riders to locate and unlock our entire shared electric scooter fleet using our mobile app and then simply lock the e -scooter in any commonly accepted parking spot. Lime may initially offer up to two versions of its Lime -S scooter product for Meridian's custom ers—Lime-S Gen 2.5 and Gen 3. Lime's recently -announced Lime -S Gen 3 scooter features bigger wheels, improved suspension, aluminum framing, dual -wheel braking, a 2.8" digital display, and a host of other features that make it the safest, most sustainable shared scooter available on the market. This model is currently being piloted in several markets and will be available in 2019. An image of Lime -S Gen 3's specifications and features is displayed below, along with more information about both scooter models.. Headlight e Keeps the road ahead illuminated Battery Moved From Stem Tip over will not cause Impact to the battery housing All -Aluminum Frame = Stronger materials ensure that critical points never fall Dashboard Screen + LED Bar Notifies rider of Important safety and legal information like no parking or reduced speed zones Reflectors + Lights Reflectors on all 4 sides and tall brake lights make the rider visible at night Dual Braking System Shortens Stopping distance and ensures vehicle is arrested regardless of the rider's muscle memory Mountain Bike Suspension Baseboard Battery Reduces shock from bumps on the road "® Lowers center of gravity to make tip overs less likely 10 -Inch Tires Allows the rider to cruise through potholes without falling 14 1165 mm u1 O N r 4-0' YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Safety Features & State/Federal Standards Lime's design and specs are in continual iteration based on user feedback and testing to create the best riding experience. Lime -S is UN 38.3 and FCC compliant. All of our certificates for Lime -S 2.5 and 3.0 can be found in this Google Drive folder. Vandalism/Theft Resistance Lime's scooter hardware and operations provide various features to address potential vandalism and prevent theft. Our approach to preventing and minimizing the impact of vandalism is multifaceted. Scooters are "touched" on a daily basis, undergoing a 4 -point inspection, including removal of vandalism. In addition, Lime's local operation teams are notified of scooter cleaning and vandalism repair needs through the following mechanisms: • In -app functionality allows customers to indicate when a scooter has been vandalized and a report is sent to Lime's operation team; • A rider calls or emails our customer service center informing us that a scooter is vandalized and in need of repair or cleaning; or • As our team retrieves scooters each night, the team identifies maintenance issues that require attention. When somebody tries to move a scooter while it is locked, the scooter will start beeping and will apply a braking force to the rear wheel. In the unlikely event that a scooter is stolen, GPS hardware located on the scooter can help operations staff or law enforcement authorities retrieve the mobility device. Weight, Materials & Design Features The table below lists the specifications of the Lime -S Gen 2.5 and Lime -S Gen 3.0, the two versions of our scooter that we currently deploy. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 15 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime -S Vehicle Specification Table Lime -S 2.5 Lime -S GEN 3 Motor directly embedded within front wheel. 1020 mm Motor directly embedded within rear wheel. 1165 mm 300 Watts 1 300 Watts 1310 mm 11205 m m N/A N/A Turns on when scooter is Turns on when scooter is unlocked. Gets brighter when unlocked. Gets brighter when brakes are applied. brakes are applied. 0 Electrical regenerative 0 Step brake on rear wheel. brake on rear wheel. • Electrical regenerative • Mechanical drum brake on brake on rear wheel. front wheel. • Mechanical drum brake on front wheel. Always on at full strength Always on at full strength when scooter is in a trip. when scooter is in a trip. 8 inch solid (not inflated) tires 10 inch solid (not inflated) tires N/A N/A AN YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 16 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime -S Vehicle Specification Table Lime -S 2.5 Lime -S GEN 3 Mounted on the handlebar Mounted on the handlebar next to the brake, the user next to the brake, the user operates the bell by pulling operates the bell by pulling down and releasing a button. down and releasing a button. Scooter beeps and turns on Scooter beeps and turns on electrical brake if moved while electrical brake if moved locked. while locked. ' • 9.6 Ah @ 42 V Battery 15.9 Ah @ 42 V Battery Aluminum Aluminum N/A N/A N/A N/A Fixed fenders for both front Fixed fender on front wheel. and rear wheel. Step brake fender on rear wheel. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 17/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description 1Image Lime's trade dress is features prominently in multiple locations on the scooter, including the front of the stem. Motor directly embedded Motor directly embedded within front wheel. within rear wheel. • Park properly (ie.by the curbside) • DO NOT ride on sidewalk or block traffic • 18+years old to ride for safety • Helmet is required • Email us at support(ali.me • Ca I I/Text 1 -888 -LIME -345 CD YOUR RIDE ANYTIME CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 19i CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description 1Image The locking system includes three parts: • The chip in the center control unit that receives the lock/unlock commands • The motor controller board in the base section • The motor at the back of the scooter where it applies the braking When rider tries to move the scooter while it is locked, the scooter will start beeping and will apply a braking force to the rear wheel. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 20 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Descriptions and Images of Information Affixed to Devices Description Image Lime's 24-hour customer service contact information is located on the top end of the scooter stem facing the rider. Lime has "NO RIDING ON SIDEWALKS" in 48 -point font at the baseboard of the scooter. AN YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 21 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 3.13. Critical Staff -Requested Information • Maximum Powered Speed: 15 mph • Unit Identification: Company contact labeling identified on the previous page. • Customer Service contact: 888 -LIME -345 or support@li.me. Local operations. manager contact will be provided to key City staff and business associations. • Parking Dynamics: Scooters store vertically with a kick -stand. • Parking Information: Currently, parking and no -parking zones—when identified in collaboration with City staff—are identified within the Lime app. While Lime continues to innovate with respect to parking messaging to shape user behavior, the Gen 3 Scooter has the capability to display messages to riders warning of possible improper parking locations in the future. • Remote Lock -Down: All Lime scooters can be disabled centrally. This can be executed in the case of a weather event or other in extremis circumstance. • Safety Features: In addition to scooter specifications illustrated above, additional safety information is outlined in Section 6. Gi YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 22/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 4. Safety Related to Parking & Operations 4.A. Technological Innovations As noted throughout this proposal, Lime is continually innovating around all aspects of our service: hardware, software, operations, and public engagement. We are eager to work with the City of Meridian to address specific concerns or opportunities present in this community, and will continue to leverage our global presence to improve locally. Lime's recent launch of the Gen 3 scooter is a direct result of customer and City partner feedback that we have been into our continual improvement processes. Examples of pending improvements that are currently being tested in other markets include new approaches to parking guidance, new technologies for identifying and curbing sidewalk riding, and new methods for engaging people who are not following local rules. 4.13. Parking & Safety Lime is committed to utilizing a variety of tools and technologies we have developed over the course of our deep experience operating scooter share systems to ensure our riders are safe and compliant with applicable laws. These efforts improve safety for all users of the public right of way by reducing tripping hazards and ensuring access for people with disabilities. Our efforts include continuously developing and promoting targeted messaging focused on appropriate riding and parking behavior, implementing product features that accomplish similar goals, and having an active on -the -ground presence to reinforce these efforts. Notification Systems and Rider Incentives We will work tirelessly to comply with all parking requirements outlined in the RFP document. Should geofenced station areas be required, we will work with the City to support the identification of appropriate locations, as well as implementation and management of such stations. We have developed a number of mechanisms to incentivize and disincentivize parking behavior. Many of our efforts have paid off, with over 69.76% of users in Portland, for example, reporting their awareness of local rules related to parking and 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIm° 23 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM appropriate riding as a direct result of in -app (49.72%) or on -vehicle (20.04%) education. Lime is continually enhancing the role technology plays in proper parking, including gamifying the mobility share experience so that customers will be incentivized to ride and park responsibly, or disincentivized for bad behavior - like fines and fees, or the inability to end a ride with improper parking. Examples of Lime approaches to parking include the following: • Preferred Parking Zones: Lime seeks to collaborate with local jurisdictions such as the City of Meridian to identify preferred parking locations as well as locations that are to be considered inappropriate for parking. Having identified preferred parking zones, we can designate preferred parking zones within our app's map view. These zones show up as blue zones so riders can easily navigate to these preferred parking areas. We have included screenshots of this functionality, as well as an in -app notification after a rider completes a trip within such a parking area, below. • No Parking Zones: Within the same map view, we can designate zones "no parking zones" where riders are not permitted to park. These zones show up as red zones so riders can easily avoid these no -parking areas. When riding into these areas, we display a clear warning message informing riders that they may be issued a fine if they park in this zone. Often times, we will implement additional messaging through the app to educate users of the areas where they are not allowed to park. • Photo Verification: Before riders are able to end a trip, we require them to take a photo of the parked vehicle. We launched a "Parked or Not" feature in July 2018 as another mechanism to remind users of how to properly park and to incentivize them to park properly. Parked or Not is a game in which Lime riders look at randomized photos and anonymously select whether or not the scooter in that photo has been parked properly. Using the information collected through these ratings, we are able to: • Identify riders who park incorrectly, provide feedback on their parking and offer additional resources to help them properly park a scooter; • Encourage engaged riders to take an active role in educating fellow riders in their communities; and o Use statistical models to provide real-time feedback and develop machine learning to enhance the accuracy of future ratings. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 24 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 01=20 1 uo ,� ,�1 TFW Z01:22168%J�HD-+ GET STARTED X GET Park in accessible spaces such as curbsides or by bike racks. Do not block pedestrian paths, sidewalks, or ADA ramp Play! You're required to wear a helmet. Bring your own or if your balance is $10 or more, you can collect a free helmet from the designated locations listed under "Lime -S Manual" in Help. Total labeled Riders helped 19 3 Where to ride n ©0 Do not ride on sidewalks. Use bike lanes when available. YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 25/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM e:pQ+ .�r a- e:01T s w. 1{I]4 ., Rs LiMe, fn — lime M - I me �J 9[aWne 4 L� You're • Herod i. � SCAN TO RIDE �15tAN TO PIOt 4—_, Si.?.k rC=fil::L —.e -- Image: screenshots of Lime parking areas (in blue) from Austin, TX; image of app after parking scooter in preferred parking area from Austin, TX. Some cities have identified preferred parking locations and have painted parking boxes, often with decals overlaid on top of those boxes (examples below). Each personal vehicle parking space converted to a corral is estimated to accommodate 10+ scooters. As desired, we are eager to work with Meridian to identify & designate similar areas, and can provide scooter stencil templates, if useful. Images: Parking decal and parking boxes in Austin, TX; parking box in San Diego, CA Finally, Lime has found great success engaging with the local business community to develop "host" relationships with businesses who are eager to have parking located 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 26 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM outside their venue. We look forward to building on the lessons we've learned doing this in over 100 other cities. 4.C. Safety Enhanced Through Preventative Maintenance Over the last two years, Lime has optimized our maintenance and operations model, and we continue to make adjustments based on rider and City partner feedback. This has led to an ethos of operational excellence unique to Lime. Our approach to maintenance, cleaning, and repair of scooters is multifaceted. Scooters are "touched" on a daily basis. Lime's location operation team are notified of scooter maintenance needs through the following mechanisms: • In -app functionality allows customers to indicate when a scooter is having a maintenance issue and a report is sent to Lime's operation team; • A rider calls or emails our customer service center informing us that a scooter is in need of maintenance support; or • As our team retrieves scooters each night, the team identifies maintenance issues that require attention. Preventative Maintenance Lime has also established additional operational guardrails to ensure maintenance, cleaning, and repair occurs in a timely fashion. First, we automatically put scooters with two low -star trip ratings into maintenance mode. The scooter is flagged for our operations team to take a closer look at that particular scooter and try and identify the reason for receiving low ratings. An in -app report from a user also automatically puts that scooter into maintenance mode. Our field patrol teams and juicers also ensure that each time they touch a scooter it is in proper working condition through a seven point check system. Second, all scooters are cleaned and undergo basic maintenance before each deployment. We work to keep scooters in operable condition and replace parts as needed. This ensures that the lifespan of a scooter is extended for as long as possible. Lime operations staff also check the fleet approximately every 60-90 rides and perform required maintenance. Maintenance is completed by our staff at our warehouse. The operations field staff check the fleet by sampling the fleet at random and entering that feedback into our operator app. Operations App OYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 27 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM In addition to the on -the -ground operations team described previously, the Lime Operations App encompasses a host of features to ensure proper operational efficiency on a daily basis. All operations staff are properly trained with all of the in -app tools in order to maintain our fleet of scooters in good repair. Through the app, our Operations team has access to the specifications, status, and location of all scooters in Meridian. The Operations team receives alerts when a scooter has a reduced charge, or when it is horizontal and may need to be re -parked. Lime is the only operator to have an automatic alert sent to the operations team when a scooter has tipped over. Lime continues to make improvements to this application to ensure our Operations team has the best tools to ensure parking compliance. Scooters flagged for retrieval will be assigned a maintenance task in the operations app for completion by the operations team. These include, but not limited to, the following criteria: • Any device knocked over • Any device reported as damaged or broken • Any device with low battery level • Any device left out of the service area The operations app also assists with deployment and distribution. Deployment zones are indicated in the app, including the following information: • Address of deployment • Number of scooters needed at the locations • Picture instructions of how to properly park scooters without impeding pedestrian traffic 4 -point inspection Our operators must fulfill a 4 -point inspection on each vehicle to meet good repair. The maintenance checklist includes: 1. Safety a. Brakes b. Lights c. Wheels d. Structural integrity 2. Functionality n YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 28/: CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM a. Lock/unlock b. Ring (audible sound aiding users to find scooter) c. Visible in app 3. Communications a. Online b. GPS c. I M EA i n syste m 4. Appearance a. Clean b. Branding 4.D. Responding to Complaints Lime supports a 24/7 global rider and community support center, including language support in over 20 languages. Our Support headquarters is based out of our San Francisco headquarters. Support is available through the app and also by email, phone, or text message at 888.546.3345 (888.LIME.345). The easiest way to reach our Support team is directly through our app, which also includes an extensive Help Desk section for easy answers to common questions on the go. Locally, Lime will hire a Rapid Response team to address customer complaints. This team is typically available for 12 hours each day on weekdays and weekends. Their job is to respond to all customer complaints within 2 hours and help manage, remove and re -park scooters in question. In addition, they proactively monitor the system to identify any issues that may arise. We pride ourselves on fast and friendly service for every aspect of a rider's journey journey from setting up a rider's wallet and billing to completing a trip. Our team's first priority is safety and our special Emergency Response Team (within our Support Operations), works 24/7 to manage our incoming contacts as well as to monitor social media to alert our entire field and local operations to any urgent issue in any market. In addition to our ERT team we offer a full Safety Claims team to handle any incidents from lost personal items, up to and including property or injury incidents. When damaged scooters are reported to our customer service team, a customer service agent puts the scooter in maintenance mode to prevent another user from riding it. The issue is then dispatched to our local operations team, who inspects it and either fixes it onsite or brings the scooter back to the local warehouse. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 29 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM S. Partnership with the City At Lime, our goal is to establish a strong partnership with the City of Meridian to improve mobility within existing City resource constraints. Lime seeks to minimize the amount of effort required by City staff to facilitate transformative mobility options for the city. S.A. Program Management Cities typically appoint a program manager who serves as a point of contact for the franchisee. Upon selection and agreement on terms, Lime's local operations team typically participates in a kickoff meeting with City staff to share information about system launch and plan ongoing collaboration. In some cities, a cadence of engagement is established for bi-weekly, monthly, or quarterly meetings. Typically the amount of engagement needed decreases as the program becomes established. S.B. Complaints & Suggestions Lime recommends that residents, business owners, and Lime customers share issues by phone at 888 -LIME -345 or by email to support(ali.me. Lime's response procedure is outlined above in Section 4.D. Cities will occasionally receive complaints directly, in which case they can be forwarded by email to Lime's Operations Manager for Meridian, whose direct contact information will be provided to the appropriate City staff. General comments and concerns are also often relayed during collaboration meetings between the City's program manager and Lime's Operations Manager. S.C. Enforcement Lime utilizes tools outlined in Section 4 to educate users and encourage user behavior in accordance with City Code. Jurisdiction's approach to enforcement is typically a local decision that is often consistent with how the jurisdiction would handle enforcement for bicycle riders. S.D. Relocating Vehicles 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTI4 30 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Lime's operations team is able to respond to complaints of misplaced vehicles usually within 2 hours and never more than 4 hours between the hours of 8am and 8pm. Occasionally, City staff may choose to relocate a mis-parked scooter. Lime recommends that City staff—should they choose to intervene—simply move a vehicle as opposed to impounding vehicles. Because the vehicles are easily relocated, this best preserves limited City resources. Lime can reimburse for the City's effort in the event City staff moves a vehicle. OYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 31/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 6. Safety Related to Traffic, Pedestrians & Property Lime has operated for longer and in more cities than any other dockless mobility company, enabling us to develop some of the most advanced approaches to safety. Our regional communications team, local operations staff, and community affairs manager will work with the City to maximize rider communications related to safe operation of scooters in compliance with local code. G.A. Public Safety Education and Training Lime offers a variety of education and training methods for our riders. First, our in -app education is mandatory for any first-time users of Lime to review, and is available at any time for riders to access. These modules cover topics such as where to ride a scooter (in a bike lane or on the side of the street; not on the sidewalk), how to park a scooter (e.g. next to a bike rack, or along the furniture zone of the sidewalk away from pedestrian flow), and safety reminders (e.g. wearing a helmet, not riding limited access highways or freeways). In addition to our in -app education, we offer in-person training opportunities at public events and through Lime Brand Ambassadors. By having Lime staff available and recognizable in the community, we create organic opportunities for riders and non -riders alike to ask questions and learn about the service. See Section 6.B. for further examples of in -app and online education materials. We also provide additional in -app notifications and user nudges to further educate riders. See Section 4. Program Operations (under Parking Notification Systems and Rider Incentives) for more details. Respect The Ride Campaign As part of our continued commitment to public safety and education, Lime is investing over $3 million to help empower people across the world to ride responsibly. The Respect The Ride campaign utilizes a multi -pronged approach to rider GAN YOUR RIDE ANYTI�^ 0 Lime r l 32 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM education, equipping our community with the resources necessary to make each trip a safe and enjoyable experience. More details about our Respect The Ride campaign can be found online at https://www.1i.me/respect-the-ride. After the first week, more than 75,000 people had signed the Respect The Ride Ip edge, expressing a united commitment to safe streets, accessible sidewalks and responsible riding. With 15,000 pledges per day we know just how strongly this issue resonates with every member of the community, both riders and non -riders alike. The first 25,000 respondents who signed the pledge received a free Lime helmet as part of the company's $3 million investment mentioned above. Another 225,000 helmets will be distributed free of charge across Lime's global markets in the months since Respect the Ride launched, and we are committed to giving away helmets at local and community events. Our long-term goal in engaging riders with Respect The Ride is to help set the global standard for responsible micro -mobility usage, and create a community of riding much like the biking community has accomplished. The multi -pronged campaign includes local advertising, a series of new product safety features and the industry's first Education and Safety Summit. Riders who commit to the pledge are agreeing to: • Ride responsibly at all times • Wear a helmet while riding • Abide by all traffic laws and speed limits • Ride only within designated areas such as streets and bike lanes • Park properly out of the way of pedestrian walkways, service ramps and metro stops • Be aware of automobiles, pedestrians and fellow riders Helmet Distribution Lime distributes helmets at select events. In the recent Respect the Ride campaign, we asked for riders to sign a pledge of good behavior while using Lime, in exchange for a free helmet. On a more regular, ongoing basis, we will distribute helmets at launch, as well as in an ongoing basis at community events such as street fairs, farmers' markets, and at designated pop-up events. 6.113. Mitigating Traffic, Pedestrian & Property Effects �i YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 33 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Users all receive educational messaging in order to encourage safe riding around pedestrians and traffic, and to encourage parking and scooter use that does not negatively affect private property. Below are Screenshots of our in -app messaging: 1. Riders are encouraged to wear helmets 2. Riders must obey all traffic laws 3. Proper parking procedures 4. Operating an electric scooter on the sidewalk is prohibited S. Mechanism(s) for customers to notify operator of safety or maintenance issues How to Ride Kickstart to get up to speed. Press on the throttle to attelerate. Squeeze the brake to slow down. O Ride with Helmets Vou're requiretl to wear a helmet Rring your awn or if your balance is 510 or e, gout cpllectafree helmet from the tlesignated locations listetl under Lime -S Manual" In Help. Screenshots illustrating how to ride and wher Don't Forget to Lock Up nd your trip by pressing he —d Ritle" button, x Where to Ride Do not ride on sidewalks other than as permitted bylaw. Use bike lanes when available and permitted by law. 1 a helmet, and wher( ® F , Rules and Regulations By tapping "I Agree', you certify that you've read and agreed the full—,, rules and conditions A helmet is required Do not ride pn the sidewalk Vou are 18 years or older Rlde at your own nsk S IAgree x Park with Care Park m accessible spaces such as curbsides or by bike racks. Do not block pedestrian paths, sidewalks, or ADA ramp L 0 L 0 to ride and park with care. Screenshots illustrating a reminder on locking up after the ride and rules and regulations. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 34/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO / VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7:141 .a ? rO, X Report an illegally parked bike XScan the vehicle or enter its ID 7:141 .r -1 X Report a damaged Lime -S Scooter ® Scan the vehicle or enter its ID Q 150 W Ivy Ave, Inglewood, CA, 90302 Q 150 W Ivy Ave, Inglewood, CA, 90302 Touch on the broken parts of the scooter I� []Handlebar Other[] I � I []Battery —� \ `Throttle Add chow:10/❑ 31 \ Wheel Brake Comments []Stand Kickstand l) W. + I I Add Ph -10/31 Comments 0140 A 7:141 X Report a lock issue XScan the vehicle or enter its ID Q 150 W Ivy Ave, Inglewood, CA, 90302 ❑ Locked, still charging ❑ Trip started on phone, still locked ❑ Broken lock ❑ Unauthorized lock ❑ Other + Comments 4140 7:141 Done i help.lime.bike Submit a Request Getting Started Pricing and Payments Encountering issues using your Lime Joining Lime Trip Issues and Fare Reviews UmePod Promotions Lime -S Scooter Manual Safety Reporting and Complaints Juicers I User Help U Screenshots illustrating directions for how to report any issues and educational materials. fYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 35/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Screenshots from our Website F C i https://www.lii,me/haw-to-lime App, Lime 0 Lama Qr G , other bookmarks RIDE SAFELY, PAPK RESPONSIBLY Riding a Lime should bean awesc - xperience, both for you and for the community- To make sure that happens, We've made safety and proper parking our #? priority. �9[rl lJy, V How to Lime -S How to Lime -E Parking Safety AN YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 36/ CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM -> C & https-//ww+w.li.rne/how-to-Sime 0 ® ID Apps [b Lime D, Other boo-kmarks O Li m, e � y How to Ride Dock -Free Bikes & Scooters ,Always follow helmet laws MID Do a pre -ride safety check Be mindful of road obstructions Park properly by curbside Apply brakes to slow dawn/stop Aways follow traffic laws n YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 37 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 4 C i https://www.li,rne/help ... Apps Lit Lime �dw% lime o LIME MICRO -MOBILITY FAQs You've got questions. Lime has answers. From "How do 1 pay for a Lime" to "How do I locate a Lime near me", find out all you need to know about our smart mobility service here. How It Works - C i https://www.li.rne/help ..: Apps _" Lime .;w. Lime Need More Help? How do I download the app? How do I find a Lime near me? How do I unlock a Lime? Where can I ride a Lime? Where can I park a Lime? How do I end my ride? Call: 1 (888) -LIME -345 Text: 1 (888)-545-3345 © * ® d other b4 kmarks A YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 38 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7. Data Sharing 7.A. Lime Provides Data in MDS Standard Lime is proud to support the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) standard in sharing data with cities. MDS is a data standard proposed by the Los Angeles Department of Transportation that has since then been widely adopted and implemented in Europe (Vienna, Warsaw, Marseille, etc.) and North America (Detroit, Seattle, Minneapolis, Providence, Arlington, Alexandria, Charlottesville, etc.). It is also used for data analysis by such city partners as Remix, Populus, and Ride Report. MDS will offer cities real-time, always updated access to the following sets of data. • Trips: Including the entire trip route in GeoJSON format • Vehicle List: By status, including details on why a vehicle is unavailable • GBFS: An older format that lists all available vehicles in an easily consumed fashion MDS is a very rich format, allowing the City access to deep and accurate data in real time. Using MDS allows continuous data monitoring and compliance, and the data 0 YOUR RIDE ANY) , 39 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM that is being shown in MDS is the same that powers all of our applications, meaning it is the most accurate representation of Lime vehicles and trips available. The trips data in particular is returned in GeoJSON format, which is a widely accepted data standard that is usable in nearly all GIS tools. Furthermore, as an ever -evolving and maintained standard, you would get the advantage of best practices recommended by cities like yours to improve how data is shared and consumed. Additionally, Lime will provide access to a real-time data insights dashboard (sample screenshot provided below), which offers high-level aggregate data in an easily digestible format. We will work closely with city staff to make the information useful and relevant for applications like compliance and city planning. 7.113. Dashboard for City Staff The images below represent the typical real-time dashboard City staff get access to as a part of Lime's programmatic support to cities. Access is continuous and the numbers are delivered in real time. Cumulative Trips Iitetime� # Rides t Riders Total Distance Total Time Median Distance/Trip Median Tmerrrip 99,127 29,143 104,648.1 mi 1,539,353 min 0.6 mi 8 min Trips Trends Daily - # Vehicles # Rides per vehicle per Day Total Ride Time Total Ride Distance 1,600" 1200------------------------------------------------------------------ — - - ----------------- 800 - -------- — -------------------------- — - — ----- ----------- - --------------- 400- _1 - 1_1 1_1 - - 2019-03-02 2019-03-05 2019-03-08 2019-03-11 2019-03-14 2019-03-17 2019-03-20 2019-03-23 2019-03-26 2019-03-29 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 40/ CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Past Week (7 -Day) Rider Past Month (30 -Day) Rider Frequency Frequency 0 Three to five trips 0 Two to three trips 49Two to three trips *Three to five trips Less than two trips Five or more trips ;:;; Less than two trips Five or more trips 7.C. Heat Maps for Transportation Planners Lifetime Rider Frequency 0 Fifteen to thirty trips 0 Five to fifteen trips Three to five trips Thirty or more trips Less than three trips Aiding transportation planners to respond to evolving demands on the transportation network, Lime provides a heatmap tool within the dashboard so City staff can identify areas of high utilization. This can inform future investments without the expensive expenditure of limited funding on consultants reports (see screenshot below). Ride Routes This Month (All Types of Vehicles) co st Z 20 ze ��tir sr Z Z 90d Z o n sr Fjr, Z ■ thview St Madisog Ave 3 Garden Cit M t view Ave—u 2 - X Irving St clZ Emerald St Morris HitL Rd Boise Junction Alpine St Lo c � Rose HiIL St � a n y d Cassia St j C a O c c c a- c� 0 Kootenai t a o L 4 Camel's Back Park Boise Hills Village Ltu t � A Fly dtesr U f ? ao r� `© Mapbox © OpenStreetMap Improve this map 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 41 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 7.113. Trip Start and End Points Lime can provide anonymized start and end point data in latitude/longitude format, per the MDS standard. 7.C. Annual Survey Lime is prepared to assist the City with the design and distribution of an annual user survey, from which can be gathered general demographic data, user preferences and user behaviors. Lime can group trips in heat maps based upon zone of origin and destination, such as for the purpose of determining travel paths for users accessing a major transit hub. This approach can assume trip purpose, but not ascertain it. 7.D. Free Tools for Transportation Planners Lime -provided data can be leveraged to assist City transportation planners at no cost to the city. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 42/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 8. Rider Pules 8.A. Rider Terms of Use Lime's user agreement can be found here: https://www.li.me/user-agreement 8.113. Minimum Age The minimum age authorized by Lime on scooters is 18. Lime users acknowledge this requirement in the user agreement. 8.C. Helmet Use Lime strongly encourages the use of helmets, reinforced by in -app messagings. In our terms of service, users agree to comply with local helmet laws. 8.D. Licensing Lime does not require users to present a drivers' license in order to use Lime. Instead, users renting via the app possess a cell phone and a credit card. 4-0" YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 43/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 9. Public Outreach & Education 9.A. General Strategy Dockless scooter share is cutting-edge technology, and Lime works hard to educate customers and residents on proper usage and parking. Before we launch, we focus on working with community stakeholders and press to educate new Lime users on the benefits as well as the operational responsibilities of dockless scooter sharing. This effort has already started, as our operations staff has already met one or more times with the Meridian Police Department, Scentsy, Blue Cross, The Village, and the Meridian Downtown Business Association and spoken to local media. Lime's public education and outreach continues throughout the duration of the pre -launch, launch, and ongoing operations periods. We will continue to engage and provide informational sessions to key institutions such as the Meridian Downtown Business Association, the Meridian Chamber of Commerce and vendors at the Village. We will also reach out to new groups to educate on scooters, which also provides new avenues to hear about areas where we can contribute to better solutions. Lime is committed to utilizing a variety of tools and technologies we have developed over the course of our deep experience operating scooter share systems to ensure our riders are safe and compliant with applicable laws. This includes continuously developing and promoting targeted messaging focused on appropriate riding and parking behavior, implementing product features that accomplish similar goals, and having an active on -the -ground presence to reinforce these efforts. 9.B. Traditional and Social Media Given the excitement that surround launch of service in a city, we are able to capitalize on traditional media attention to remind the community of norms and laws relating to riding scooters, as well as how they can contact customer service to remedy issues such as misparked vehicles. Our Marketing, Communications, and Public Relations team is well -versed in working within the Treasure Valley and already have connections with the proper marketing and communications channels. The excitement similarly means that social media efforts by our team garner public attention as well. Lime communicates to riders through the following platforms: 4-0' YOUR RIDE ANYTIN' 44 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM • Lime website (www.li.me), • Lime Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/limebike/), • Lime Twitter (https://twitter.com/limebike), • Lime Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/limebike/?hl=en), and • The Lime blog (httl2s://www.li.me/blog) Lime's website provides redundant functionality in addition to what is offered in the app environment. This includes regular company updates of new app content, safety videos and educational materials for our riders and partnering stakeholders, press kits for local media and much more. Lime is also the only company to invest significant resources into creating a dedicated Lime safety webpacte and video series and have already partnered with KC Streetcar on a scooter safety video. We frequently share these to current and prospective riders via social media, email campaigns and other web -based channels. Our Message The messages Lime shares via all channels revolve around safety, proper use, and the advancement of urban and civic life. Messaging also includes helmet promotion, highlighting great scooter uses such as connection to transit, and how to use scooters properly consistent with local laws. These helpful reminders aid public understanding on where the vehicles should be parked and ridden as well as other important norms. 9.C. Stakeholder Collaboration ie By building strong partnerships and building effective lines of communication, our team will be responsive to community interests and build a system the community values. In order to provide for a seamless launch that meets or exceeds community expectations, our team will engage the following organizations: 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 45 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Meridian Downtown Business Association Meridian Chamber of Commerce • Scentsy • Blue Cross • The Village • Meridian Crossroads Note: Because scooters are not Verasso Village authorized for users under 18, Regency at River Valley Lime staff will communicate • The Fields through school district leadership - High Point on Overland to administrators at area High • Central Park Commons Schools about scooter rules, and provide a contact in case of any concerns. * Organizations listed in bold have already been the subject of ongoing collaboration. Gi YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 46/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 10. Police Engagement IO.A. Ongoing Engagement Lime has already been in regular contact with the Meridian Police Department (MPD). We have established the building blocks of an effective relationship to share concerns and solutions to achieve a smooth launch. MPD will have a direct contact with our Operations Manager to deal with issues as they arise. Engagement events with the Los Angeles Police Department 10.113. Community Engagement Opportunities with MPD In preparation for launch, our team will bring scooters to multiple shifts of police deployments to showcase how they operate, let officers ride them, and build a dialogue around encouraging positive use. This dialogue will showcase the company's role in shaping user behavior and tools at our disposal to aid officer's work. Additionally, this positive relationship will help Lime and officers together spot emerging trends so we can continue to positively shape user behavior in Meridian. A positive, collaborative relationship with the MPD enables proactive efforts to shape community norms relating to scooter use. Given MPD's creative use of social media and effective leadership on matters of public concern, the Meridian scooter launch presents an opportunity for officers to be part of the storytelling effort. We look forward to creatively presenting scooter best practices to the public in partnership with the MPD should the department be interested. OYOUR RIDE ANYTIih' 47 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 11. Pathway Easements & Engagement 11.A. Transportation Officials Prior to launch and ongoing after launch, Lime Operations staff will work with City of Meridian transportation officials as well as officials of the Ada County Highway District to ensure a common understanding of e -scooter operations and pathways to resolve any issues should they develop. 11.13. Private Property & Easement Property Owners Lime proposes to initially introduce Lime -S throughout Old Town, the downtown core, and The Village, and to expand from there as demand dictates. In some cases, these involve major privately -owned spaces accessed by the public. We will proactively engage with private property owners in this service area to understand their needs and establish feasible solutions when available. We will also learn if they have an interest in hosting dedicated scooter parking on-site or prefer to abstain. Hosting scooter parking can be a terrific way to align the e -scooter program with the objectives of private property owners in the area, providing a boost to business revenue or residential access. In fact, after learning more about the e -scooter program, property owners often choose to participate in Lime's Juicer program as a means to generate discretionary income. n YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 48 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 12. Special Speed Zones 12.A. Technology Lime continues to experiment with ways to effectively control speed in zones of special concern within cities. We have the ability to establish speed limit zones, which are in trial status in areas that have specific speed limitations. This is usually determined in conjunction with the local municipality. Scooters will automatically slow down to the designated speed limit when the user rides into a speed limit zone. The effectiveness and user experience of these tools continues to evolve and may be available for use in select areas of Meridian. 12.13. Recommendations Lime recommends the City and Lime jointly evaluate the need and appropriateness of these still -evolving tools on a case-by-case basis in select areas of major concern during the term of the franchise agreement. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 49/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 13. Parking Location Identification 13.A. Transmitters Lime does not use transmitters or transponders to identify preferred parking areas. This is not required to establish preferred parking areas. 13.113. Other Parking Indicators for Users A number of cities have chosen to institute physical pavement markings in high -use areas to help users identify appropriate parking areas. In some cases, these physical markers can also be reflected digitally in the app (see Section 4.13. for examples). QYOUR RIDE ANYTIME 50/52 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 14. Successes & Lessons Learned 14.A. Limes (Successes) Characteristics of our most successful deployments include: • Flexible scooter caps allowing for increases in vehicles as demand grows (and similarly reduces during seasons demand decreases) • Generally consistent rules and access between adjacent cities, universities, and other jurisdictions • Efforts by jurisdictions and Lime to provide physical visual parking cues that correspond to indicators in the app. • In our research, over 30% of users would have used a car or ride -hailing had all -electric, spatially -efficient scooters not been available. • In Portland, 85% of scooter riders said they would recommend it to a friend, and 62% of residents viewed scooters favorably. • In Auckland, businesses are ecstatic about scooters because they perceive shared scooters as causing an increase in sales for downtown merchants. 14.B. Lessons Lime's LimeAccess program provides low-income residents access to scooter transportation at half price. We have learned that working with local partners is critical to raising awareness of this program and growing numbers of participants. • Scooter users prefer protected bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes, and bike paths over using scooters on sidewalks or the open road, citing safety as the main reason. 0 YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 51 CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO/ VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM 15. References Lime references and contact information can be found in Section I.B. of this submission. n YOUR RIDE ANYTIME 52/52 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 9 of 53 De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. De Weerd: Item 9-B. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: From the review of 9-B, this is Mr. Perison's letter. It seems to mirror some of the -- the substantive issues raised in the 9-A request for reconsideration. Some of the same concerns. I echo what I said in the previous application. Same applies here as far as where my position was on the original application. Nonetheless, it could benefit us and all parties to go the same route with this one. So, I will make a motion and we can discuss after if there is discussion, but I would move that we grant the request for reconsideration on Item 9-B as well with the same directive, for it to be remanded for findings of fact, conclusions of law consistent with existing record in a more complete, succinct manner, inclusive of the DA that legal counsel has referenced just moments ago. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Okay. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. C. Public Hearing for Proposed Vehicle Sharing Program Ordinance and Associated Proposed Fees 1. First Reading of Ordinance No. 19-1809: An Ordinance Adding a New Chapter, Chapter 6, To Title 3, Meridian City Code, Regarding Vehicle Sharing Programs; Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, Regarding Party Responsible For Nuisance; Adding A New Section, Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, To Title 7, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, Regarding Electric Power -Assisted Bicycles And Scooters; Adding A New Subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F ), To Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, Regarding Prohibited Parking; Adopting A Savings Clause; And Providing An Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 16 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 10 of 53 Effective Date. De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-C is a public hearing for the first reading of Ordinance 19-1809. Mr. Clerk, will you read this ordinance by title. Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1809: An Ordinance adding a new chapter, Chapter 6, to Title 3, Meridian City Code, regarding vehicle sharing programs; amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, regarding party responsible for nuisance; adding a new section, Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, to Title 7, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, regarding electric power -assisted bicycles and scooters; adding a new subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F), to Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, regarding prohibited parking; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Okay. You have -- I have opened this public hearing and heard the first reading. Mr. Clerk, do we have any signed up to provide comments? Coles: Madam Mayor, it looks like we have one. Randy Rutland. De Weerd: Yes. Come on down. Sorry, you're not a contestant on The Price is Right, but it just -- Rutland: That's too bad. Thank you. De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Rutland: My name is Randy Rutland. Address is 12063 West Rock Hampton Street in Boise, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Rutland: My reason for coming this evening was to get a little bit more information on Meridian's take on the ride sharing program with the scooters and which companies plan to come to Meridian, if it's the same as what the city of Boise does, because I do have comments on both companies that are currently with Boise. So, that's my question is just will it be the Lime company, as well as the Bird scooter company. De Weerd: Thank you. And, Mr. Nary, do we have a presentation on this? Nary: Madam Mayor, I mean I certainly can -- for the record purpose, for the folks in the audience who are watching, what you have in front of you tonight is a proposal to create a franchise program in the city that will be limited under this iteration to two franchisees. So, we don't have a franchisee -- as this gentleman questioned, we don't have any franchisees yet. So, this is to establish that program to be able to operate within the City of Meridian. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 17 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 11 of 53 Rutland: Okay. De Weerd: So, those details can be found as they are contained in the ordinance. We will -- I suppose -- I think we will have three readings and so this is just the first reading, so it would introduce it to the public. You have an opportunity to review the ordinance and ask any questions that you have regarding the ordinance, but it -- it would be as -- as Mr. Nary indicated. We don't pick who the e -scooter companies would be. It would be on a fair, even basis. So, first two in are the first two that -- that offer the service in the City of Meridian. Is that correct, Mr. Nary? Nary: Yes, ma'am. Rutland: I see. All right. I think that answered my question. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Sir, you mentioned you had some comments specific to the two companies that we had experience with? Rutland: I do. I -- I actually -- I'm considered an independent contractor with both of them and I have pros and cons for both companies. Obviously, the pros would be the -- the fact that it takes away some of the traffic, parking issues that the city may encounter. Pollution. An affordable, cheap ride to get, you know, maybe your first or last mile of your trip where ever you plan to go. Some of the cons are, though, that their customer service is very poor in my opinion. I have been working with them for the last few months, since -- since they have established in Boise in late November -- or, I'm sorry, late October and whether there is a decision to be made or it's already been made and whether or not you bring on these scooter companies, you know, hopefully, there is some talk about -- and have read the stipulations that are required by them. However, there is zero talk about what it does for the community as an independent contractor and what they have to go through in order to succeed with their profits. So, basically, it's really a customer service thing. Their -- their technology is -- they claim to be a billion dollar company each one of them and yet their technology is -- is poor at best as far as their app and the way you use their system. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Additional question for you, Mr. Rutland. As an independent contractor can you share with us what type of direction you receive from the two companies that you contract with about where to place the scooters? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 18 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 12 of 53 Rutland: Yes. It's -- it's on their app, so -- it's on their -- when you use your phone it will tell you exactly where the scooter is to be deployed. Now, with both companies it's before 7:00 a.m. and there is many times where there is -- this morning, for an example, I went to deploy a couple of Bird scooters and it told me to scan a regular Bird. I didn't know what that meant. So, I asked them. Now, unfortunately, the only correspondence you can have with them is through e-mail. There is nobody you can talk to on the phone. So, you really have to wait for them to reply back to you and my question literally was: Would you like me to scan a woodpecker? A crow? What would you like me to scan? Certainly I was being funny, because it's kind of frustrating. I work downtown at the courthouse in Boise and I mean it's just frustrating when you're trying to do what they ask of you, but, yet, there is multiple, multiple glitches with their app. Cavener: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you for joining us. Rutland: All right. Thank you so much. De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide comment on -- on this item? Okay. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I would. So, only in like the last hour was the -- the point was brought up to me that there is more than two -- I didn't even know -- companies out there and that it's literally the first two that can submit fast enough and so when I read through the ordinance I wasn't really -- had that in mind, so I wasn't really looking for, you know, performance requirements, so I don't know if they are in there or not, but my concern with that would be if -- if there are multiple ones that are interested, if there is more than two, do we have built into the ordinance any kind of -- they have to have so many deployed by a certain date or anything like -- time frame? Because my concern would be that if -- if that doesn't happen somebody could just kind of buy up the franchise and wait until they are ready, whether it's six months or a year down the road or I'm going to -- if I owned one -- I don't know if you could get away with it, but I would imagine I would probably want to just set up another entity and take them both and, then, just not do the other one and, then, you would -- instantly would have exclusivity, so -- De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Excuse me, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Palmer. Yes, that's exactly correct. So, there are -- there are two it contemplated. The minimum is a hundred and the maximum is 350. So, once they can have the total amount and what the city contemplated under its ordinance currently is 700. There are means to up those, but, yeah, there is exactly the scenario you're talking about certainly could occur if they Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 19 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 13 of 53 file the application timely and pay the fees, it is based on first in time. So, you know, from a -- from a standpoint when we were exploring this since last year -- originally -- and I think what they experienced in the city of Boise and what we experienced here is at the time we had these discussions there were only two vendors that expressed any interest and that -- and Boise originally didn't cap the number of vendors, they just capped the minimum and the maximums and the maximum total and not the vendors themselves. But, again, they looked at it with it being probably two. Now, you're correct, we have had increase from other vendors that are interested and this could create that problem where it really is just the first in the door. That's the nature of the licensing. We talked before about franchising and going through a different route on the selection process. That would be different than what's before for you right now. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I think Council Member Palmer brings up I think a fair concern, but I do believe our ordinance gives the city some teeth that if a vendor isn't performing, that they could be removed and I would take somebody who had the license and is not deploying it in an appropriate or timely manner noncompliant and we could, essentially, remove their license and award it to the next in line. So, I think there is some -- there is a carrot and a stick to have our operators operate appropriately within Meridian. De Weerd: Did that answer your question, Mr. Palmer? Palmer: Madam Mayor, yeah. Oops. Sorry, Dean. I usually try to be perfect with that. But that -- yeah, if that satisfies that issue -- and I don't know if anyone would attempt this -- I know this -- but the fat gut, capitalist -- free market, unapologetic capitalist in me, thinking these things through -- the other thing that I would ponder on if I were in that position is could I buy both of them and, then, paint them a different color, but still be the same entity, using the same app, or if -- and, then, you would still have both of them. don't know if anyone would go to that effort in Meridian to make that happen, but we are still early in this process and I would rather not regulate them, but, obviously, we are going to and so I want to make sure that we are giving and -- making sure that there is an opportunity to actually have competition. Nary: So, Madam Mayor, Members of Council, to answer your question, Council Member Palmer, so what's required in the application is notice -- notice to us when you are going to begin. So, it doesn't have a start date requirement. So, it doesn't require you begin within 30 days or 60 days or whatever. They simply have to tell us when they are going to start. So, again, if you would like us to change that we can change that. But that's currently the way it is, is they simply notify us when that start date is, so apologize that Council Member Cavener is out of the room, but -- so it wouldn't be a violation if they told us the start date was 90 days from now or 120 days from now and they didn't -- as long as they stayed within the time period they said. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 20 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 14 of 53 Milam: A year? Nary: Well, the current -- the -- sorry. The question was could it be a year. This license period expires December 31st of this year, so -- and, then, they are subject to renewal. Palmer: Madam Mayor? When we get to the renewal can whoever has the franchise just be the renewal or do they have to reapply at 8:00 a.m. on the day after their expiration? Nary: I'm looking at the -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Palmer, so the renewal section, basically, the -- I don't -- the way I read it -- and I wasn't on the committee and maybe Mr. Coles would know better, but it doesn't read that there is a preference to the current vendor. So, it says December 15th is when the renewal period begins and the renew it -- it says renewing franchisees may request authorization to deploy the number of shared vehicles authorized in the previous year, but that doesn't give them a preference of start. And I may be mistaken, maybe it's somewhere else and I'm just not seeing it, but in the renewal provision there is no -- there is no preference for existing vendors. Coles: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- De Weerd: Mr. Coles. Coles: -- Council Member Palmer, so I think that it's the other way around, I believe. The renewal does actually give preference to the current franchisees, because they can apply for renewal on December 15th, I believe. However, an initial franchise -- Nary: Oh, I see. Coles: -- cannot be applied for until January 2nd. So, an initial one is a franchisee that doesn't currently have the franchise agreement. They can apply January 2nd. The current franchisees can apply for renewal December 15th. Nary: I see. Okay. Palmer: Madam Mayor? Nary: Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Sorry to dive so deep into this, but I want to get it right. So, if -- if somebody were to get the first one, could they say I -- we plan on starting in 450 days and, then, go a year without deploying, just so that they have locked down the position and, then, do the renewal, because they were the first one in and, then, deploy later in the second year? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 21 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 15 of 53 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, no, I don't think we would accept an application that the start date exceeds the current period of the license. I don't think that we would allow that. Palmer: Works for me. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: It brings up a good point. That's the type of clarity that would be helpful for the applicant to know, whether it's part of -- you know, in addition to the initial application for a franchise that, you know, makes them aware of the fact that whatever they pick as their initial start date must be something -- no later than the end of the current term that you're applying for or 90 days from your application or something that gives them that understanding that should they want to invest in this program here there is a date by which they have to launch, so they can make a decision. De Weerd: So, this is just the first reading, so as -- as we continue to accept comments -- if you find these things and you want to change it, that -- that's the beauty of the three readings, that you have opportunity to -- to gain further information and -- and look at some of these technicalities or opportunities, depending on how you want to say it. Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, since I recently learned, I think like everyone else did, that there are more that are interested than just the two we are familiar with, just maybe some food for thought and discussion at a later time, would we consider maybe doing an RFP or something, having them be a little more competitive than just if you're first in the door you're automatically in and, then, potentially struggling if they are not meeting our criteria? Maybe we need to just think about that. De Weerd: That is, indeed, another approach and -- and one that you could ask for letters of reference and how they -- their technology works or their experiences in -- in other communities or -- it would open up for additional discussion as to what those criteria would be. Mr. Nary, anything you want to add? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean I think -- certainly that's -- that's an option. Again, that's not what's in front of you and we can certainly suspend this if that's the direction you wish to go and move forward with an RFP process, because the benefit is -- as we have previously discussed, you can set the criteria that's most important to you on how this is done, how it's operated, hours of operation, where it's -- I mean can be used. How it needs to be used. Have selection criteria that's weighted for those things, so that you have a way to discern the difference between number one and number whatever and -- and, again, if you want a cap of numbers of individual scooters per franchisee, cap on the total amount in the city, whatever -- whatever your preference. I mean certainly those can be done in our fee. It's a little more difficult than the licensing Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 22 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 16 of 53 one, other than having the -- not having a cap on the number of franchisees and that's what the city of Boise chose to do. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: The UD, I guess, of the less regulation or this version is that you have competition that's created just purely by who wants to get in the market and who gets there first and my concern with an RFP version is, then, we get to where government is picking who is going to be there, who is going to be allowed to do that business in town, and if -- you know, if one sucks and the other one doesn't, the free market will take care of it and people will ride one and not the other. If they suck equally, then, either they will ride them or they won't, but ideally whoever wants in can get in if they are the first two and try to be better than the other, instead of having us just pick who is going to do the most favors for the city. Not that -- I don't think any of you guys, but I'm worried about future councils that I don't know and trust. De Weerd: Okay. Any -- anything further on this? We -- oh, yes. Chief. Lavey: Madam Mayor, Counsel, I just want to point out that using Councilman Palmer's analogy of a business sucking, you just need to realize that not using the ridership or the ridership is only one part of the suck -- is if it's a bad company it's going to create lots of manpower for us and so we want to make sure that we have reliable companies in there. I support the RFP process, but I also support the free market. If we are going to do the free market, then, we need to make sure that we have rules in place that allow us to revoke these people when they do suck, because my experience with a few of the companies have not been great. But I will tell you that there is currently four companies that I'm aware of. Three of those companies are looking -- well, two of those companies are in Boise. An additional is looking at Boise and there is a fourth one in the wings. So, there is four floating around there that could come to Meridian. So, just want to point out that not riding them is only one part of the equation. If they got bad business practices, then, they are going to create a lot of workload on our part. So, just making sure that whatever ordinance we come up with has a mechanism that we can revoke them if they are poor performers. So, we either judge them before or we judge them after, but if they are a bad company we don't want them doing business in the city. And since it was a long walk to get here, I'm not going to leave until I make sure there is no questions. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Chief, since you walked all the way up here in pain, I just want to wonder -- I'm wondering if any of those companies are purple? Are any of them purple? Lavey: Any of them are purple? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 23 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 17 of 53 Milam: That's the most important thing. Lavey: Just because you have a purple sweater on right now, is that why, or is there some other reason? Milam: I just -- De Weerd: There is a color to a tot lot. Milam: My favorite color. Lavey: I do know that -- I do know the colors of two that I will not mention. I do not know the colors of the other two. Milam: I'm just kidding. Madam Mayor, I agree with -- with what the chief is saying and -- I would -- I think maybe first come first serve isn't the best route to take on this. I think if there are four companies we should have a better system for looking at them and picking the two that are going to be the best -- or at least that we think are going to be the best companies and -- and what happens if you get three at the same time or all four -- or all at the time. So, I think that needs to be looked at real carefully. Coles: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I think Mr. Clerk has been looking at that. Would you like to comment? Coles: Absolutely. And to the chief's point, just so the Council is aware, my office has been actually in communication five total companies. So, the limited communication -- five. I'm not aware of the colors however. Sorry, Council Member Milam. In terms of the first in, our Enterprise software that we use to track intake and issuance of licenses is what we will use to track when we receive applications, so it won't be at our front counter, it will actually be through our Enterprise software, which will date and time stamp and I'm told it has the ability to go down even to the millisecond in terms of time stamping. So, we know who the actual first -- first in is or the first two in. Then from that we will be looking at completeness of applications. So, if five total companies submit, it's the first two that have submitted -- that have a complete application without our office having to go back to say you have missed a step or you have missed three steps. So, we want to make sure that the application is complete and that we are lessening the manpower on our staff to walk people through the process, because that takes time to answer questions and walk through the process. So, that's what we have been looking at in terms of the first in in determining who those first two are. De Weerd: And you can't be early, because you aren't qualified. Mr. Nary, is there a hybrid model you could look at to -- to maybe find that middle ground between the two concerns -- one if they are qualified and they meet certain criteria and, then, two, that they would have a submission date and still allow the free market to choose them once they are qualified. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 24 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 18 of 53 Nary: So, Madam Mayor, we have had a committee working on this for quite a while and I know they have explored all of those options. So, under the licensing one -- I mean this is -- this is the standard model -- model for licensing any type of activity. So, I guess the concern I have -- and when we were talking about deficient business practices, those really aren't something we normally regulate in a license circumstance. So, here in the ordinance, if you look at it, really, the only basis for revocation is they are not operating as they told us they would, whatever -- whatever they tell us how they are going to operate, so where they locate them, how they located, when they put them out, take them back, all of that. They violate the law or they have lied on their application or they don't pay the fee. That's it. So, I -- I have a sense from everybody talking what you think of as bad business practice is more than those things and that's the problem. In the licensing circumstance it's very difficult to manage preference and so that's why the conversation was over an RFP where you could set out their criteria that you want it to be and pick your successful vendor based upon that. So, there are -- there are just two distinct ways of doing it, but the cap on the number creates that race to the -- to the clerk's office that maybe not -- may not be the best way to do it. But the only way to really change that is to, then, not have a cap on the number. You can -- what Boise did was they put no cap on the number, they put a requirement of a minimum and a maximum and maximum total in the city. And, like I said, at the time I think -- and Mr. Coles can confirm, but I think they are considering new caps because of more vendors, because they did the same thing, they just capped the total number in the city and that allowed more than one vendor to participate or it could have allowed two or three, but you had them -- each one picked up their full load up front and so it absorbed the entire cap by two vendors to start. That's why they are looking at more. Lavey: Boise -- Boise is capped at three companies currently. Nary: Three? Okay. But I think it's capped based on the numbers. Lavey: They have a -- they have a number which is 750, not to exceed that -- Nary: Right. Lavey: -- and, then, they have a cap of three vendors currently. Nary: Right. But -- I'm sorry to disagree with you, but I don't think it says there is only three allowed in the city. Lavey: Yes, it -- Nary: Oh, it does? Okay. Lavey: It says only three vendors currently, yes, in their ordinance. De Weerd: And I guess the committee really focused on -- if we are going to do this we want to do it right and the race to be the first to submit, I don't know if that necessarily will Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 25 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 19 of 53 give you the most qualified to -- to try and do this right, because I will tell you we had a lot of complaints after the first rollout and if the comments and the -- the phone calls that we have received are any indication, we don't really have a large percentage of our citizens that are supportive of this program to begin with. Kicking it off wrong I think would not be a good way to start a program -- to see how it would work, because I think as we heard earlier, there are advantages of being an alternate transportation form of low emission and an inexpensive way to -- to have alternative transportation. So, you would want to do it right. I don't know, it's -- it's certainly your decision. Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, just to comment on that and I echo with what you said. wasn't real supportive of this because of the experience we had the first time, but I have really tried to come around and give that benefit to the -- to the city and to the companies that we did have experience with. I will tell you that there is one company that is still very, very disappointing, even after I reached out to them and they said they heard me. Well, they have now forgotten me and we still have not met. So, I am really, really concerned if we go forward this way with first in -- first come first serve, because they haven't proven their reliability and -- and, frankly, with what Mr. Nary said about we are limited in how we can revoke, I'm concerned we are going to have a nightmare all over again. So, I think we need to slow down and we need to not rush this. But that's one person's opinion, so -- I realized the vote rests with you, just, please, proceed cautiously, because that trust has not been earned yet in some of those companies. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: A couple thoughts. Appreciate the comments from the chief. As one who has worked on RFPs in the past, everyone who works on an RFP works really really hard to make sure your organization looks as best as possible when you submit something and so I have been on the side where we have selected our piece for organizations and they haven't performed to the level that they had indicated and promised they would. I think that -- what I'm hearing from the chief, which I think maybe worth some further exploration -- is strengthening our case or our basis for revocation if a -- if a licensee isn't performing. I think that's more appropriate than entering into an RFP process. Again, I don't know if there are other provisions that the committee that worked on this discussed. Perhaps that's something that we could hear feedback from the committee before a final vote. I am not one that gets really excited about an RFP process for this, just because I think it's -- it's a formalized sales pitch from businesses and, you know, we -- as -- as I hear from the chief it sounds like we have got one operator in the valley right now that has been forthright and has met with the police department, one who is not -- and, then, it sounds like three that are kind of an unknown. So, I think the Mayor's correct, let's try and get this correct, but I think that we can achieve what maybe sounds like some additional Council Members want to see without necessarily having to invent an RFP process, go through a scoring and, again, scores are driven by a small group of people -- did they have breakfast that morning? Is the -- using favorite words? I mean there is just so many variables that I don't get really excited about an RFP process. So, if we can avoid it I'm Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 26 of 476 Meridian City Council February 5, 2019 Page 20 of 53 supportive of that, but let's -- let's take some of the feedback from the chief and feedback from you as Council, if there is additional teeth that you want to add to give the city greater strength to remove a licensee if they are not performing and I would support that. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for the chief? Lavey: I can limp back up here if you have them. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Cavener. Cavener: What run -- what run were you on? Lavey: What was that? Cavener: What run were you on? Lavey: It was Nugget. De Weerd: It's the bunny hill. Lavey: On the back side. Yes. Chair six. Before we got to 16 inches of powder. Cavener: Glad you're okay. De Weerd: Yeah. Cavener: Appreciate you being here. Lavey: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Okay. Anything further? Otherwise, we will put this on the next week's calendar. Okay. Okay. Very good. D. Public Hearing Continued from January 2, 2019 for Warrick Subdivision (H-2018-0115) by Schultz Development, Located at 2445 E. Amity Rd. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 36.22 acres of land with an R -4 19.94 acres) and R -8 (16.28 acres) zoning districts; and 2. Request: a Preliminary Plat consisting of 125 building lots and 19 common lots on 36.22 acres of land Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 — Page 27 of 476 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 6 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 is -- thank you, Mr. Cavener, for doing that. Okay. Item No. 7 is our Consent Agenda. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I move we approve our Consent Agenda as published, for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda [Action Item] De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 9: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Proposed Vehicle Sharing Program Ordinance Third Reading of Ordinance No. 19-1809: An Ordinance Adding A New Chapter, Chapter 6, To Title 3, Meridian City Code, Regarding Vehicle Sharing Programs; Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, Regarding Party Responsible For Nuisance; Adding A New Section, Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, To Title 7, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, Regarding Electric Power -Assisted Bicycles And Scooters; Adding A New Subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F), To Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, Regarding Prohibited Parking; Adopting A Savings Clause; And Providing An Effective Date. De Weerd: So, we will move into the Action Items. Our first public hearing up is on the -- Item 9-A, the public hearing for proposed vehicle sharing program ordinance. I thought I would -- first we might have some new folks in the audience here wanting to provide testimony. During the public hearing process for ordinances we will read the -- the ordinance by title only and, then, open it up for public comment. You have three minutes Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 15 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 7 of 84 to provide your thoughts and comments and, then, Council, this is the third reading, they will decide if they want to make any changes to the ordinance and move it forward or if they do make changes, then, it will go through the reading process at their discretion. For those who are here for land use process I will explain that when we get to the land use section. So, with that, I will go ahead and ask our city clerk to, please, read Ordinance 19-1809 by title. Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1809, an Ordinance adding a new chapter, Chapter 6, to Title 3, Meridian City Code, regarding vehicle sharing programs; amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, regarding party responsible for nuisance; adding a new section, Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, to Title 7, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, regarding electric power -assisted bicycles and scooters; adding a new subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F), to Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, regarding prohibited parking; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date. De Weerd: This is the third reading and we are taking public hearing on the ordinance that is in front of Council. Mr. Nary, can you give a brief overview of where we are and the intent of the ordinance. Nary: Yes. Again, thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. So, the ordinance that's been proposed has been on your agenda for the last couple of weeks. Basically it creates an operator system for our licensee to request the ability to operate this business within the city. They have a minimum number of vehicles they have to provide as part of that service, as well as a maximum number as well. Again, it's an application process for a licensee. The maximum is two licensees currently and the ordinance maximum of 700 scooters that can be deployed by each licensee -- or, excuse me, total amount of 700 to 350 per licensee with a minimum of a hundred. The other portion that you have in front of you for review on this program is related to the regulations for operating these vehicles -- or operating the scooters, how they can be used, where they can be used. There is one issue I do need to raise for the Council to consider in -- in the drafting of it there -- we discovered today there is a discrepancy between the licensee portion and the operation portion and what that is is in the discussions by the committee there was a discussion on whether or not to park these vehicles on private property where a written permission would need to be provided or be secured prior parking and the committee felt that that was a difficult thing to enforce and made a decision not to require it. So, in the operator section is not in there that that is required, but in the parking provision it is and so it got overlooked in the drafting and so my recommendation would be to pick either one. There is certainly pros and cons on both sides on whether to require written permission to or to not and -- and the committee had made a decision not to require it, but it does need to be cleaned up prior to publication for a final ordinance, that it either needs to be required or not, that it can't be -- it can't conflict. So, if there is other questions I can answer those. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Cavener: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 16 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 8 of 84 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Couple questions. First for Mr. Nary. I know Emily is not here, but that piece about written permission for private property, how do other municipalities across the country handle that? What was the discussion from the committee about that? Nary: Mr. Coles was a part of the committee, so he could probably answer that. I will tell you from the practical standpoint right now when you're looking at a vehicle -- so, not this type of vehicle, but other vehicles, there are parking lots and things that are open to the public and there are places to park vehicles and such and I don't know if that was the gist of it, but that's really how it is handled for private vehicles in general is that -- it depends on the -- and they could sign it, they can post it. If they want to post no scooters on their property they can. So, they have the ability to enforce that themselves if they wish. The difficulty is -- on the enforcement end is -- and, again, thinking of it in relation to vehicles -- the operator of the vehicle never gets the parking ticket, it always goes to the vehicle itself. So, I don't know if the concern from the committee was trying to address that from the operator standpoint, from the -- the franchisee's standpoint, so -- and that may have been -- and, again, Mr. Coles can help with that, but it's certainly not undoable. I mean it -- and I can give you one common example. If you rent a vehicle from a commercial vehicle rental, Alamo, Hertz, whatever, they do -- almost every one of them will now tell you if you get a citation in this vehicle or charge, like a parking ticket or a toll bill or something like that and don't report it or take care of it, when it comes back to them they will charge your credit card for it. So, there are means that the -- that the -- the property or the -- the owner of the scooter can address this issue as well if they wish. But that's up to them. But, again, Mr. Coles could probably help with more of that. But that's the general way of enforcement. Coles: Thank you, Madam Chair. Unfortunately, I don't think I can really add much more to that. I don't recall specifically this piece of the conversation. We have had many conversations about this, other than I know it was -- and enforcement was the biggest issue here, how is the city going to handle enforcement of that, especially on private property. But the specifics down that -- that road I do not recall this conversation. Cavener: Madam Mayor, I guess an additional question. I learned today that -- it looks like Kaycee for the Mayor's office put out a poll asking the public for their feedback. I'm just curious the methodology around that poll, when that was pushed out, who that was pushed out to and scientific validity behind it and just put in our packet for consideration. Who the right person is to talk to about that. De Weerd: It was just a question that was put out on NextDoor to get a sense of, one, does the public know that this was up as an item for discussion in front of Council and since we did get comments that people didn't know about it, it was to -- to say, hey, what are your thoughts, yes, no, don't know. So, there is nothing scientific. Just another way Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 17 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 9 of 84 to -- to get public sentiments and to let the public know that this was an item for discussion in front of Council. Cavener: Madam Mayor, follow up? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Cavener: Do we know how long the poll was up for and who was able to access it or see it? De Weerd: Yeah. Everyone on NextDoor. It was sent out like we put out all our communications on NextDoor. Cavener: Sorry, Madam Mayor. Do we know -- De Weerd: I don't know how long. No. Cavener: Thank you. Coles: Madam Mayor, -- I can -- I believe I can answer that. De Weerd: Mr. Coles. Coles: Thank you. It was put out Friday at some time. I don't know the exact time of day on Friday, but it was put out on Friday. Cavener: Thank you. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I believe over 800 people replied to it, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Anything further at this point? Okay. Mr. Coles, I would ask if you could read the names of those that have signed up. Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. We do have a few sign-ups this evening. Russell Spearman is the first on the list to address the Council. De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Spearman: It's Russell Spearman. 411 West Claire Court, Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 18 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 10 of 84 Spearman: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Russ Spearman and I'm a 39 year resident of the City of Meridian. I'm also on the board of directors for the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho, a 501(c)(3) that promotes awareness, understanding and prevention of brain injury based on the express needs of individuals with a brain injury in their families. Since 2000 1 have served as the program director for Idaho's traumatic brain injury program for the state of Idaho through Idaho State University's Meridian campus. My comments today are specific to the ordinance 19-1809. I'd like to begin by saying companies like Bird, Lime, Scoot or Spin offer smartphone applications allowing users to search for a scooter nearby, tap to run it, and they are free to ride away, but they don't require and enforce helmets and representatives from emergency departments across the nation express concern throughout this past summer. Electric scooters have an average top speed of 15 miles per hour, significantly faster than the six miles per hour cruising speed of a bicycle. They are also less than half the size and in many cities downtown neighborhoods ill equipped to navigate the -- the terrain, storm grates, broken sidewalks, potholes and traffic. Injuries suffered in electric scooter accidents can be devastating, especially without a helmet. Traumatic brain injuries are devastating to the individual, his or her family members and loved ones, coworkers in the community. Ashanti Jordan has not woken up since the day six weeks ago when she hopped on a green and black scooter and took off onto a downtown Fort Lauderdale street. A car hit her as she rode for the -- rode the for rent scooter. The initial police investigation says she ran a stop sign and was struck by an oncoming Toyota Corolla, sending her flying about 25 feet. Today she lies in a vegetative state in a hospital with a fractured skull, a severe brain injury and multiple broken ribs. Doctors also had to remove a portion of her skull. Her family's currently suing Lime, because the Lime application indicates that riders must ride in the street, but the local policy in our city is to ride on the sidewalk. This discrepancy, along with people neglecting to wear helmets, has led to accidents such as this one. The Lime app states that riders must wear a helmet, but not all riders, including the woman in this accident, abide by that rule. Closer to home, just this past fall we had the man in the dinosaur costume who fell off the e -scooter and struck a woman in a Boise crosswalk. There has been at least one death in Dallas, Texas, as a result of e -scooters. As has already been alluded to, the poll conducted by the Meridian Mayor's office shows that out of 850 Meridian residents only 37 percent supported the operation of e -scooters in Meridian, while 56 percent oppose their operation. In the January 2019 edition of the Journal of American -- from the American Medical Association, they looked at injuries associated with standing electric scooter use from two separate hospital emergency rooms. They found that the most common injury were falls at 80.2 percent, collision with an object at 11 percent, being hit by motor vehicle or object at 8.8 percent. Only ten individuals or 4.4 percent of all riders were wearing a helmet. I would like to end my comments by saying that the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho is not opposed to the use of e -scooters or e -bikes, but believes that the ordinance before the City Council does not include the safeguards and protections that should be afforded to all residents of Meridian. Some of the recommendations we would like to suggest are the following: I think we would all agree that the rollout last spring of the use of e -scooters was premature on too large a scale and it did not include protections for both the rider, as well as the community. We would recommend piloting by downsizing the number of riders to 50, consider limiting to a particular geographic area within the city limits, collect additional data and make Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 19 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 11 of 84 adjustments based on use and feedback. Another recommendation would be to consider the use of a helmet similar to the echo helmet. That's a new helmet that's out. It's a unique honeycomb structure that absorbs impact by spreading the blow evenly around the head in the case of a crash when riding and it should be a requirement and forced in the ordinance. We would also like to -- like to recommend that consideration be given for including a minimum age requirement for the use of e -scooters in the ordinance. We would like to recommend 18 years of age for use of an e -scooter. We also recognize that there exists an inability to monitor those that are using an e -scooter. Lastly, we would like to just say that given the population growth and desire to improve the city's infrastructure, we also recommend moving forward with a time limited work group or advisory group involving all interested -- interested stakeholders that would assist city leaders in coming up with a plan, thereby mitigating undue harm on riders, as well as citizens of this great community. I would like to leave you with this quote from the executive director of the Brain Injury Association of America. When you hit a pothole on a bicycle -- when you hit a pothole on a bicycle with a 26 inch wheel, you may have an issue. When you hit a pothole on any scooter with a six inch wheel you are going to have an issue no matter the age or size of the rider. Meridian city leaders must protect their communities by demanding e -scooter companies offer protective equipment, especially helmets for all riders. Members of the Meridian City Council, thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. I stand open for questions, if that's appropriate. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? We appreciate you joining us. Cavener: Madam Mayor? Sir? I do have a question. De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Mr. Spearman, thank you for being here. I appreciate having someone with a unique subject matter expertise coming to provide some testimony tonight. A couple questions that will help -- kind of help me. Are you aware of what, if any, laws exist in Meridian or in Idaho that require helmets of any kind, whether it's off a scooter share, personal bike -- again, I look back when I was in elementary school and high school, never used a helmet on a bike. Now I do all the time. I never wore a helmet when I was skiing because, apparently, I wasn't crazy and now I wear my helmet all the time. I'm just trying to understand if those have happened by -- by people modifying their habits or if that is a result of -- of law. And you may be the best qualified person to provide some of that expertise. Spearman: To my knowledge there is no helmet law in the state of Idaho as it relates to bicycles or motorcycles for that matter. There wasn't when we moved back in 1998 when the state underwent Medicaid modernization and Governor Kempthorne tried to move forward with -- with some legislation at that time, but it didn't -- it didn't go anywhere. That's not to say that, you know, at the municipal or the -- or the city level that -- that helmet use, you know, couldn't be prescribed. I think -- I think from an enforcement standpoint clearly that's -- that's an issue. I will say that -- you know, I read -- I read this morning in the state of California for an individual 18 years of age on an electric scooter Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 20 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 12 of 84 without a helmet, they can get fined 500 dollars. Pretty -- pretty steep. It is California. But if it was -- if there was a fine commensurate, you know with the -- with -- with the City of Meridian that might be a deterrent and to your point, I never -- I never wore a helmet growing up as a kid, but, boy, my -- my children sure do and whether they are -- whether they are skiing at Bogus or -- or on their bicycle. Cavener: Madam Mayor. We drove up to Bogus two weeks ago and realized that I didn't have my helmet and so we drove an hour back down to grab the helmet and an hour back. So, it's -- it's habit forming and it's good. Madam Mayor, a couple other questions. Your -- your comment about an age in the audience I think is really intriguing and I'm just curious from your perspective should that pertain only to those who use these kind of rental services? I think because I have been researching scooter shares, my Google ad and my social media ads are just inundated with -- by -- by e -scooters and -- and don't -- don't rent one, just own one and so I guess from your perspective should an age for an ordinance only pertain to someone who is going to be using this mobile device to check one out or should we be setting an age restriction for anybody who wants to use an electric scooter or nonelectric scooter or a bike? As someone who really represents brain injury, I'm really interested in -- to kind of what you think are some of the best practices for us as a city to -- to consider. Spearman: I had a difficult time -- I had a difficult time coming up with the age. You know, I began with -- with 14 to 16 years of age and, then, I found that in looking at, you know, what some of the other ordinances look like out there, that 18, you know seemed reasonable. That's the -- you know, it's the legal emancipated age and, you know, for most states. I surmise -- I can't specifically tell you that this is a fact, but I surmise that when -- when we had the roll out here in Meridian that they were -- that there were many people under -- under 18 years of age that were -- that were using those scooters and maybe as young as ten and 12 years -- years of age. At least they looked that young. And I think there may have been a lot of -- you know, a lot of work in getting the information out to the community, but I don't -- I don't suspect -- I don't believe that the community was ready. I know -- I'm president of my homeowner's association and I can tell you that we were not prepared for -- to see e -scooters on sidewalks. Cavener: Madam Mayor? Mr. Spearman, I'm -- I'm on the City Council and I wasn't prepared for it when -- when they deployed. So, I think that's one of the reasons why we as a Council are taking this so seriously. Madam Mayor, one more question if I may. Your -- your comment about a pilot, smaller scooters in a certain geographic area, and you -- your -- the word used to -- to gain data and feedback, what -- what data and feedback would you hope to attain from -- from a smaller pilot from your perspective that would be beneficial, either to move you either in favor or in opposition? Because, essentially, I think you're kind of neutral. Spearman: I think -- I think the City Council has -- has the ability to be able to draw some geo -- geographic boundaries around -- around the city without -- without being discriminatory in any way and can limit the number of scooters that may not be palatable to the franchisee, but they will -- they will recoup their money eventually and to start small, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 21 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 13 of 84 you know, in a locale. I just think it makes good sense, because I think there is a lot that we don't know as it relates to e -scooters. It's not just the City of Meridian, it's -- it's -- you know, Boise is struggling with this issue as well. So -- so, my question would be why not -- why not go slow? Why not move into this incrementally. Cavener: Madam Mayor. Help me, though, because I think that if -- if we -- let's say we were to do a smaller geographic area for the intent of gaining data, we as a Council or the Mayor or city go to these operators and say this is data that we need and I guess I'm struggling to find out what are the -- what are those things -- what are those data points that a city would want to see to help -- and for someone who works in brain injury would want to be aware of to help better form your opinion. Spearman: The biggest issue would be what's the age of the rider. What's the terrain that they are riding on. Are they riding on sidewalks? Are they riding on -- on -- on paved roads? You know, are they -- are they wearing a helmet? You know, the -- I mentioned the age. Injury. You know, would be -- have they -- you know, have they sustained an injury. I mean, obviously, on the enforcement side it's going to fall to the franchisee to some extent, but I think it's also going to fall to our -- our law enforcement folks and -- don't know if that answers the question or not. Cavener: I appreciate it. I really do. Appreciate you being here tonight and I appreciate your testimony greatly. Spearman: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions? Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Not a question, just -- the only helmet law that I'm aware -- as I'm looking for nods or shakes -- is that on motorcycles if you're riding or driving a motorcycle and you're under 18 that you're required to have one. I don't know that we have any other helmet laws in Idaho. Yes, that was confirmed. Spearman: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Coles: Next is Brian Leslie. De Weerd: Good evening and thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 22 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 14 of 84 Leslie: Good evening, Madam Mayor and City Council. My name is Brian Leslie. I'm at 4647 North Tipton, Meridian. 83646. De Weerd: Thank you. Leslie: So, as Councilman Cavener probably already knows, I'm a member of the Transportation Commission with Meridian. I'm also a member of the bicycle advisory committee for ACHD. I'm not here on behalf of either of those today. I'm just here as a private citizen. I'm an advocate of alternative transportation models, helping people get around other than in cars. So, first I want to thank the Council for being open and receptive to the e -scooters and e -bikes. They are a low cost, nonpolluting, congestion reducing typically options that frequently replace motor vehicle trips and I don't know if anybody saw, but Portland had a four month pilot program and they released a study that was very detailed and they found that about 35 to 40 percent of scooter rides replaced vehicle trips. So, Boise's had the program I think since mid October and by and large it's been pretty good. There was the one incident with some guy in a dinosaur suit riding on a sidewalk and he hit somebody, but by and large has been a pretty successful operation. I do want to say, though, that some of these operators have made mistakes in other cities when they have rolled out and it wasn't exactly smooth here in Meridian either. I think the -- the operators need to be more proactive when they enter these communities with educating users on how to ride them, how to park them, you know, what -- where to ride, where not to ride and they have that capability to custom tailor their instructions to a particular community and I think they really also need to have more enforcement on their own part for where people are parking these scooters, because every time somebody has to park these they have to take a picture of it, so they have a record of what it looks like and if it's in the middle of the street, you know -- and up to this point in time it seems like they really haven't taken any action against their users. So, my question on the ordinance is -- it appears that it's only for vehicle sharing, e -scooters and e -bike. You don't have to answer now, I just want to throw it out there, but are personal e -scooters and personal e - bikes included -- I'm seeing heads -- they are not included in this. Okay. So, I have concern about -- concerns about that, because if personal e -scooters and e -bikes are not included in this ordinance, if this ordinance is adopted as is, the rules for personal devices are going to be different than these vehicle sharing devices, which is a bad idea. People are -- they need to be the same; right? An e -bike is an e -bike whether it's a vehicle sharing or your own personal one. On Section 3-6-31D I was curious why there is an hours of operation limit, 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. ban. They have headlights. They have tail lights. So, I was just curious why they have that in there. It also said the scooters need to be physically removed -- oh. Said the scooters need to be removed, but it -- does that mean if it's physically removed or -- from the public domain or just inactivated for riders to ride them? Section 3-6-3E2. It's -- it's a good -- a good idea in principle, particularly for those people with vision and mobility limitations, but it says you can't block us -- the sidewalk has to stay five feet clear and it seems, just from my walking around the city, do we have any sidewalks that are more than five feet wide? I think most of our sidewalks are pretty narrow. De Weerd: Yes, we do. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 23 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 15 of 84 Leslie: Do we? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Leslie: We have a few, but like in my -- my subdivision -- De Weerd: We would love to see more, but -- Leslie: Right. So, if the sidewalks are less than five feet I'm assuming they can't put them on the sidewalk, they would have to put them on private property. De Weerd: And, Brian, if you can start wrapping up your remarks. Leslie: Okay. De Weerd: Your three minutes were up two minutes ago. Leslie: Oh, man. I'm sorry. I guess Boise's program is working pretty well. I think we should probably emulate their -- their regs that they enabled. So, really, my biggest concern is Section 7-1-9-2. If you eliminate A, B and C and just tell people ride on the sidewalk if you can and you don't feel safe in the street, it's working for Boise fine and that's pretty much all I had. De Weerd: Thank you very much. Council, any questions? Cavener: Madam Mayor? Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Brian, you said it could replace vehicle trips and I'm curious in Meridian where we don't have other forms of transportation -- because most of what I have experienced are people is getting off a bus and, then, getting a scooter and going to work or things like that where they have been either going to walk or use another form, but where we don't have much other transportation to connect to, what kind of trips are you imagining them replacing in Meridian? Leslie: I would imagine Lime has a lot of that data to show where people are -- are riding them. I would venture to guess it's closer to the core -- to the downtown core. Eagle Road. But I -- yeah, you're right, we don't have much public transportation here. So, it's probably going to be from their home -- Little Roberts: Thank you. Cavener: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 24 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 16 of 84 De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Commissioner Leslie, I appreciate you being here. Brian Leslie. There was a -- the previous testimony talked a lot about helmets and I'm just curious for someone who does a lot of work for bicyclists and bicyclists' rights and working with the highway district, what's your opinion on should the City Council be requiring operators to have helmets? Should we be looking as a city to require helmets amongst all riders, whether it be electric scooters or bicycles? I'm curious if you have any insight on that you would be willing to share. Leslie: Unequivocally, absolutely no mandatory helmet laws. Mandatory helmet laws reduce ridership. That has been proven everywhere it's been enacted and they don't keep you safe. When you get -- the vast majority of bicycle injuries or when a car hits a bicycle and 4,000 pounds hitting you, a little foam hat is not going to save you. Helmets were designed for low impact, low speed, kind of injuries and those are few and far between. Cavener: Thank you. Leslie: Infrastructure is the best thing. Cavener: Thank you, sir. De Weerd: Off street lanes that bicyclists and e -scooters can travel safely; right? Leslie: Yeah. That would be great. De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you. Leslie: Thank you. Coles: Next is Jonathan Hopkins. De Weerd: Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Hopkins: Jonathan Hopkins. Bell Street in Seattle, Washington. So, good evening, Mayor de Weerd and Council. We wanted -- I'm Jonathan Hopkins, the regional government relations manager for -- for Lime and you may know my colleague Megan, who is here. She's met with some of you and also colleague Aaron, who is coaching a son's basketball game tonight, so I decided to come on over and stand in for them here tonight. I definitely want to thank everybody for the opportunity to speak today and thanks for your work to bring new mobility options to Meridian that the community we have seen is eager to use. We are also eager to continue to collaborate with the city, local businesses, local civic organizations to help bring a coordinated seamless scooter launch to the city. In fact, we have learned from our experiences early in this history and you Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 25 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 17 of 84 were part of that history about how important that good community engagement is and because of that, that's -- those lessons have been applied in other cities. We build really close relationships with the community and we are doing that currently in Boise. In fact, we just came from meetings with the city of Boise earlier today. Their staff is busy working on rules to double the size of the scooter fleet in their city at the direction of council, because of council's satisfaction with how that -- that program has gone in the city of Boise. Also, you know, Lime takes safety very very seriously. We want our customers to remain our customers and to remain healthy good citizens in their communities. Our outreach encourages use of helmets and other safety best practices and we are eager to collaborate with organizations that are focused on safety. Specifically we launched a three million dollar campaign that we called Respect The Ride in the fall, which focuses on both education outreach, such as asking users to take a pledge to ride safely, distributions of tens of thousands of helmets and we even have developed new scooters that we are -- we are testing now that have two inch larger wheel bases, front shocks, much more stable to improve safety. In fact, we do know from cities that have collected data on safety -- namely Salt Lake City and Portland. The Multnomah County Health Department, Portland, and the city of Salt Lake's -- the city's DOT -- both say there is no indication that injuries and accidents from scooters are significantly different than those affecting pedestrians or bicycle riders. We are a strong supporter this measure, noting the committee's original intent that private property owners be able to keep scooters off their property, but the written intent -- written approval not be required. We definitely thank Meridian for your leadership on this, to help bring new mobility options to further -- to greater parts of the Treasure Valley. So, thank you for your time tonight. De Weerd: Thank you. Hopkins: We are always happy to answer any questions that you have. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Just to get a little bit of perspective -- you mentioned Portland. So, can you give us an example of how many scooters you have deployed there. I know we are talking a much larger city, but -- Hopkins: Portland had a total of 2,000 scooters initially, but their DOT believes that -- their DOT says a lot more could be put on the streets -- like thousands and thousands more to meet the demand of the city. Milam: Because the city limits of Portland it's -- okay. And, Madam Mayor, follow up. How many accidents that -- that come back to you, are you aware of? And maybe that -- you probably need more parameters. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 26 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 18 of 84 Hopkins: Yeah. I don't have specific data on accidents from Portland that Lime collected. The best information we have is from the Multnomah County Health Department, that the general takeaway is that there were fewer accidents during that period than there were on bikes and -- but there is certainly a learning curve and as -- even as people started using scooters more the number of accidents went down. So, it's just like getting on a bike for the first time, people should do it at low speed and figure it out. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Thank you. Thank you for coming. Hopkins: It's a pleasure to be here. Bernt: Yeah. Remind me what the minimum age is for Lime. Hopkins: For us we require people to be 18 years of age. Bernt: And remind -- Madam Mayor, follow up. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Bernt: Mr. Nary, what is -- I don't remember what our ordinance is saying -- do we have a minimum age in our -- I don't remember seeing that. Nary: I don't believe so. Can I add one more thing, Councilman Bernt. And not specifically that question, but it was brought up that the ordinances before you only apply to the leasing companies. The operation ones, 7-1-9 and 7-2-2 apply to all scooters, not just ones that are rented. The other parts regarding the licensing only apply to those companies. But the operational ones are to everyone. But there isn't an age limit. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Mr. Hopkins, how many -- so, more people earn a -- an income from Uber than from any other company in the world, because of their -- their platform and their ability for pretty much anybody to take advantage of the earning opportunity there. How many people locally are earning an income off of Lime's juicer service? Hopkins: In the Treasure Valley it's hundreds. Palmer: Hundreds? Any idea how many hundreds, roughly? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 27 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 19 of 84 Hopkins: We have over 20 staff. They are full-time staff in Boise. That number will increase should Meridian allow scooter service here and those employees can come from throughout the region. Additionally, there is juicers -- I mean our company is named Lime, so everything has to be metaphorically correct. So, the juicers are recharges for the scooters and those people come from throughout the community. It has -- it has an equity impact, in fact. It's five to 20 dollars per scooter that you recharge. It's pretty easy to do. People of all ages and abilities can go do that sort of thing and earn money on their own time and it helps take care of the community, they help deploy them in the morning, based on guidance they get through an app showing where the proper deployment zones are. Palmer: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Hopkins, I guess I have a question in terms of this ordinance holds the operators accountable to the driver's behavior. How does the company hold driver's behavior accountable? Hopkins: Madam Mayor, I think that's something as we continue to innovate and evaluate best practices it improves safety and helps bring proper norms to communities. We are definitely exploring like what sort of options work from just notifying riders if they have been noticed, you know, doing something to violate the rules or leaving the scooter in a place that it shouldn't have been left. But there is -- I think we will see continued evolution or exploration of like what tools work best and companies like this love to beta test and test, okay, is the behavior better through one type of activity than another. Much more than -- anything more aggressive than that is just something that sometimes communities discuss with us. De Weerd: So, you could have repeat behavior from one user that -- that is ongoing, there is no way that you have to block their usage or anything like that? Hopkins: We are definitely able to do that, should we decide to. With good cause. De Weerd: Because certainly the first four days of the rollout showed a lot of bad behavior and they weren't 18. 1 know you require the helmet. I -- I also know not very many people walk the streets of Meridian with a helmet in their hand looking for something to ride. So, that one's difficult, but if you require these different things that you have a credit card, you're 18, you have a helmet, how do you enforce that? Hopkins: If there is reports of something with a certain user's account, that's something we can deal with and continue to talk to the city about. Beyond that -- there is certainly certain norms that have to develop, like people have to have a chance to use these sorts of things, just like we have certain norms with biking, certain norms with cars, those things have been developed over decades and the way we get to that is both by having a community that has expectations. What we found is on these scooters it's not just 19 year olds and 20 year olds riding it, but it's the broad swath of the community and when we have the whole community out there, there is a self policing aspect of that over time, as well as the communication that we have with local city government, with the police Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 28 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 20 of 84 department, to try and tweak things where necessary to help the proper best norms develop to help people both have mobility and safety at the same time. De Weerd: So, in the ordinance it also contemplates -- I guess I am more sensitive to how the first rollout impacted public perception and, you know, the committee came and made a recommendation to roll this out a little bit with greater caution, using one operator to -- to understand how the ordinance works and work out any bugs before we open it up to everyone. The way we have it being proposed tonight is that it's kind of first in gets to -- the first two in are the two operators we move forward with. What do you think of that approach and would you suggest a different type of rollout? Hopkins: Madam Mayor, I think it's important to work to bring the best quality operators that have demonstrated a willingness to work with the community and, you know, produce best practices of that sort of partnership. I don't know if -- like the first two to, you know, essentially digitally dropped their name in the hat is necessarily the pathway to get there. It's our strong belief that in a competitive marketplace there should be just some sort of method to select the most qualified providers. If it's the first two that arrive, there is -- there are other cities that have picked less qualified providers and have had negative experiences with that, both from the quality of the hardware, as well as just the quality of the interaction with that organization and when -- when we risk taking less qualified providers, we actually risk just re-experiencing the experience that the community had here earlier when all the -- when the whole marketplace was younger; right? Well, there is certain companies that have gained experience over the past nearly two years and there are others that have not. Our lessons at Lime are to work with your staff, to work with political leaders, and not just stop there, to work with business associations, civic organizations to try and educate on what are the norms, how can we roll this out, where, what are your concerns, maybe there is something we can do about that. Those -- those sorts of things and that's why we have staff that's here present in the community to do that sort of work, because we find it absolutely important. We believe like the best, most mobile cities will have really strong partnership between organizations that are private and organizations that are public, like yourselves. De Weerd: I think you have raised a good point. I know a comment earlier was a race to the bottom and certainly you -- you want to give this an opportunity, like Mr. Leslie said, to -- to shine and to show that it is a viable alternative transportation option, but what we can't afford is another failure and, you know, I -- I was interested to hear your -- your comments on that. Hopkins: Thanks, Madam Mayor. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Cavener. Cavener: In your testimony you talked about lessons learned, which was music to my ears. I think there is a lot of lessons you guys have learned. You touched on engaging Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 29 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 21 of 84 with other local stakeholders to better improve rollout. So, I'm curious what type of outreach and connections have you made with local stakeholders in Meridian to ensure, should you be one of the companies to roll out, that things go much smoother than they were when -- when you first rolled out? Hopkins: Largely to date our stakeholder engagement has included the police department, some members of Council, but during those meetings there -- a main point of that effort was to identify who else can we talk to -- to chambers of commerce, like we were just in Boise speaking to the downtown association, to -- and to the universities and colleges in the area. So, our intent is to do the same in this case. There is time between the time that this passes and the time that a vendor is selected and goes out onto the road; right? And so our intent is to use that time to work with local business associations and local civic organizations. Cavener: Madam Mayor? So, what I'm hearing is today, outside of talking to the police department and some select city council members, that public engagement has not happened on Lime's behalf. Hopkins: The actual engagement hasn't happened. The plan has already begun. Cavener: Thank you. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Little Robert. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor. Jonathan, it seems that we keep covering experiences in larger cities, Boise and larger. Have you rolled out in a city -- a community that's more Meridian size and how has that worked? Hopkins: Earlier this year we launched 500 bicycles in Bellevue. So, slightly different. It's bicycles. But it still is shared mobility. Bellevue, I believe, is about 134,000 people. About the same distance from Seattle as Meridian is from Boise. I do think it's commensurate. Similarly, it's -- and this might be more Boise size, but we did scooters and bikes in Tacoma, Washington, which is 30,000 fewer people in Boise. But -- yeah. So -- and both of those have been strong successes. So, that -- so, something I wanted to clear up from a question that you had earlier about connections to transit. It's true that about 20 percent of our rides are connect -- people connecting directly to transit and that's music to our ears. It's people reducing congestion and reducing greenhouse emissions, but also 30 percent of riders are going to buy something at a store or market. Another 30 percent are commuting directly using the scooter to either work, school, or appointments. So, that's the data that we have from nationwide on that point. De Weerd: Thank you. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 30 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 22 of 84 De Weerd: Uh-huh. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor. Jonathan, I know that the rollout was very short lived, but do you have any data from it regarding what the rides were and if there was a particular area that was popular? Hopkins: We can provide that information. I know the scooters were getting about three rides a day, if I remember right, or more during the time we were there, which we consider good. We do have heat maps that can show where these are, so we can provide that. I just don't happen to have it with me. De Weerd: Thank you. Hopkins: Thank you. Coles: There were no other sign-ups, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this? Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, just had a couple words I would like to say. De Weerd: Thanks, chief. Lavey: As you know I wasn't supportive of the scooters at first, but if it's what our community wants, then, we are willing to take a look at it and bring them forward. But I have to tell you today that what I have heard from the public is concerning to me and no matter which direction you go -- if you go with the helmet laws, that's concerning to me, because the only one that can enforce that is law enforcement and we do not want to take on that task. So, if Council is going to put that in an ordinance, then, we just as soon -- let's not have scooters at all. Likewise, if we are going to change the ordinances that applies to every single person, whether they are lessee of equipment or whether it's a privately owned equipment -- again, that is a resource that we do not have and if we have any interest in doing that, then, we need to stay out of the scooter business. It also has already been talked about somewhat today and I brought it up on the first time and I think I need to bring it up one more time. Not that it's going to do any good, but I need to bring it up one more time -- is I'm really concerned about the race to the start and we are going to get the two fastest people, not the two best people, and I expressed an our RFQ before and I will express an RFQ now. Let's weed out the bad, instead of accepting them and have to get rid of them out of our city. We are not going to get the best, we are going to get who is first and that's concerning to me. I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Milam: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 31 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 23 of 84 De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Chief, other than the four days that we had the scooters -- the rental scooters, are e -scooters -- has it been something that has been an issue for the police department -- like privately owned scooters or not really? Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Milam, have they been an issue? Potentially. I know we have crashes every once in a while. We -- we do get them hit by cars every once in a while, but not often. I think what created the issue for us is it was something new. It was something on every corner. It was something nobody knew that was coming and they were playing. My guess is if we would have approached it differently we might have had a little different result and if we allow them to stay here longer than four days, some of that would have softened out, too, because they were neat, they were new, let's play. The age thing -- it's really hard to -- it's really hard to control. You can say what you want to say and that protects you liability wise, but it's -- it's hard to enforce, because all it takes is mommy and daddy's credit card and the smartphone they have in their pocket and it doesn't matter how old they are, they are good to go. So, it hasn't been a major problem, but this is just like anything else, whether it's a bicycle, whether it's a scooter, whether it's roller skates or whether its skateboards, yeah, there are issues but to what extent -- not a lot. Milam: Madam Mayor? And I don't know that age really has anything to do with it. mean kids know that they are going to get hurt. My ten year old owns an e -scooter and is very responsible with it. He doesn't speed or go crazy. He rides on the sidewalk and he rides kind of slow. So, you know, I get when you're renting something you maybe get a little wild and try different things. I think more than age, even though it is a restriction on there that -- that doesn't get followed, having some kind of action come back to the rider for misbehavior I think would be the best bet and maybe figuring that out, but -- Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Milam, I don't disagree with you. The only problem is the only way they are going to get that report is if law enforcement generates that report and that's -- that's -- that's concerning to me is we have other more important things to do in this city than to chase down every violator of a scooter. So, if the burden is going to fall on us, then, they need to stay out of our city. And, then, I will also say that a lot of our irresponsible drivers weren't necessarily under the age of 18. De Weerd: And I think in renting a car we don't set the age limit on how old you have to be to rent a car, that's something for the -- the rental companies do. Certainly I don't think you care how old they are, they just need to have a driver's license; right? Lavey: Madam Mayor, that's -- that's correct and we are not going to know unless something bad happens and it -- likewise, if they set up these -- these age restrictions, we are not going to -- we are not going to enforce that. I just share that with you to -- to let you know that it may sound good that we are putting it in an ordinance, but if nobody's enforcing it, then, why do we put it in an ordinance. So, that's really kind of why age was left out before. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 32 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 24 of 84 De Weerd: Any further questions? Thank you. Lavey: Thanks. De Weerd: Any other testimony? Okay. Council, in front of you you do have the ordinances as written. If any changes are desired certainly we would have to -- to change it, bring it back and -- well, I will just turn this over to your discussion. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: The more I have thought about this and talk to people, I do have some -- some issues that I -- things that I would like to see changed within the ordinance. First of all, the first come, first serve I think is a terrible idea. I said that last week and I'm saying it a little louder today. We should put out an RFQ, RFP, whatever it is, and make sure that we have the best company or companies, depending -- rather than just the first ones. I still think we should have geo fencing around playgrounds and, hopefully, that will just discourage ridership around playgrounds, so that we don't have two and three year olds getting run over by a little bit -- some older kids playing around on the e -scooters. I don't think there should be a minimum or maximum deployment time, because I don't think that whoever we get an agreement with is going to sit on their laurels and going to do nothing, I think they have got money on the table that's burning -- it's already being spent, so don't think that they are going to lollygag around. So, I don't think that we need to put that in there. And I don't think -- yeah. And, then, get rid of the written permission for private property. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Question for Council Member Milam. If you would yield to a question; right? Your comment about timing, I didn't -- that didn't quite connect with me. You don't want to establish a minimum time that they have to be out by? Milam: Sorry. Yeah. So, there is no -- like -- I'm trying to think of how it -- how it was phrased. It was -- Councilman Palmer brought this up that it would be -- it would have to deploy so many within a certain amount of time. De Weerd: And certainly if you did it through an RFP or RFQ process, that could be one of the things is what is the timeframe you would deploy the program. Milam: Right. Cavener: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 33 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 25 of 84 De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: And that -- I guess that was the clarification was not the time that those scooters would be brought out each day -- Milam: Right. Cavener: -- but the timing after a licensee is granted before they would actually deploy in the community. Milam: Yes. Cavener: Does that make sense? Milam: Sorry for the -- Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: And the reason -- two reasons I was really concerned about that is, one, I didn't want a company who wasn't ready to just buy the spot and, then, sit on it and, then, have the right to be the one to renew it and also I didn't want one entity who is in the business to be able to just form another business and lock them both up and be the sole provider of the service, eliminating competition. So, requiring that they be deployed with -- you know, within whatever time frame -- anytime frame was good enough for me. So, that's why I wanted it added, so that it would have to happen, rather than just sitting on the franchise. And while I'm talking, if I can keep going I guess, because I'm a politician and I only have ten months left, I'm going to keep talking. When it comes -- when it comes to something -- De Weerd: You know, every minute you talk means another taxpayer home is paying for you to pontificate. Palmer: And I would love to shorten these meetings with less -- well, we will not get into that. We don't need to fight today. When it comes to a lot of concerns about the chaos -- so, I -- I teach a Sunday school class of nine year olds. We have got -- one of the kids in my class, because of some health issues, doesn't really have the opportunity to get out in the public a whole lot and -- but was still wanting to get back and participate in our Sunday school class. So, we had an iPad with FaceTimed in so they would be able to join the class and you take an iPad with FaceTime with a friend of theirs they haven't seen in a while and stick in the middle of a room full of nine year olds, there is going to be some chaos for a while. So, after we got through the novelty of there being an iPad with a kid on it on a chair next to them -- so that was over, we were able to have a very effective use of what the intent was there. When we -- when the scooters were deployed in Meridian and nobody knew it was happening and, then, all of a sudden they were there, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 34 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 26 of 84 we had 100,000 nine year olds out there trying to figure out what they could do with these things and, like the chief has said, it wasn't people -- just people under 18, it was people like myself and Councilman Cavener riding down the sidewalk on Franklin, heading down to Ten Mile, without helmets, figuring out how these things worked and what we could do with them and so I think that -- as the point was brought up after the hundred thousand nine year olds we have in our town have a chance to get out and ride them and realize, okay, these are cool, now, how can I use it as a tool instead of a toy, that we will be able to realize the intent and the idea behind it and I think as was -- as was mentioned that there is hundreds of juicers out there earning an income that there is this major employment opportunity that we are choosing to wait now months so that -- just that we can figure out some regulations on it. We get super excited when, you know, a business wants to expand here that we are like how can we give you some money from tax dollars, so that we can get you to expand or -- or come to Meridian or expand your business in Meridian, when we have got a business from out of state right now that's wanting to provide income instantly to as many people as want to sign up and go do it, there is just so many pluses to this that I feel that it's appropriate to put some level of responsibility on people. In today's world I know that that's a really scary thing and say, okay, if you -- if you're going to break the rules that -- that maybe Lime or anybody else might set up and allow your kids to do this, that you know what they are doing and you pay a little bit of attention and if it's going to be your card that's going to be going on it, that you're ultimately responsible for what your kid's going to do and if you're an adult making the decision to ride these things, if there is a pothole, you need to be able to make the decision of whether you're going to wear a helmet, because the pothole might cause a bad day for you or not, but personal responsibility, business opportunity coming to town, jobs -- I mean let's just get this thing done. De Weerd: Any other questions or comments? Lavey: Madam Mayor. I just recalled something that you guys were discussing or I think Councilman Cavener was addressing the private property -- granting permission on private property -- one of you were. I was on the committee, too, and I think it was kind of a carryover from when the MOU -- in the MOU it said grant permission, private property, and I think it kind of got carried over in the ordinance. I don't have an express opinion on whether it should -- should or should not be in here, I will just let you know, though, that a really kooky criminal trespass law was passed last year with the legislature and it talks about written permission -- if you do not have written permission from the owner, you're automatically committing a trespass. So, I would suggest that we have legal review that to make sure that we are in compliance with that, because it is a really awkward criminal trespassing law that was just -- was just passed this last year. So, perhaps we are required to have that in there and they know that there has been some private property owners that have expressed some -- some concern of what they are going to do if they show up on our property and it's -- it's one thing if it's actual private property and it's another thing if it's actual private property that's doing public business and so that creates confusion as -- as well. So, they can set up their own rules, but, then, they would have to enforce those rules, too. But that's -- those are some thoughts that came to my mind when that was originally brought up. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 35 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 27 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, I agree that we need to do -- go the route of an RFQ or RFP, something. I do not think that just first come first serve is the way to go, because even though we put some sideboards on there that, you know, the chief could say this isn't working and in this company needs to go away. I think that would be a whole lot more difficult than to just do the process right to start with and make a selection based on criteria and so that's probably my biggest issue with this right now. That and I think we do need to take a hard look at geo fencing certain areas. We were just in San Diego and I was amazed how tight they could get the geo fencing to the point that you could park on one side of the street light and not on the other. I mean you really can do some things with geo fencing from what I saw to -- to help them not end up in areas where the police have to deal with them. But for the point for us I would definitely say we need to go with an RFQ. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Question maybe for Council Member Milam or Roberts. I'm not opposed to an RFQ. I guess my question for both of you is what are those qualifications that you would be looking for from a vendor? If we are wanting to raise the threshold, great, but what -- what is that? Because I think that it's important if this is the direction we are going to go and we are going to ask staff to now put together an RFP, we have got to provide some real clear ring the bell sideboards about what we are looking for in an RFQ. So, I guess that would be my question for each of you is what is it that you would be looking for. De Weerd: Well, I would ask -- I know that was a recommendation from the committee with the RFP or RFQ process. Was that part of your discussions? Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. It was, but it didn't go very far, because at the direction of Council it wasn't asked for us to explore that. So, I know one of the -- the elements that we were looking for as a committee was whether or not the company had a history of being good actors within the city or could we obtain letters of recommendation from community partners where said company was deployed and operating was one of the things that we discussed, but we didn't go down that road very far, because, again, it hadn't been Council's desire for us to explore that to this point. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I guess to answer your question, I think that we need to work with our -- our departments and -- and, you know, other city leaders and the -- and the committee that's already been working on this and figure that out. I don't think that's something that we need to decide tonight at this Council meeting. I think deciding to go with an RFQ is Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 36 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 28 of 84 something we decide and, then, we get the right people in the right room and get it put together. De Weerd: And you can set a time that you would want those -- those elements back and I would imagine -- I know Mr. Hopkins had mentioned equipment. Mrs. Little Roberts mentioned the geo fencing and how tight they could get those kind of things. I would imagine those would be some of the elements to that to have a demonstrated ability to do certain things. Cavener: And, Madam Mayor, that may be -- I think that we -- if we are expecting that that is going to remove one or two or three or four different vendors from being able to participate, I don't think that is the appropriate expectation. I think that all the vendors that are out there can do geo fencing. All the vendors that are out there can demonstrate the equipment and -- and, again, my comments a couple weeks ago when we talked about this is anyone who is worth a lick can make themselves look really great in an RFP. Everyone can make themselves look really great on paper and if you have ever hired somebody you have got a stack of resumes, you say, wow, this candidate is going to be great and they show up for the interview and you're like why are we interviewing them -- because they look great on paper and I think that when you're a -- an organization that has millions and billions of dollars invested, you're going to make yourself look really great on paper and so I guess I'm not opposed to it, I just want to have a better sense of the confidence that we are going to get and if it's just to prevent whoever is the first to dial, you know -- it's like -- it's like a radio contest, the first to be caller nine is the one who gets to -- to have a license, I get that piece. So, let's -- let's build a better solution for that, because I don't necessarily think the RFP is going to get us there. I think the chief's got some more comments. De Weerd: And I guess at this point it's who can push the send button the fastest and I'm not sure that that's the right method. Chief. Lavey: Madam Chair, Councilman Cavener -- and -- and I don't disagree with you at all on -- on the RFP, but I guess it goes back and validates, then, maybe some of the other suggestions. A pilot program. A temporary program. And, then, the actual program. The one thing that I do believe that we have done is we have put some teeth in this ordinance that if you're a problem we -- we can revoke your -- your enterprise, your license, but I think it's set up for one year and I don't want to go through chaos for one year and, then, look at -- the license runs for a year. Yeah. So, making sure that we have some sort of -- of clause in there that we can revoke prior to that one year renewal coming up may alleviate the problem with -- with the RFQ. The other thing is -- and I know that this is probably going to be a shock, but we -- we really kind of oppose geo fencing, because why are you going to geo fence one device when you're not geo fencing all the other potentially dangerous devices out there in our parks. The bicycles. To private scooters. The -- the skateboards. You're not controlling any of them, so why would you control one person or one item. So, I understand that's what the Parks Department wanted, but it's a false sense of security. You're only dealing with a few and so we -- we -- we don't look at geo fencing favorably. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 37 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 29 of 84 Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Chief, I guess to that regard, the -- the thought behind that is that, first of all, the way that people acted with the e -scooters when they were deployed, if they would have -- when it's a rental they treat it a little differently than they treat their own. They are less responsible and, you know, maybe go a little faster, be a little bit more reckless, because they don't care. It's just like renting a car, like, oh, I could run RPMs up a little higher, because I don't really care if this car lasts forever. So, it's more about the -- the actions and the attitude of people renting something, as opposed to owning it and also just the sheer volume that will be out there. So, it's not a problem now and so probably by having that in there it's not going to change what's already happening. So, if it's not a problem now it won't be a problem, but by deploying hundreds of scooters into the hands of inexperienced kids who don't care about them, we may end up with a problem. Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Milam, then why are we only protecting the parks? What about the sidewalks? What about the parking lot? What about the schools? What about the neighborhoods? What about the cul-de-sacs? You have that same behavior going on that won't be protected under the geo fencing, yet the parks are. Why just the parks? Milam: I'm not talking about the whole park, I'm only talking about the playground where you have little tiny children playing. So, a two year old is standing in the middle of the roadway and here comes some stupid kid that's going 15 miles an hour on a scooter and the little two year old gets plowed over. I'm only talking about very small areas on the larger playgrounds, just right there to protect the little tiny kids. That's all. Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Milam, I will just explain to you that the problems that we had in the parks were not always near the playgrounds. So, just don't get the false sense of security that if you -- if you ban them around the playgrounds you have taken care of the problem, because we had the scooter races down the middle of the street in Kleiner Park, we had them on the walkways of the parks that weren't anywhere near the playgrounds and so just know that it's only covering one part of the potential problem. Lavey: And you can do it, I'm just saying that we are getting this false sense of security and that this problem still exists. Far too often that's what keeps me employed. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: So, let's go back and remember how this all got started. We weren't regulating them. We still don't have the law regulating them. We had a company interested in doing Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 38 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 30 of 84 business here. They came to us and said, hey, we want to be a partner, want to work together, what do you want to do. So, we said let's do an MOU. They did it and some of their customers -- again in the -- because we only had a couple days, it was just -- we were a little shocked -- or created a little bit of a shocking situation. De Weerd: Not just a little bit. Palmer: We said, okay, never mind, please stop and they did. Let's find a different way. So, we got people together to figure out this. Here we are with this. And now we are wanting to say, you know, throw it away, let's -- let's go with an RFP. You know, what if we get that and we still don't have the ones that we want, so what if it all means the same two that are -- that are -- that have been the most interested. I mean last time we did do an RFP, obviously, it was a different situation, but we had dozens of people who would express interest in participating. We had two applicants. We have only had two ever show up to our meetings. Sure, there is more out there, but I mean we are not -- we can always -- we can change things down the road as we keep learning, that's why we got to the point that we are at, but this is more of a commitment, but it will give us the data that we need to see if more than two days is enough time for something like -- again, the novelty to wear off, things to normalize and see how people use them and make some adjustments down the road if we need to. Or we can just keep saying, no, don't come to town, don't help make more money, don't help people avoid having to drive for shorter distances. I would be just as happy to -- to deny it if that meant we are, then, out of the business and going to let the free market do its thing, but that's, obviously, not going to happen. So, if it takes a little bit of regulations to be able to allow business to do it, then, so be it. Let's do this and get the data we need to, then, make adjustments, rather than trying to solve every possible problem before knowing what they all are. De Weerd: Well, the bottom line to the responsibility of this Council and the policies that you set are -- are outlined in that ordinance seeks to protect and enhance the safety of the streets and sidewalks, pedestrians, cars and shared vehicles to facilitate transportation options -- and I'm paraphrasing. Three. To establish clarity and regulations for operators, users and citizens for their safety and to balance oversight and staff time. So, what you do is important and I think, too, that, number one -- and we have always talked about this. Number one, responsibility for the city is to provide a safe city, a safe atmosphere. If it takes a few extra steps to make sure that you're going to roll out a program that can be successful and that can prove itself and the data, then, do it right the first time. We didn't do it right the first time. We have an opportunity to rebuild the trust and to make a program that offers an alternative successful in the citizens' minds and opinions and that's equally important. So, any extra thought that goes into this is doing your job and I think that all of you take that responsibility seriously. I -- I'm not saying that you're not, but we would like to see that this is done well. Lavey: Madam Mayor, I will just point out, I guess, is we are not opposed to going forward the way it is, but we just want to make sure that there is some revocation and process that we don't have to wait 365 days to take care of the problem, because we are going to know, after it normalizes, what -- what the problems are. So, you know, the decision Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 39 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 31 of 84 ultimately rests with you. We do have to -- we have done everything that we can without looking into a crystal ball and finding out what's going to happen in future and so now we have set the community expectations, we have set the expectations on the vendors, at least two that expressed interest, now we have to wait see what they are going to do, but I don't want to wait for 365 days before we decide that we are going to renew or not renew the license in case it goes bad again. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Chief, I appreciate your comments. I really do. If there is anyone that knows and as -- you know, I don't think there is anyone out there has a greater concern about this process more than you and your team. So, I take your -- your guidance, your advice very seriously, but given the fact of the safety issue and what we are talking about this evening, is there -- is there one thing that -- that we are missing in regard to safety that we can be including in this -- in this ordinance? Are we missing something, in your opinion? Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bernt, I don't believe you're missing something. There is -- there is just the one thing that we all want that we can't control and that is proper human behavior, proper responsibility and that is out of our control. If we could sit there and tell every single person to do this and do it right, then, you wouldn't need us and so, really, that's -- that's the concern is -- is how do you ensure people are taking that first personal responsibility -- that responsibility for their kids and doing what's right. We have tried to write an ordinance that would involve very little of staff time for both the police department, code enforcement, for C.Jay's office, the clerk's office, the Mayor's office, but we would be naive to think that we are not going to get complaints, we aren't going to get calls. We are. But we are doing our best to try to minimize those. But the things that are going to still create issues for us we can't control and that's the personal responsibility of each individual person that gets on that device. But that's -- same thing goes for anybody who is on a bicycle or anybody that's on a private scooter, it's the same thing and so I see all the dilemmas here and we can do the what if's, what if's, what if's and -- and I guess we are to the point where either we push forward on it or we don't do it. It -- it's pretty much that simple. I just want to make sure, though, that we don't feel that we are going to burden ourselves for a long period of time if this becomes another nightmare, because it won't be just one company this time, it will be two. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: And I was just reading a little bit from the ordinance under the revocation, it says: In addition to any and all applicable civil or criminal penalties, the city clerk or designee may revoke a City of Meridian vehicle sharing program operator franchise where -- and, then, under the sixth item it says the chief of police communicates to the city clerk a written finding that the franchisee has demonstrated a pattern of actions or practices that Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 40 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 32 of 84 present or could foreseeably present a threat to public health, comma, safety, comma, or welfare as such finding may be substantiated by complaint received by city and/or government agency, responses by city employees or agents or incidents involving shared vehicles and/or other evidence or information. So, from that we have the revocation ability when -- like you said, we can't control what the customers are going to end up doing, just like someone's driving a car, whether they rented it, bought it, any situation, we are going to have problems with people driving cars, bicycles, scooters, these -- walking. Any situation where it's going to run into these issues, but we have the ability to revoke it if the franchisee -- if the person providing it is the cause of the problem. So, with that I move that we close the public hearing on Item 9-A. ►yin��2 01 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I move that we approve ordinance number 19-1809 and adjust the parking language to match the intent of the committee with regard to the private -- private property and the parking situation. Does that cover what you need or do you need me to explain -- break it out better? Nary: If I could just ask Council Member Palmer -- are you referring to 7-2-2 subsection (f)(6)(7) and delete the word written? Palmer: Correct. Yes. Nary: That's what I thought you said. Palmer: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Cavener: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 41 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 33 of 84 Cavener: I guess I don't know which way we are going to go. I have really wrestled with this issue, way more than I thought I would have been a year ago. I went from being I think probably the biggest proponent and cheerleader for scooters in Meridian to being frustrated with the way things were rolled out and I have heard from a lot of our citizens, some who were in favor, many who aren't. The Mayor's survey shows there is a lot of folks that aren't supportive of that and I have wondered is it because of the poor roll out of the experience. Is it they are against scooters or are they against the way it was rolled out. I don't know. I don't have time to talk to 800 people. But I'm sure some of them are frustrated with the way things were rolled out. So, I have went back and forth about do we say no to scooters because the way one company rolled things out initially? And I don't think that I'm there. You know, when we began this process we heard loud and clear from the chief, who wasn't necessarily there, he was opposed to it and now I don't think he's going to be a cheerleader, but what I really appreciate and applaud is his critical feedback to us and making sure that as chief of police, the person who is most in charge of the health and safety of our community, that if he feels there is a concern, we have got real teeth to make a change and, you know, if -- if this body wants to go forth with an RFP I will support that as well. I don't think that it's necessary, quite frankly, but I -- if that's the way this group wants to go I support it, but as there is a motion before us, I'm supportive of that one as well and believe that if the rollout is bad, if companies are not good actors, that the chief or the city will have the authority to remove them or replace them with someone else. We talked about this at the very beginning, carrot and the stick. We have got some fairly large sticks that if a company isn't operating they are not going to be in business anymore. It's a privilege to be here and we expect that those that want to be licensees are going to really embrace that privilege that we are providing them. So, I'm supportive of it. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I believe the chief may have went over his three minute time slot earlier. Cavener: Three or four times. Bernt: All kidding aside, I -- you know, I'm in the same boat as Mr. Cavener in this. I have waffled, I have flipped back and forth, I have -- I have been -- I have talked to people -- certainly not 800 people, but I have talked to people. I have looked at different comments online, social media, and, honestly, most of those -- most of those comments have been negative. I really agree with what the Mayor said earlier in regard to we -- whether it's land use that we talk about or whether it's scooters in -- in -- in regard to this particular ordinance, we have one chance to get it right and I would be in favor of just maybe throwing this back to the committee just to just discuss the roll out, because it seems like that is the common concern that the members of his body have, just to make sure that they have dotted every I and crossed every T that maybe they have -- maybe they didn't quite discuss that issue enough, because it's not -- they didn't receive that directive from us, but I would -- I wouldn't be opposed to just having them discuss this, you know, one Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 42 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 34 of 84 more time just to make sure that this is the right rollout and -- and we are doing it in the proper fashion, in the most prudent way. I think we are covered in regard to relocation. You know, if there is someone out there that's a bad actor, I believe that we have enough teeth in this ordinance to be able to take care of them and to get rid of the bad actor. And, furthermore, if -- if -- you know, if we have to make, you know, some amendments to this ordinance in the future because of, you know, different problems that we have experienced through recommendations from our good chief and his good team, then, maybe we can have those discussions at a later date. But my concern is with the rollout, making sure that we are getting the right people involved. I get the free market aspect of that Mr. Palmer pushes and I respect that a lot, but -- so, without talking more and more and more, those are my -- those are my -- those are my thoughts. De Weerd: Okay. Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Madam Mayor. I still think the best way to go is an RFQ or an RFP and so with this I won't support this motion and I think one of the reasons is we saw, I believe, five different types of scooters with five different types of software, so they were definitely not all created equal and maybe they have the type of software they could use, but they weren't using it and so I think we really could put some good sideboards on what is required for the operator to require filling out to the -- that's got the maximum information on the rider, so this could be used -- you know, just more data at this point I think is good. Plus it puts more sideboards on if they need to revoke a rider. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Yeah. I'm -- I have already said it, but I just think it's really important that we get this done right, instead of right now and pushing this through is just getting it done right now and I am in favor of the -- the e -scooters, I just don't think that first come, first serve is doing it right. So -- De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any other comment? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Thank Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, nay; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, nay; Bernt, nay. De Weerd: Okay. The motion did not pass. MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. THREE NAYS. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Council, certainly we could send this back to the committee as -- as was mentioned and if you have specific items that you would want them to bring back to help frame the discussion in terms of -- if you were to approach this through an RFP or RFQ process what would be the criteria and -- in rating that and/or, second, as Mr. Bernt had mentioned, any additional thoughts on how to roll it out so you do have a successful Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 43 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 35 of 84 rollout. I don't think there is any question among the Council members that this is not a program that is interested in having the opportunity to see how it does offer an alternative transportation option to citizens to get from point A to point B, but how can we minimize the -- the negative experience. Milam: Madam Mayor? Maybe it's a good idea for Councilman to -- I'm looking at you. To be part of the committee to kind of help and give that insight. I think for me one of the most important things is history and service and -- and relationships with cities and, you know, I know that's hard to put on paper and it's going to include references and -- and it's going to include a little bit of time for us looking into other experiences that -- that other cities have had with a particular supplier. So, I think that -- and, then, I want to make sure that we don't make our requirements so stringent that it's picking somebody before they even start. I want to make sure that it's broad enough that all of the companies that are out there that are interested would qualify to be part of the process and those are the main things. But it may be somebody getting -- getting one of us on the committee can get that -- the other thing is I want to make sure that it doesn't -- spring is coming, so time is of the essence, so I say we don't get -- don't push this through, but it is important to get this done. De Weerd: Okay. Fortunately, you're not a member of the public, because we closed the public hearing. Lavey: I know. Madam Chair, I was just going to say that to defer to counsel -- to legal counsel, because if a Council member is on there, then, you lose your vote probably to here. So, you might want to rethink that. De Weerd: No, I think -- I think in the ordinance realm and certainly land use, but not in -- in policymaking. Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that wouldn't preclude that. This is a legislative action. So, having one Council member to be a member would not prevent them from voting on it later. Lavey: And, then, the other thing is is that there is legal statutes on RFPs, RFQs that dictates time limits or time. So, it's going to -- if you do that route it's going to drag out, because you have to post it, it has to be legally posted, and it will be well past spring if you're going to do that, because you have to come up with the criteria, then, you have to post it, then, you have to have your team and it has to be evaluated -- De Weerd: We can ask the clerk on what kind of a timeline that that potentially could -- Lavey: So, it's going to push it out way into spring. De Weerd: Mr. Coles. Lavey: Just thought I would let you know that. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 44 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 36 of 84 Coles: I don't have the RFQ and RFP timelines memorized, since we don't issue very many of them. I think it's at least 30 days, if I am not mistaken, but I would have to consult the statute on that. Lavey: So, the staff time to actually -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, for a majority of these types that we were doing -- and from what I have heard in the Council's discussion, you weren't looking necessarily for an exclusive franchise, but simply set reasonable criteria of what you as a City Council would want any franchisee to meet and having -- and I guess -- I guess the value -- and maybe -- maybe we haven't made it as clear from the committee standpoint -- the value is some of the issues and concerns that you all have raised at least can be evaluated from the company's perspective of what they would be willing to do and, then, hold them to that. Right now in a licensing situation they simply could tell us this is what we will do, which is fairly minimal, and so the RFP gives you some of that ability. But you are looking at at least 60 days before you would award that. So, there is some timing and, again, the franchisee also has requirements, too, and I, like Mr. Coles, I can't remember the -- the amount of time, but I would -- I would say you're looking at a 60 day window, but we are in the middle of February, so that's the middle of April. So, I mean if you think May 1 we may have this awarded, that's certainly not an unrealistic expectation. Bernt: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: And I'm not saying that I'm in support of an RFQ process or -- I just want -- I just would like the committee just to talk -- just to talk about -- have a meeting where they could just maybe deliberate on this. I don't know if this is the right setting for us up here to deliberate on whether or not an RFQ process is -- is warranted or not, it's just -- make sure -- but make sure that -- that -- that -- that they have -- that they are making the right recommendation to us to -- to -- on why or why not in an RFQ or even the -- what's in the existing ordinance is what is -- what is recommended. De Weerd: So, Council, maybe what I would suggest is that we can have a committee meet and bring this back next week and what the options could be and what any timelines would be that are associated with that. So, then, you have a clear path forward, regardless of which path you take. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I think to that point I think continuing this a week that, Madam Mayor, if you are willing to have staff get together that's on this committee one last time to review and provide their feedback to us again, that's fine. I just -- I would remind our Council we are here to act, we are here to render decisions and that's -- deliberation is part of the making Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 45 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 37 of 84 of sausage that we do up here and sometimes it is a little clumsy, but that's -- that's what we are hired by the public to do is to render those decisions. So, I will support continuing Item 9-A, public hearing on the proposed vehicle sharing program, to next Tuesday for a -- don't need to continue the reading part, we just need to continue the public hearing; is that correct, Madam Mayor, Mr. Clerk? De Weerd: The public hearing is closed, but, yeah, to continue the Council discussion for Ordinance 19-1809 and if you need to -- I would -- I would recommend actually opening the public hearing, so that you can post it as such. Cavener: Madam Mayor, that's exactly I think where I was heading. So, move we reopen the public hearing for Item 9-A, for 19-1809. Milam: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to reopen the public hearing for Item 9-A. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Cavener: Madam Mayor, I move we continue Item 9-A, the public hearing for proposed vehicle sharing ordinance number 19-1809 to next Tuesday. Bernt: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this item. If we could also at least make the one cleanup that our City Council -- our city attorney has recommended, so you have a cleaned up ordinance in front of you as well. Milam: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I would like to ask the committee to not only just give us our options, but -- I know you said to stop talking about it, the RFP, because that was -- you were getting the impression that we didn't want that -- go that direction. I would like to -- hopefully you guys have had time to -- we can look at that and, then, advise us if that is the way that you think it should go. If the committee, who has been working on this for a long time, just says we don't think RFP is the way to go, then, I might be open to that, but I want -- would like to get advisory from the committee that's been working on this. De Weerd: Okay. Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Cavener. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 46 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 38 of 84 Cavener: Along -- along those lines, what would the question -- what would we be looking for in an RFP that we could not already address in our proposal? To me that's -- what are we -- what are we as the Council gaining by going through the RFP process? What's the most important reason why we would want to look at going through that? What are we going to benefit? De Weerd: Okay. Coles: And Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Coles: If I may ask a question, especially of Council Member Bernt. You had brought up the idea of the committee getting together and talking specifically about the rollout and what that might look like, hoping to get perhaps maybe a little bit more direction of your thoughts and ideas on that, so when the committee does come back we are going to meet, we will come back and we can say this is our recommendation on the rollout and what it should look like based on your -- De Weerd: Council, can we get into that detail -- let me first call for the question, that you vote on the motion to continue this, and, then, we will add any specifics on what you would like to see brought back. Okay? So, the motion is to continue Item 9-A until next week. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed say nay. Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: And any further clarity, Mr. Bernt? Bernt: I just -- I would just like the committee to get together and just talk about the pros and cons of a rollout, whether it's RFP -- the RFP process versus what's been proposed in -- in -- in the existing ordinance that we just voted on and so just have that discussion, maybe brainstorm, you know -- you know, again, positive, negative, what makes sense, what makes sense to the community, what makes sense -- you know. And just in that selection process -- I don't know if I necessarily have, you know, something, you know, that -- in particular I would want to be discussed in that -- in that meeting, but just to make sure that, you know -- that whether it is the RFP or -- or the existing ordinance, that we get it right, that it's the right one and it's what you guys feel comfortable with. Lavey: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bernt, I would just say that in speaking -- I'm on the -- on the committee as well -- is I do believe the company was ready and they brought this forward and so they wouldn't have brought it forward if they didn't think they were ready and so maybe we are -- or me created some of the confusion. So, we will take it as a pause and say are we good to go or should there be something different based upon what you're saying. But the committee wouldn't have brought this forward if they weren't ready to roll out. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 47 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 39 of 84 Bernt: Madam Mayor. I was under the impression that you -- didn't you say, Mr. Clerk, earlier that -- that you didn't discuss this very long, because you thought you did receive that direction from us and it wasn't maybe a point of interest? De Weerd: Yes. Coles: Yes. That was specific to the RFP process. Correct. The committee, again, went through several different options based on the direction of Council, put together this ordinance with what we believe was the direction from Council and we were ready to implement and move forward with the ordinance as in front of you, but specific to the RFP, we didn't go down that road all the way, because it wasn't directed from Council. Bernt: Madam Mayor, follow up. So, maybe -- so, maybe that's the discussion that needs to take place. Does the RFP make sense, yes or no. And if -- and if -- and if it does and, then, maybe we go from there and have, you know, future discussions in regard to that RFP process, but -- and if you guys get together and feel like, amongst your body, that it just doesn't make sense and that you're comfortable and you feel like going forward, that the existing rollout is what's already in the ordinance and we will go from there. I mean at the end of the day it's a week, you know, and I understand, Mr. Palmer's approach is just let's get it done and, you know, my approach is different, I want to make sure that we get it right. I want to make sure that this is -- and if we have to wait a week, then, I don't -- I don't see what -- you know, what the harm is in that. De Weerd: Well, we already are waiting a week, because it's been continued. So, if you -- Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: -- have any other ideas, can you, please -- Coles: E-mail. De Weerd: -- e-mail Mr. Clerk and give him any additional thoughts, because we need to move on. We have people that are sitting here waiting for other agenda items and so -- Palmer: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: I just want to say that I'm having flashbacks to other times when I have tried really hard to wait one more week or tried to adjust things to make the right decision that were millions of dollars it affects that we needed to get done right away. De Weerd: Okay. I'm moving on. Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 48 of 487 Meridian City Council February 21, 2019 Page 40 of 84 B. Resolution No. 19-2128: A Resolution Adopting New Fees Related To Vehicle Sharing Programs; Authorizing The City Clerk's Office To Collect Such Fees; And Providing An Effective Date Cavener: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Cavener: I would move that we continue Item 9-13, Resolution 19-2128, which is related to fees to the vehicle sharing program. De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-B is Resolution 19-2128 and I have a motion. Do I have a second? Bernt: Second. Little Roberts: Second. De Weerd: I have several seconds. I wish I could get them back again. Any discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you, please, call role. Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. De Weerd: Thank you for your attempt to be efficient. I appreciate that. C. Public Hearing for Villasport (H-2019-0011) by Sadie Creek Commons, LLC, Located the SW Corner of E. Ustick Rd. and N. Eagle Rd. 1. Request: Council Review of application H-2018-0121 and the Planning and Zoning Commission's requirements related to conditions of approval: a. UDC 11-4-3-2A.1, which requires all outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed to maintain a minimum setback of 100 feet from any abutting residential district; b. UDC 11-3A -13, which requires outdoor speaker systems associated with the use to be located a minimum of 100 feet from all residential districts; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 5, 2019 — Page 49 of 487 From: Jonathan Hopkins To: Keith Watts Cc: Ashley Scott; Chris Johnson; Malmen. Erika E. (BOI); Miller. William (B0I) Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 11:23:58 AM Attachments: image001.png imaae002.png Thank you very much, Keith. Much appreciated. On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:22 AM Keith Watts <kwattsnmeridiancity.org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, you are correct. The due date for a protest will be noon Thursday, May 16th Keith Watts, CPPB I Purchasing Manager City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department — Where Everyone COUNTS! www.opportunitvmeridion.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkins(@li.me> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 11:18 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts(@rneridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scottl@li.me>; Chris Johnson <ciohnsonPmeridiancity.org>; Malmen, Erika E. (Perkins Coie) <EMalmen(@perkinscoie.com>; Miller, William K. (Perkins Coie) <WMiller(@perkinscoie.com> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Keith, that is correct. We requested the Bird RFP as well but have not received it. Assume once we receive it the clock will start ticking 3 working days. On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Keith Watts <kwatts&,meridiancity.org> wrote: Good morning Johnathan, I am assuming you are requesting Bird's proposal when you requested the RFPs. If so I have sent it to the Clerk's office. Please confirm that is your request so that the Clerk can release those documents. You are correct on the protest deadline, it is due no later than Noon on Wednesday, May 15th. Thanks Jonathan, Keith Watts, CPPB I Purchasing Manager City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave.. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 The Finance Department — Where Everyone COUNTS! www. oggortunitymeridian. oro All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkins(@Ii.me> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 6:42 PM To: Keith Watts <kwattsPmeridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scottl@li.me>; Chris Johnson <ciohnsonl@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Keith, confirming you mean 3 business days, so if we are to protest the protest is due Wednesday, May 15. Is this correct? Thank you, Jonathan On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:37 AM Keith Watts <kwattsnmeridiancity.org> wrote: You're welcome Jonathan. Keith Watts, CPPB I Purchasing Manager City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave.. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 1 The Finance Department — Where Everyone COUNTS! www.oggortunitymeridion.org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkins(@li.me> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 8:35 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts(cDmeridiancit�.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott(@li.me>; Chris Johnson <ciohnson(@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Ok thank you, Keith. On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 7:33 AM Keith Watts <kwatts o meridianci , .org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, you will have 3 days from the date you receive your response from your public records request. Keith Watts, CPPB I Purchasing Manager City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 C�,(fEII?�� The Finance Department — Where Everyone COUNTS! www. opportunitymeridian. org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by low. From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkins(@li.me> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 8:30 AM To: Chris Johnson <cjohnson(@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott(@li.me>; Keith Watts <kwatts(@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Following up, Keith. Please confirm the due date for any protest. Thank you. On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 8:54 AM Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkinsnli.me> wrote: Keith, please confirm the deadline for submitting a protest. Thank you. On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:56 AM Chris Johnson <c-johnson 0,meridiancity.org> wrote: Jonathan, I have updated your request in our system. While I don't expect there to be a delay, any modification does reset the clock. You should expect an initial response no later than end of business on May 14. Chris From: Jonathan Hopkins <jonathan.hopkinsC@li.me> Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 9:52 PM To: Chris Johnson <ciohnson(@meridiancity.org> Cc: Ashley Scott <ashley.scott(@li.me>; Keith Watts <kwattsc@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Good afternoon: I wanted to provide a clarification on our public records request, that might not be necessary but wanted to clarify: 1. With our request for the RFPs, we are also requesting all grading materials from the evaluation committee. 2. Keith, could you clarify the date and time of the deadline for filing any protest? 3. If the public records are not provided prior to the deadline, can we request an extension of the protest deadline if we so desire? Thank you for all being so helpful and answering our questions, Jonathan On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:05 PM Chris Johnson <c-johnson a,meridiancity.org> wrote: Jonathan, I have already entered in the request. You will receive an initial response no later than 5pm MDT on May 9. The response may be records responsive to your request, or may state the need for an extension. The City has up to ten business days to provide a response, or provide a reason they cannot respond. For your records, the request is PRR 19-2598. You will receive correspondence via email once records are gathered/reviewed. Please let me know if you have any questions. Chris From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkinsC@li.me> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 3:02 PM To: Keith Watts <kwatts(@meridiancity.org> Cc: Chris Johnson <cjohnson(@meridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Thanks Keith. Chris, could you let us know the timeline for completion of the request, once you know it? Thank you both! Jonathan On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:52 PM Keith Watts <kwattsomeridiancity.org> wrote: Hi Jonathan, I am forwarding this to our City Clerk for processing. Hi Chris, please create a public records request for Jonathan for this email. Thanks Chris. Keith Watts, CPPB I Purchasing Manager City of Meridian I Finance 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian. Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0417 fE IDI I .�-- The Finance Department — Where Everyone COUNTS! www. oaoortunitymeridian. ora All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Jonathan Hopkins <ionathan.hopkinsCcDli.me> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 11:11 AM To: Keith Watts <kwatts(aDmeridiancity.org> Subject: Re: Meridian RFP Sorry. Inadvertent send. Questions: 1. Is there more information the city can provide as to generally why Bird was scored higher than Lime in all of the categories? 2. Under Meridian and Idaho laws, are proposals a matter of public record? If so, can you please release those for review? Thank you. —Jonathan Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—Northwest Jonathan. Hopkins(cDli.me Your ride anytime. On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:08 AM Jonathan Hopkins <_jonathan.hopkins li.me> wrote: Keith, Thanks for updating us on the Meridian scooter RFP results. Questions: —Jonathan Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—Northwest Jonathan. Ho kinsa-li.me Your ride anytime. Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW _jonathan.hopkins li.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW ionathan.hopkins o,li.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW ionathan.hopkins e i.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW i onathan.hopkinsnli.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW ionathan.hopkinskli.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW ionathan.hopkins crli.me Jonathan Hopkins Director, Strategic Development—NW ionathan.hopkins V;li.me 7"7 r 4 RrDIAN HisTORIC DOWNTO'WH FSTA9 L 1SH EO E393 L i IL _ r — 1 1 _ 5. 0 kv J' P R 16 P p„IN �J _ o Lr L Y- .Elm :. - T _. -- t_ `:t _ ' fit• • e , JA F� y _ , P 71 dA ■ _ _ v , •. v':: Re .. - • `— i'. to P e r 8 " ° IL i � L _ ig ago 6 70 Omm 07 . . u , ° Y s.a ae L , • moi• - _ Y Y. , a F Y �° ■ IF a--Iq r� if _ : Y: ® - Few a �Q ov- , , ° Y r r s P lip AM r - r aY ' +£� r 1 m , - . ur ■� _ ° m - _ r • Pte= •.'W -Tr! °?� r 'e•■ ■ -, ` o■. T.,_ _° • - i' •� i s ' • . � � ■ Lam° d .J � - � �_ . � �'�, �, Y� .• _ '�. _ mm ��et — _ ^, - j -o ei� 1 # �'ri' �: Ts ■ __ - _ j_ ° _ � mom, •1® _ _ i r — — ti '.1 ,% P Y� ®` � - Y �� ° , � ■ .ter � ,a -, °� r� ' . �" i, .� ■ r,�� �'+aa. °" �" , �, tr L:rY. 4 ■ is ac!r �' "� • r.. 4F - •, • _M P is _.�.. 6• • a as •"' _ llsimm• _ ■ ML r— AM Via, r-■� j •�° it i Fr a " •�, 1 rr '• %J ir Ir m'� T - :, - ip ," e •AN � Ar ir re _ a — iu Y ".' 16— =J1 aft's it 4 RrDIAN HisTORIC DOWNTO'WH FSTA9 L 1SH EO E393 L i IL _ r — 1 1 _ 5. 0 kv J' P R 16 P p„IN �J _ o Lr L Y- .Elm :. - T _. -- t_ `:t _ ' fit• • e , JA F� y _ , P 71 dA ■ _ _ v , •. v':: Re .. - • `— i'. to P e r 8 " ° IL i � L _ ig ago 6 70 Omm 07 . . u , ° Y s.a ae L , • moi• - _ Y Y. , a F Y �° ■ IF a--Iq r� if _ : Y: ® - Few a �Q ov- , , ° Y r r s P lip AM r - r aY ' +£� r 1 m , - . ur ■� _ ° m - _ r • Pte= •.'W -Tr! °?� r 'e•■ ■ -, ` o■. T.,_ _° • - i' •� i s ' • . � � ■ Lam° d .J � - � �_ . � �'�, �, Y� .• _ '�. _ mm ��et — _ ^, - j -o ei� 1 # �'ri' �: Ts ■ __ - _ j_ ° _ � mom, •1® _ _ i r — — ti '.1 ,% P Y� ®` � - Y �� ° , � ■ .ter � ,a -, °� r� ' . �" i, .� ■ r,�� �'+aa. °" �" , �, tr L:rY. 4 ■ is ac!r �' "� • r.. 4F - •, • _M P is _.�.. 6• • a as •"' _ llsimm• _ ■ ML r— AM Via, r-■� j •�° it i Fr a " •�, 1 rr '• %J ir Ir m'� T - :, - ip ," e •AN � Ar ir re _ a — iu Y ".' 16— =J1 aft's it PART III PROPOSALFORM In response to the Request for Proposals, the undersigned respondent hereby proposes to furnish labor, material, travel, professional services, permits, supervision, equipment and all related expenses, and to perform all work necessary and required to complete the following project in strict accordance with the terms of this Request for Proposals and the final contract for: PROJECT # MYR-1921-11034 VEHICLE SHARING PROGRAM Respondent certifies that he/she has examined and is fully familiar with all of the provision of the Request for proposals and any addendum thereto; that he/she is submitting a proposal in strict accordance with the Instructions to Respondents; and that he/she has carefully reviewed the accuracy of all materials submitted in response to this proposal. Respondent certifies that he/she has examined the proposal documents thoroughly, studied and carefully correlated respondent's observations with the proposal documents, and all other matters which can in any way affect the work or the cost thereof. Respondent agrees that this proposal constitutes a firm offer to the City which cannot be withdrawn by the respondent for sixty (60) calendar days from the date of actual opening of proposals. If awarded the contract, respondent agrees to execute and deliver to the City within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of City's Conditional Notice of Award, the applicable Contract form, franchise fee, and insurance certificates. RESPONDENT'S BUSINESS NAME: �IKP IRIDIS ING- M (signature in ink) Date: q - q - Ig Agent: Title: G0\l EV MMEN-C VAQ10-LSHIQS 10 of 20 RESPONDENT'S LOCAL ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-MAIL fAmy tew AVG. _ W2, - 063 06q (PH)_ MIC � � • MGM fs L6 ,& RtV: E,0 (E-MAIL) RESPONDENT'S CORPORATE ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-MAIL qO6 baa 3U '%L#'U (PH) hell fE-MAIL) NAME/ADDRESS OF REGISTERED AGENT IN IDAHO: M WA61� W M6IQA GL6 IOUK W. FAW-VIEW Avg. '615e . ID , S31137 DECLARATION: The undersigned declares: that he/she holds the position indicating below as a corporate officer or the owner or a partner in the business entity submitting this Proposal; that the undersigned is informed of all relevant facts surrounding the preparation and submission of this Proposal, that the undersigned knows and represents and warrants to the City of Meridian that this Proposal is prepared and submitted without collusion with any other person, business entity, or corporation with any interest in this Proposal. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. RESPONDENT: DIS-lD 6ST�49A_ BY: TITLE: NNE F (AL, AN V MLLO Off lLG_RL ADDRESS: q6to 996ARWAN A&S SPtN'C�4 MbNLG4 , C.1�. dual DATE: 11 of 20 PART IV ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONNAIRE Respondent must answer 'yes" or "no" to each of the following questions. Circle the correct answer. A. Does Respondent operate vehicle sharing programs in at least twenty (20) cities, and/or has Respondent provided 1,000,000 rides to date (in aggregate)? YES NO B. Will Respondent deploy shared vehicles which meet each and all of the following physical specifications? 1. Labeled with current contact information for the franchisee. 2. Able to stand upright when parked. 3. In good repair so as not to interfere with or degrade public facilities, operations, systems, or equipment or to present an imminent or foreseeable threat to the safety of riders or the public. YES N4 C. Will Respondent connect an app to all shared vehicles deployed which meets all of the following specifications? 1. Explains the method by which riders can notify the local agent of the franchisee to report safety or maintenance issues. 2. Informs riders of the location of designated parking areas. 3. Capable of being remotely disabled. 4. Capable of being located and controlled remotely, by geofencing or other remote technology. YES NO R I'D 12 of 20 coaPoIt P 1) Description of respondent's experience with shared vehicle programs, including how long the respondent has been engaged in this business, experiences in other venues, including under other similar contracts awarded to it, and work completed of similar type and magnitude. Bird invented shared e -scooter transportation in Santa Monica, California. Bird incorporated in April 2017, and began operating in Santa Monica on September 1, 2017. We operate in over 100 universities and cities across the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Latin America. We conduct business under a wide range of regulations, permits, and reporting requirements and our compliance team specifically focuses on ensuring we are tracking our obligations, data reporting, and permits. Collectively, Bird's leadership team has decades of experience operating shared mob vanaer/anaen, has a tremendous passion changed the way we view shared tr than just reducing private car ownership, but rather private car use Travis founded Bird with the goal of creating a do more for tr ility systems. Our CEO, Travis anSDortation, revolutionized the car -sharing industry at Lvft and UbE riences, Travis realized that t an-qir qvGramc _........,.......... However, through thoseP-Ynp- N r, and here was a need to sustainable, affordable, our communities. ana convenient alternative to sno rt car trips - spec ifically t he 40% of car trips that are less than 3 miles in Our partnerships with cities are Bird's number one priority. Our specialized Government Partnerships team works closely with each of the cities in which we operate to ensure that we are addressing their unique transportation needs, complementing transit systems that already exist, and helping cities realize their transportation goals. For Meridian, this means shorter commutes, less traffic delay and congestion, greater access to jobs from underemployed communities, and available bus and rail service. Bird is currently permitted in neighboring Boise, Idaho. We are licensed to operate 250 scooters, and the City Council is deliberating new rules to increase the size of our fleet due to high demand from Boise residents. As one of the first e -scooter operators within Boise, Bird is proud to maintain a strong working relationship with the City. Since Boise's e -scooter program was implemented in October 2018, Boise has seen over 150,000 e -scooter rides, with almost 43,000 unique riders totalling over 42,000 miles travelled. The success of this program is attributed to the direct and consistent dialogue developed between Bird, the City of Boise, the law enforcement community, Ada County Highway District (ACHD), and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). For example, when the City initially expressed concern regarding e -scooters blocking ADA access at bus stations, we mitigated such issues through constant training and re-education of our Charger community on Boise's unique ADA access rules and infrastructure (described in complete detail in Section 14 below). Indeed, as described in Section 15 below, the City of Boise recommends Bird as a mobility partner for other cities. We look forward to developing and building a close relationship with Meridian officials. Please see Section 14 for a breakdown of our experiences in several cities in which we operate and please see Section 6 for a case study on how Bird impacted Portland, Oregon's transit landscape and rider behaviors. 2 2) A description of the proposed program, including which shared vehicles are to be offered for hire or use, and the number of shared vehicles to be deployed (both as planned initially and as projected when program is fully developed hours of operation, deployment locations, fleet balancing approach, and proposed program start date. To Starto l rye Rider Experience To sign up for Bird, riders must download the Bird smartphone app. The Bird app is compatible with both iOS and Android operating systems. When downloading the app for the first time, riders are prompted to provide general information to sign LID - including name address, and payment information. Riders must also take a photo of their valid driver's licenselicensenrinr to their first ride in orde firm they are 18 years of age or older. email r to Riders then ao through a comprehensive responsible riding an(] parking tutorial before taking their first ride. i ne video reminds riding, park out of the public right-of-way (in the furniture zones or bv bike racks), to not de on sidewalks, and to ride in bike lanes where available or in the street in the same manner that bikes are ridden. We also ri ri ders that they must wear helmets when provide a safety section of our app which features the City's local rules. We will work with Meridian officials to determine which rules the City would like to display in our application. Finding a Bird Bird Chargers disperse fully charged and operational scooters throughout the pre -designated nests and our devices are available to ride around 6:00 a.m. These nests are virtual and dynamic, meaning they can be changed and repositioned at any time. Riders are able to find a Bird through the map section of their smartphone app, or by spotting one in the community. Reserving a Bird Upon locating a Bird, riders simply open the Bird smartphone app, press the Ride button at the bottom of their screen, and scan the individual scooter's unique QR code. The Bird smartphone app also includes a feature that allows riders to manually input their unique vehicle code, and a flashlight feature. 0 Beginning a Ride Through the Bird smartphone app, riders can see the closest Bird on a map, walk to it and unlock it, and begin a ride. Riders will be instructed to wear a helmet and to not ride on sidewalks. Safety reminders are also included on labels that are placed on each B ird. After putting on a helmet, riders are instructed to gush the vehicle forward a few times with motor. their feet to engage the 9:41 AM FIND A BIRD GET SET UP Crar)ao,o C,t Ile Books of S09VPn18 p_ � N D C -:-- Rialto Ave // 11 G Sevi"e Ct * 100% Mal Ending a Ride At the end of the trip, Bird's customized in -app messaging notifies riders to park Birds out of public pathways and at bike racks, near public transit stops, or in corrals, where available. Riders lock their vehicle and end the ride using the app. At the end of every ride, riders are instructed to take a photo of their Bird to " verify proper parking." The prompt also reminds riders of proper parking etiquette. The photos are collected as a way to verify proper parking. This enables us to track parking behavior and identify and follow up with riders who may need additional education on safe parking behavior. suspended and Repeat offenders can have their accounts n some cases, terminated. C N Desy Safan-� Gerard, Ph.D E Grand Blvd AN 9:41 AM SCAN BIRD * 100% � Scan QR code on the Bird to start ride F mill IF, 9:41 AM 100° <- CONFIRM PARKING ' Please park nicely. Don't block sidewalks, ramps, or doorways. ABC1 M=4l E Types of Devices Bird has a mixed fleet comprised of three models of scooter. These models include: Bird Zero, XIAOMI M365, and Ninebot ES. ;:�A4MI M3651SPECS Motor power 2 wafts Ac ,e, 18 m U#e% Brok'ing Dir!Se + rrtrotIY Lights Headlight + tail light Connectivity LTE Cod or 3g and/or Bluetooth Locationtracking Overa 1l dime ns I on s 42.E x 16,9 x 44.x' ±a tter y cap!aci t y 30 cell 18650 x 2600 mah Voltage 42 volts Mechanical brakes enable rulers to safety stop and sloe. down as needed Integrated digital display lets rulers easily check their speed (max 1 mph) and the battery level of their Bi rd The latest ireIess and bluetaath technologies i m c rovc m r Low cenle r of gravity, provides a smoother riding experience Solid 1 fires withstand a variety sof g round s u daces 9 i6d r�j a g ..r Lights Connectivity Overatl dirmnsi r BIRD ZERO PE K1111UL'io 12 miles Reg"erat + Physi rear stomp brake Headlight + tail light ENuetooth via customer phone 40xi7x45 42 volts Max 15 MPH peed i Motor Power 3 0 0 W ■ � i i � � � � � � � . i . . i . . i . i i Iri �+ � � ■ r � � � � � � � � � s � � � � . i i i i Drum Bra r irig Braking -.-I,+ _. R�r�r�a �I tier Brale Longer lasting battery Wide riding dock extends the range of a Bird al I ows for a more comfortable ride 1 li ht + tail light Large brakelighi increase vehicle iili[it o help beep ri tiers safe 1TPVVz-* �� IaLe 1 5 Number of Shared Scooters in Meridian Bird would initially launch in Meridian with 1 expand our operations to serve additional r grow the fleet to 500 vehicles. 50 scooters. Once it is clear that our devices are being appropriately utilized, we will in Meridian. In order to do so, esidents and working closely with the City, we could Hours of operation Birds are available to ride from approximately 6:00 A.M. until late at night and Bird looks forward to working with Meridian to determine the proper hours of operations for Meridian residents. Deployment Locations Hwy,20 Z W �IcMillan FCS Senna 9 'km's' F � r) Ii •-i R W Frank • F s a A r Q Q ra ater 5ettl _.0 LL e., rs Paris E Us ti 'e f endian ]VOIn V LA -0 r McMillan Rd P-4 W McMillan Fk� VJUstla R --..0 s M. Kleiner Memorial P a r ILL E vW.ave P"i. Ave El03nd P41 no Our deployment in Meridian will unfold in three "Waves." We will expand our service area as it is proven that Birds are being utilized. This ensures that local residents feel comfortable with the scope of our services, and that each of our devices is being actively ridden. The Wave One (1) of our deployment will focus on the core commercial areas in Meridian, largely along the east side o We will provide another means of travel for residents and visitors who will be able to Bird to go shopping at the Portico at Meridian Center or grab a sandwich at Fat Guys Fresh Deli. Birding will also provide residents and visitors with a cheaper and more environmentally friendly way of getting to the Valley Regional Transit stop on NE 2nd St., thereby further connecting residents with Boise, Garden City, Eagle, Star, Middleton, Caldwell, and Nampa. f the City. Throughout our initial deployment and over the following two waves, we would meet with local businesses and work to form partnerships to offer Bird nests (groups of scooters) in agreed upon locations. This could include shopping malls, grocery stores, office buildings, restaurants, and more. As our e -scooters become more heavily utilized, Wave Two (2) of our expansion will provide more coverage to the east side of the City and include Heritage Grove to the North. Overall, the coverage area provided by Waves One and Two would span northwest from Settlers Park all the way to Citi Corporate office on the southeast side of the City. Wave Three (3) of our deployment would stretch our service area westward to include all the residential neighborhoods of Meridian, thereby providing a seamless rider experience to get to one's home, office, or place of recreation, like a restaurant or a shopping mall. We would also seek to form partnerships with businesses that would likely end up as destinations for Bird riders, like the Roaring Springs Water Park or the Meridian Swimming Pool. By working closely with the community, we can ensure that our operations are as efficient and equitable as possible. Throughout the course of deployment and operations, we would greatly appreciate the City's assistance in identifying areas that would be sensitive to our operations, as well as local businesses that would be interested in having dedicated Bird nests or parking zones. wield Support and Balancing Bird has a field support team dedicated to safety that is available throughout the day to balance our fleet, maintain our scooters, and resolve any outreach from riders, residents, or visitors. This field support team will include Bird Watchers, Chargers, and Mechanics. Bird fill hire Meridian residents to form this team. These local employees and contractors will work within their own community to ensure that our services are safe, responsible, and equitably distributed. 7 Bird Watchers In many o on t looH f the cities we serve, Bird utilizes teams of local Bird Watchers. Bird Watchers are the eyes and hands of our company ne ground in a city, and are deployed daily into core operating zones to ensure our fleet is well -parked, high -functioning tidy. They also perform minor repairs, report damaged scooters, and respond to inquiries from riders and City officials Watchers are members of the local community that enables us to be as responsive as possible to any issues reported to us by City representatives, community groups, and concerned individuals (both riders and non -riders, alike). The Bird Watcher team is supported in real-time by a team based i and . Bird within minutes notice. n our Headquarters which remotely monitors their activity and can adjust operations We created the Bird Watcher program in August 2018 out of our desire to be the best possible partner for cities. While our scooters have always been highly utilized, we noticed that they sometimes became clustered in areas with particularly high ridership, which can lead to service imbalances and instances of poor parking. Bird Watchers have proven to be an extremely effective way to resolve these issues, while also providing a way to respond to customer service requests as quickly as possible. Our team of Bird Watchers will make sure that our fleet in Meridian is high -functioning and well-maintained. We place a strong emphasis on thoroughly training Bird Watchers so they can efficiently fulfill all their responsibilities. These responsibilities include: • Monitoring the streets of Meridian to ensure that Birds are legally and properly parked. Bird Watchers will fix any Birds that are blocking sidewalks or have been knocked over, and will rearrange those Birds into neat nests out of the public right-of- way. • Rebalancing vehicles. Bird Watchers relocate Birds from over -concentrated areas and ensure that our fleet is balanced throughout our operating zones. We work closely with City officials to identify areas where Bird Watchers will have the most optimal impact on clustering and can adjust this distribution based on need. This allows us to actively rebalance or move our vehicles to appropriate parking locations, as needed. • Respond to requests and issues. Whenever we receive a report regarding a Bird (poor parking, etc.), we can dispatch a Bird Watcher to correct the issue. This allows us to ensure sidewalks and pathways are kept clear and our scooters are evenly distributed. • Performing minor repairs. Bird Watchers can perform minor repairs on vehicles in the field. This can include handlebar realignment, repairing or replacing a faulty kickstand, and more. If a Bird requires more significant repair, Bird Watchers report the vehicle and we remove it from the field to be repaired in our vehicle facility. Through this process, Bird Watchers come in contact with every device we have in Meridian. We currently have hundreds of Bird Watchers in more than a dozen markets across the United States. Because we hire locally, our Bird Watchers work in the communities where they live. We receive feedback from Bird Watchers every day that they feel they are actively helping their communities by ensuring that everyone has equal access to a high -functioning Bird. 14 All e a �- yy a �a do N N Do Chargers Bird will employ a network of Chargers from Meridian who are independent contractors responsible for helping set up and maintain vehicles in the community. Working in close coordination with Bird, Chargers access the "Operator Mode" of the Bird app to identify where to place nests (small groupings of fully charged and recently- inspected vehicles) in the morning. Chargers also use the operator mode of the application to identify where to pick up Birds to bring them in for inspection and charging. Similar to riders, all Chargers are required to photograph the nests they've set up. The photographs are reviewed and approved by our operations team. If the operations team receives a photo of a nest that does not meet our requirements, that Charger is given feedback and issued a warning. Birds are picked up regularly for charging and any necessary repairs by Chargers. This helps keep riders safe and Birds in good condition. 10:30 PM 100% � i FIND BIRDS v f] Junction _ - Preis.Puice InYel7ig9 eult9ia r a 0 Abbot tAf A.s: r 1. �"rffdrrliara / y e LeAr 4 &The rarrl �Gaod Loa _ r 4 / sy'r / 1 I a 1 (;ordra:'a Ci y �l .. 1S1if J55 i7. - G ��,,t � f7ial[❑ Aal ` Rialto Aue Prosy Scfr r Gerard, Ph.b Rli ! Soni Pru: CA us Past dliutc r ! 1 ! / r / r / / 12:15 AM 100% RELEASE BIRDS RoasterfishQI —'17 �, MLI5�7 R,ih. 1: 17--, hart, l� r frF � 4 Al, rafitbre Cr Venice Studio S,. 4 TyA --- ream Bungatow --- - — - �q4'F pIaito A'We US Peat office m Q 151 ���f�rAj� Ave Got Altair Pi Books of Solvenla ` �La Desy Safal Afi �aer.,rrt or�.n +V r— Grand Blvd 4 wenice audio i 2 A 11—so Mechanics Damaged vehicles are hidden from riders on the in -app map, and riders are not able to begin a ride on a vehicle marked as damaged until a trained Mechanic has inspected and are not used until the problems have been addressed and remove the vehicle from the road and fully -operational Birds to ensure our overa functioning Bird. RebalancIN ing repaired the vehicle. This ensures vehicles needing maintenance or repair . When a vehicle is marked as inoperable or damaged, our team will locate repair it in our regional service center. Damaged Birds are replaced immediately by II fleet size remains static and riders always have access to a well-maintained and high - Using our GPS and bluetooth tracking technology, we are able to identify where Birds are at any given point in time. With this technology, we are able to instruct our Bird Watchers and Chargers on where to capture Birds for rebalancing, charging, and maintenance. Once the vehicles are ready to be ridden again, they will be returned to pre -designated " nests." Nests will be placed throughout Meridian to assure City-wide coverage, and specifically placed to avoid the overcrowding of high traffic areas. Bird will also use trip data to determine where nests should be established, moved or expanded based on a variety of data metrics. As mentioned above, Bird Watchers play an integral role in rebalancing vehicles and they do so continuously throughout the day. Riders, Meridian City officials, and community members are encouraged to report any issues regarding over -concentration so we can address them as quickly as possible. This includes everyday operations or special events. Issues can be reported through our Customer Service lines or through Community Mode, an in -app reporting feature which allows anyone - regardless of whether or not they are riding a Bird - to report an issue. Please see Section 3 below for a complete breakdown of these reporting methods. Program Start Date We would propose beginning this program in May 2019. E 3) Specifications of shared vehicles to be used in the program, including maximum speeds, identificati franchisee contact information; method by which customers can notify local agent to repo issues and whether able to: stand up on wit h current rt saTely or maintenance right when parked, inform riders of the location of designated parking areas, be remotely disabled or controlled, condition and safety features to protect the safety of riders, pedestrians, motor vehicles, and Property. Our Bird fleet is 100% electric and powered by on -board lithium ion batteries. While total range varies on a case-by-case basis, our vehicles will generally last for an entire day of service. The battery level of the vehicle is clearly displayed in -app and (on most models) on the vehicle LED display so riders know the remaining labeled on the vehicle and shown through a photo tutorial in the B range. The vehicles have a throttle and brake that are visibly ird app. Bird dedicates significant energy and resources to the constant improvement of our fleet. As the most experienced operator, we have and will continue to revisit our scooter designs to be as safe and reliable as possible. Key vehicle safety features include: • Durable brakes that are adjusted for consistency for each model. • Reinforced hardware to prevent breakage even during heavy use. • Kickstand which enables scooter to be stood upright when parked. • Scooters require kick-start before being throttled for safety purposes (to avoid unintentional or jerky acceleration). • Airless solid tires that never go flat (some models). • Non -slip standing surfaces and durable grips for secure riding. • Clear and prominent labeling reinforcing responsible ridership rules (helmet required, no double riding, etc). • Always -on front light (clear) and rear 'night (red) coupled with reflectors for extra visibility. • Front and rear lights configured to remain illuminated for at least 90 seconds after the vehicle has stopped. • Manual bells on every model that can be initiated to alert other users on the road. • Vehicles capable of being capped at specific speeds as necessary. We will work with Meridian officials to determine speed caps. Bird also created Bird Zero - the first e -scooter designed and engineered by Bird specifically for long-lasting every day shared use. Bird Zero is designed to meet the demands of cities with varying climates and street terrains by providing riders with superior battery life for longer range, enhanced lighting for increased visibility, and improved durability for a longer life -span. All Birds have unique identifier codes on the vehicle, and are equipped with a location tracking system and a GPS enabled "Brain." Birds are monitored by our highly -skilled team of engineers and analysts. We are able to track the location, speed, temperature, heading, odometer, battery charge and status (in -ride, ready -to -ride, damaged, etc.) of any vehicle in our fleet. Our GPS technology enables riders to unlock and lock vehicles, instructs and monitors where our chargers stage Birds in nests, and allows us to create a customized zones that regulate speed based on a Bird's physical location as well as send push notifications regarding certain rules and regulations. 10 Preferred Parking Preferred Parking is a new, first of its kind in -app feature, providing a comprehensive parking solution that directs riders to park in predetermined parking locations using geofencing capabilities, in -app education real-world visual reference points, real-time navigation and GPS -enabled alerts. These predetermined locations will be created in partnership by Bird and Meridian. 'referr urther ed Parking areas would be highlighted in the app to encourage e -scooter parking in specific locations pushed toward appropriate utilization through incentives (such as credits towards future rides) or disincentives (such as 9:41 AM � 100% � CONFIRM PARKING ' Please dark nicely. Chan"t block sidewalks. rams, or daarw and riders could be i6_ M ees ranging from $ 10 to the cost of any parking fines) for leaving a vehicle outside of these parking spaces. Once ample Preferred Parking spaces are available and riders have had an introductory period of Preferred Parking, Bird can prevent riders from ending rides until the vehicle is detected within the Preferred Parking space. This experience can also be coupled with existing or new infrastructure signaling parking locations (such as bike racks, parking signs, mats, stencils, etc.) to create a holistic parking management solution that starts in the Bird app and ends in the real-world. We continue to build on our suite of lock tests, and experimenting with augmenting parking locations with bluetooth beacon technology that could detect a vehicle's parking tools to usability and efficacy and are currently iterating on our vehicles with various parking location with high precision. We envision future collaboration with Meridian officials to identify high priority areas and work with local organizations to establish an incentivized process that gives riders credit if they drop-off near public transit stops. mill' 9=41 A [ W0% M�f IIIDE IN PRODRESS (D 0.00 � 00% CDo0 0 to P 0,0e 0 Popp i I sell ` 9=41 AM iG0% lilRIDE IN PROGRESS +N 4or Eike Fuck In tro:nt -Ct the Miller S�:I�'--Ice-BuildiX Incentive Corr7munity Benefit Irw. 0 �U,Ish 0 0 eeekit 0S f IVIII OL 15th Ct 0 UCLA Medical 15th St Center and 15th St Hospital - Santa Monica Euclid Ct Euclid Ct Euclid St lid St 12th Ct 12th St >12th St 11th Ct(a 11th Ct co o EI Choly Q 1nth Stloth ctHuckleberry 1othStNO RIDE ZONE 9th St 9th St Lincoln Ct Lincoln Ct Toyota Santa L-incotn Blvd MonicMine Emerson teed Park -h St¢ — TRANSIT ZONE 6th CtCassia 0 5th St < 5th St5th Ct Umamu Burrpr ee 5th St 5th St ��ron(./Maxx �-��D.F. Changsi � F -SANTA MVr�rICA 3rd Ct ays. 11 Reporting Community Mode We want to encourage people to r eport safety, parking, and maintenance concerns. Community Modeisqn in -app repo feature that allows anyone - whether or not they ride Bird - to report instances where a Bird is parked improperly. These help us take appropriate action such as deploying Bird Watchers to reposition or remove a vehicle, or taking furthe action as needed. Reporting options within Community Mode includes: • Badly parked Birds. • Tipped over vehicles. • Several Birds stacked. • Homeowners wanting Birds moved from private property. • Damage issues with brakes, throttles, kickstands, or QR codes. rting reports r disciplinary Community Mode encourages smart, responsible safety practices throughout communities. We invite all community members to share in our mission by being mindful of parking locations and reporting any issues when you see them. da aft REP''( RT -_:';4 ISSUL UNSAFE AMER GAMAG,E D 81RD CONT-ILCT BIRD r Ak Ak I- Rill '-? 46 40 41 A `rt SCAN A BIRD .a - u: n 1479 CIoverrield Blvd, Venice, CA 90291 ELLOCKING ACCESSIBILITY I n !MULTIPLE STACXED I ON PIRIVArE PROPERTY I I TIPPED OVER I OTHER I i 0 0 X VL70 FARO Ili ADCC A PHOTO 14 7 8 C Dave rf i e l d BI vd , V en is e, CA 90291 ML.JL TI@L F 5TACKFO T 1PRE: D 0'i ER 1 ))HEI. Bird Support Bird has a team dedicated to Customer Support 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Bird's customer service number is 1.866.205.2442 and email support is hello@bird.co. All emails, phone calls, in -app Community Mode reports (described below), and social media messages are routed through Zendesk. where our team of experienced Customer expertly triage requests. Customers can report maintenance concerns through the Bird app or Service representatives an issue 24 hours a day and riders can also report any safety issues or support email. Translation services are available through our customer service number in several languages. Bird's customer support information is displayed on our app, website, and on each individual scooter. In the instance of an improperly parked or damaged vehicle, Bird's in -app Community Mode feature enables any person to easily report an improperly parked Bird. 12 Bird Watchers As described more fully in Section 2 (above), upon receiving a red can be dispatched to correct any issues, including poor parking, r rt through Bird Support or Community Mode, Bird Watchers ebalancing, and more. Bird is dedicated to the regular maintenance and improvement of our fleet. Over the last year and a half of operating experience, o be safer, more reliable, and consistent for our riders. Bird perTorms.a daily inspection we've evolved our vehicle designs t each vehicle e very dav t h ro u g h our comprehensive program of Chargers, Bird Watchers, and Mechanics (all described 2 above). All Bird repairs are performed by Bird employees in-house. n in Section When a Bird is in need of repair, the Bird app hides damaged vehicles from riders on the map and disallows a rider trip to start until a trained Mechanic has inspected and repaired the vehicle. This ensures vehicles needing maintenance or repair are not used until the problems have been addressed. When a vehicle is marked as inoperable or damaged, our team will locate and either provide on -the -spot maintenance, or remove immediately by fully-operational Birds so that our overall fleet size remains static. that vehicle from the road to be repaired. Damaged Birds are replaced Regular maintenance and repairs are performed by our team of Meridian -based employees throughout the day. Should a vehicle have more significant repair needs, we remove it from the fleet to be reDa complete our comprehensive quality assurance inspection. We have a va Pre -launch Preventative Maintenance fired. Birds are not returned to the road until they riety of touch points for maintenance as detailed below. Bird's maintenance program begins before a Bird reaches the road,. During the value added production process where Bird's technologyis added to vehicles, each Bird undergoes a 14 point quality assurance inspection and that is signed off by the engineering team members performing the assembly as well as the inspection managers. Then, each Bird is submitted to hands- on validation testing with respect to braking, steering, and throttle control. These steps ensure Bird scooters are deployed at their maximum level of performance and service. Mechanic Training and Function Bird has a rigorous training program for Mechanics. To be eligible to become a Bird Mechanic, a baseline level of vehicle repair knowledge must first be demonstrated. Bird then trains each of its Mechanics in the various functions and capabilities of each of its scooter models and the variety of repair needs that may surface in its functional life. In addition, Bird has developed specialization teams to focus on certain vehicle components like Bird's on -board computer brain, handlebar fixtures, and disc brake repair. When a vehicle is delivered to a service center, it is inbounded by our trained team of Mechanics, inspected, triaged, and tagged. Birds then move through the multi -tiered logistic warehouse repair flow, receiving service from Mechanics who specialize in specific repair points until the Bird has passed all quality assurance protocols. 13 Regular Maintenance Predictive Maintenance Using a variety of algorithms, we actively identify vehicles that may require maintenance or repair. Through Bird's proprietary system, Bird can isolate and predict which devices are in need of repa the Bird system, which removes our service center for repair. ir. These devices are pre-emptively marked `damaged' in them from the rider map immediately, and dispatches a driver to pick up the Bird and bring it to Bird Watchers Bird Watchers (described in Section 2 above) also play a role in regular maintenance pa damaged Birds so that they cannot be ridden and will be picked up for repair. trolling the streets and flagging any Damaged Bird Notification Charger Inspection Birds are removed from the streets as needed for charging and maintenance. As part of this process, Chargers perform routine inspections on the scooters they charge. If our Chargers find a Bird requiring maintenance, they mark the vehicle `damaged' in the app. Riders cannot ride the vehicle until a Bird Mechanic inspects and repairs the vehicle. Rider Reported Feedback After a ride, we ask each rider for feedback on their experience. For anything less than five stars, the rider may select an area of concern (i.e. flat tires). If the concern is safety related, Bird will remove the vehicle from the rider map until it has been taken to our service center and repaired by a Mechanic. a a ml 0-F, 9:41 AM 100%M, FIND A BIRD O UCLA Medical Center an Orthopaed c Hospital Santa Mani a Euclid Ct 70 co U a � 10th Ct lath St 901 Ct , `nth St REPORT AN ISSUE Q _ REPORT LOCK A BIRD ISSUE ID ID 5tl DAMAGED CONTACT VEHICLE SUPPORT 9:41 AM 100% X REPORT AN ISSUE WHAT HAPPENED ON YOUR RIDE? w �J BAD BRAKES 1 STICKY THROTTLE (:LOOSE HANDLEBARS LOCK � UNLOCK SLOW OTHER Community Feedback As noted above, Bird's in -app Community Mode feature allows all community residents, whether they use our scooter service or not, to report problems, including vehicles with operational issues that need maintenance or repair. REPORT AN ISSUE j' UISI rAFE RIDER VAMAGE D BIRD CONTACT BIRD SCAN BIRD ADO A PHOTO 1479 Cloverfield Blvd, Venice, CA 90291 ILLOOKING ACCESSIBILITY I MULTIPLE STACKED! ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TIPPED OVERl OTHER l 9.41 AM SCAN A BIRD XVL70 E• W:) 10 ,L'U A -1H JTO 1478 CIove'ffielid 13[vd, Venice, CA 90291 l SLocK I NG AOC IESSIOILITY I ' 9 MULTIPLE :STACKED TIPPED OLVER OTHER li; Vehicles Beyond Repair If a vehicle requires significant repairs, it will be sent to our vehicle facility near Meridian for inspection. Our team of technicians and engineers will thoroughly inspect the vehicle and repair it if possible. Should the vehicle no longer be safe for use down into its component parts. Reusable parts are tested and verified for function and safety and then reused on othe requiring repairs. it is broken r vehicles 4) Plan for addressing public safety and other issues and incidents related to the shared vehicles' operation and/or 11 parking, including response time, approach to shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. Parking Strategy We share a collective responsibility to keep our neighborhoods safe and clean. For Bird, this means keeping our sidewalks clear. While we have already taken many steps in other markets to ensure compliance with local and state laws related to parking, riding, and roadway safety, we are continuously developing more effective enforcement, messaging tools, and strategies, including better i ncentives and disincentives to encourage good parking behavior. We will treat Meridian with the same care, attention, and respect. We understand the need to respond quickly to any issues or complaints. The following is an overview of strategies that we have implemented, or are working towards implementing, to ensure that Birds are always parked in a responsible, legal, and comp1iant way that does not disrupt the community. 11110-7 9:41 AM 100% � X REPORT BAD PARKING D �n SCAN BIRD ADD A PHOTO 1478 Cloverfield Blvd, Venice, CA 90291 f BLOCKING RIGHT OF WAY MULTIPLE STACKED � ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TIPPED OVER OTHER ^ 9:41 AM 100% � X REPORT BAD PARKING XVL7Q ILL BIRO ID ADD A PHOTO 1478 Cloverfield Blvd, Venice, CA 90291 15 Education In -App and Online Education Bird is committed to educating riders and the community about safety rules and regulations at the time of sign-up and before every ride. Information provided on each Bird will inform riders of how to operate the device safely. In -app messaging will instruct riders on responsible riding and parking practices. • Obey all applicable vehicle code requirements. • Strongly encourage the use of helmets. • Park and ride in appropriate locations. Bird explicitly instructs riders on the proper access ramps, etc.) in the Bird app, on ourpush, and in -app notifications). The Bird app features a comprehensive, animated safety video that all Bird riders are required to watch and engage website,andthroughoutboundcommunications(email,way to park scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not blocking driveways, entrances, website,andthroughoutboundcommunications(email, with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video, riders are shown how to ride and park vehicles in a responsible, showing riders that they are required to park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and not t doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language, t possible. legal, and compliant way. This includes o block access to ramps, driveways, o be as universally accessible as We can also implement Meridian -specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each to continuing to work with Meridian to rules of the road d ride begins, customize t and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward his messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages an As noted in other sections, riders are required to submit end -of -ride photos that allow us to monitor parking behavior and adjust our online education efforts based on the feedback. 16 PREVENTION Bird Watchers Described in complete detail in Section 2, Bird Watchers play a critical role in ou patrolling the streets and responding to any complaints regarding parking issues0 r efforts to ensure safe and effective parking by Preferred Parking As mentioned in Section 3, Preferred Parking is a new, first of its kind in -app feature, providing a comprehensive parking solution that directs riders to park in predetermined parking locations using geofencing capabilities, in -app education reference points, real-time navigation and GPS -enabled alerts. These predetermined locations will Bird and Meridian. 'referr urther , real-world visual be created in partnership by ed Parking areas would be highlighted in the app to encourage scooter parking in specific locations pushed toward appropriate utilization through incentives (such as credits towards future rides) or disincentives (such as , and riders could be ees ranging from $ 10 to the cost of any parking fines) for leaving a vehicle outside of these parking spaces. Once ample Preferred Parking spaces are available and riders have had an introductory period of Preferred Parking, Bird can prevent riders from ending rides until the vehicle is detected within the Preferred Parking space. This experience can also be coupled with existing or new infrastructure signaling parking locations (such as bike racks, parking IN signs, mats, stencils, etc.) to create a holistic parking management solution that starts in the Bird app and ends in the real-world. We continue to build on our suite of parking tools to usability and efficacy and are currently iterating on our vehicles with various IN lock tests, and experimenting with augmenting parking locations with bluetooth beacon technology that could detect a vehicle's parking location with high precision. We envision future collaboration with Meridian officials to identify high priority areas and work with local organizations to establish an incentivized process that gives riders credit if they drop-off near public transit stops. mill T 9=41 AM 10 11� RIDE IN PROGRESS G 0. .0 0 100% 0 "30,0 0 0 ecp. 0 ks, 0 R P* IL'SoeJ� mill T 9=41 AM 100% ISI. RIDE IN PROGRESS +N Bike Fuck In front of the Millen Science Building Incentive Community Benefit llel,5 r 0 CPO C) 0 0 �. LTE 1:08 'M 9:41 AM 100% � RIDE IN PROGRESS CONFIRM PARKING 16th St 16th St 15th Ct 0 UCLA Medical Please park nicely. Dant block 15th St Center and � 15th St sidewalks, ramps, or doorways. Hospital - Santa Monica 3rd Ct X11 M 17 Euclid Ct Euclid Ct Euclid St clod St 12th Ct 12th St > 12th St 11th Ct o M 11th Ct W EI Cholo Q 11th St E 10th Ct Huckleberry 14th Ct �+ 10th - NO RIDE ZONE 9th St 9th t 9th St Lincoln Ct Lincoln Ct Toyota Santa LiincolmBI- d Monis Mine Emerson teed Park 7th St > - = TRANSIT ZONE 6th Ct r ® Cassia 0 6th StN ¢ 6th St BurgE 5th Ct r lUrnarni ee 5th St Q IF E N D 11 5th St RIDE iron 0 . D_O_W V D.F. Changs TJ Maxx SANTA M,.� .: 3rd Ct X11 M 17 End of Ride Photos Riders are required to take a photo of their parked Bird at the end o the photo it also includes a prompt that reminds individuals of proper f blocking sidewalks, access ramps, driveways, doorways, and more. every ride to verify proper parking. When the app asks for parking etiquette, emphasizing that they are prohibited from The photos are collected as a way to verify appropriate parking in the event of hazardous or improper parking being mages also serve as verification that a particular rider has, in fact, misparked a Bird. This allows us to follow up with I f t urther education and, as appropriate, fines. Repeat offenders can have their accounts suspended and, i erminated. Lock -to reported. The riders with n some cases, Bird is continuously working on more solutions to ensure that vehicles are parked in an orderly and organized way, including a lock -t o capability. We're developing vehicles with hardware attached to their necks that will allow riders to fasten individual to bike racks or other City -approved structures. This technology will be easily accessible on the vehicle with a simple scooters release lock or combination lock to allow all riders to lock and unlock each vehicle with ease. Riders will be able to keep their heading into work for the day. Additionally, a lock -to mechanism should help desired vehicle secure while stepping into a shop or ensure vehicles remain in an upright manner and not markets, and is gathering feedback and learnings. block sidewalks. Bird is currently testing lock -to hardware in specific Presently, Bird is engaged in pilot programs utilizing a blend of proprietary hardware mounts with heavy-duty combination U- shaped locks and vinyl coated braided steel coil cable locks of varying lengths and sizes. These locks may be equipped with lights for use in low lit areas. The vehicle hardware goal is to enable all riders to lock and unlock each vehicle with ease. When riders scan a Bird equipped with a lock, they get a lock access code and instructions on how to unlock the vehicle. They can then ride the vehicle as normal. At the end of the ride they are instructed on how to tether the vehicle to a Bike rack or designated location, being careful to not block sidewalks, doorways or handicap access points. As we gather more information from these initial tests, we can bring the best solutions from our learning to the Meridian market. Tip Detection Technology We are also developing the ability to detect improperly parked devices so that we can quickly repark them. Each Bird would be equipped with a variety of sensors to allow them to be constantly monitored. The vehicles would `check in'with their GPS location and other sensor data every 30 seconds when idle, and every 5 seconds while being ridden. This close monitoring would allow us to proactively direct vehicle inspections of vehicles that may be damaged. In addition, vehicles would also able to sense when they've been tipped over and send us an alert. Once we have been alerted that a vehicle is tipped over, we could send a Bird Watcher to adjust and properly repark the vehicle. Additionally, these signals could give us the ability to identify areas which are not appropriate parking locations. 0 TIPPED OVER BIRD ALERT 1 D: X D H V G iE Policy Zones As noted above, Bird currently uses geo-fencing to indicate City boundaries and locations that are prohibited for riding and parking. Bird's geo-fencing capabilities can be extended to designate parking zones that are created in collaboration with City officials as needed to indicate no -parking zones. Geo -fenced parking zones can be set up to alert riders, either through a push notification or app banner, where parking is allowed and not allowed. We are also willing to collaborate with City officials to create physical signage in areas where it is necessary. In addition to parking zones, Bird can use its geo-fencing capabilities to include no -riding zones. We will partner with City administrators to create the appropriate zones given the unique characteristics of each City. These predetermined zones are then shared with riders on our in -app map and via notifications to appropriately inform and influence rider behavior. xq Y 9=41 ANI 100% �r RIDE IN PROGRESS 0.00 100% 0 T�_ 0 V C —ml IF F N i 1 Bird Parking Spaces .111 *4 9=41 AM 1001:1,16 � RIDE IN PROGRESS +N Bike Fuck In front u1 0 i ` Miller Science Buildinc X InCCnt 1� C orrlInit1fi �r ae 0 o '10 0 0 E i L___ __...W�A iain Si 16th St 0 15th Ct 4 UCLA Medical 15th St Center and y 15th St Y. u rtt u-p-a-ed;ic—= Hospital - Santa Monica Euclid Ct Euclid Ct Euclid St --lid St 12th Ct 12th S# > 12th St 11th Ct m ra 11th Ct W EI Cholo 0 N d {} 11th St O loth Ct Huckleberrvl Intl, r' 10th St NO RIDE ZONE 9th St JL.. 9th St Lincoln Ct Lincoln Ct 0 Toyota Santa Lincoln Blvd 0 Monica Mine Emerson' teed Park h St — TRANSIT ZONE Q 6th Ct = Cassia o 6th St a` 6th St Umami Burge 5th Ct ee 5th St© r DE 5th St .vron 0 D 0 W 8 ).F. Changs p TJ=Maxx SANTA Mlumt,A 3rd Ct 9:41 AM 100% CONFIRM PARKING Please park nicely. Don't black sidewalks, ramps, or doorways. We have worked with multiple cities, particularly those with congested downtown streets, to determine locations and create signage for designated e -scooter parking to improve orderliness and reduce clutter. This can take a range of forms depending on the needs of a City, from long term infrastructure like Darklets to more temporary formats like stencils and signage. For example, Bird has designed a dynamic stencil that can be adjusted to fit any space available within the City where it is deployed. 1 NJ 4 C_ y 3� Y. 1 NJ Nest Location Photos Properly placing Birds mitigates clutter and increases responsible parking behavior from the very start of the day. In order to incentivize our Charger community to model good parking behavior, we updated our Nest deployment photos to real images of the deployment location. To ensure these photos are effective, Bird's experienced operations team manually reviews each nest location and determines the best photo example is shown within the Charger app. Our experience has shown that real images, rather than computer generated graphics, encourage and enable Chargers to more accurately deploy Birds at established Nests. Community engagement As we scale our operations in Merid on safety education to ensure these an, new riders and community members will encounter and interact with Birds. We will focus interactions are safe for all members of the Meridian community. Bird is committed to educating riders and the community about safety rules and regulations at the time of sign-up and before every ride. In Meridian, our public information and education program will include in -app, online, email, and public engagement eff orts. In -App, Online, Email Consistent in -app reminders will communications in -app help reinforce proper rider behavior and parking etiquette. To date, we have sent out il. and on social media o safety rules a through ema to ride, they must read and agree the rules of the road. t to deliver i t the time of sign-up. Riders are informed and educated how to operate the device safely. reminding all riders to: Obey all applicable City regulations. Wear helmets. Not ride on sidewalks. Ride in a manner that is safe and courteous to others. � Park in appropriate locations. mportant messages. Before a new rider can activate a Bird We also have in -app notifications reminding riders about n -app messaging will display Meridians local rules, We will also work with the City to determine appropriate messaging that will address local rules and regulations. 20 101 oblic Engagement Upon permit approval, Bird is committed to partnering with Meridian officials t ence in other cities, rollout around our entry into the City. Based on our experi service prior io launch io set the t communications plan that include momentum: o engage the public and drive a communications we believe it is critical to communicate about our one for future engagements in the community. i nereTore, we recommend leading a phased touchpoints before Bird launches, at the time of launch, and post launch to keep positive Pre -Launch: Our marketing and events team can work with the City and/or groups to create an in -market event strategy aimed at early rider education and safety. Bird can host pop-up events in highly trafficked areas or at the Valley Regional Transit stop to show what life can be like with Bird. Bird representatives can provide safety demonstrations and answer riders' questions about the rules of the road. Press will also be invited to speak with Bird representatives, and other invited City officials and community leaders, to give them an early look at how Bird will contribute to the local economy and environment. • At Launch: In conjunction with Meridian officials, Bird will push out a shared announcement of our launch with local press and once again provide important information regarding safe use and ou spend the week of launch doing interviews for broadcast and radio to ge t value proposition for the area. We would also t the message out about our arrival, and express our sincere commitment to being an integral part of the extended community. - Launch announcement and service information shared on social channels and amplified on partner channels owned by the City and partner organizations. - Bird would work with local event hosts to integrate Birds as a safe transportation option for current events at heavily trafficked locations. 10 Post -Launch: We will continue to partner with the City to amplify stories of Bird's impact in the community by highlighting the "Bird Commuter" through external communications opportunities such as LTEs, op-eds, partner blog posts, and more. We will also leverage in -market partnerships with local organizations, business groups, environmental and bike activists to engage in positive press opportunities regarding Bird's integration into the Meridian area. Due to our experience operating in Boise, we already have local knowledge and regional relationships that we can leverage. Please see Section 3 for a breakdown of our maintenance plan as well as the ways in which any incidents can be reported. 5) Proposed role of City staff in program management, including fielding complaints or suggestions, enforcement of rider rules, and encountering or removing shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. Bird envisions being a part of the Meridian transit ecosystem for years to come, and would greatly appreciate the City's partnership while we implement the aforementioned strategies in Meridian. This supportive partnership may include the City designating e -scooter parking areas in high -traffic corridors (temporary signage or parklets) and posting signage to educate and enforce positive parking behavior. We envision future collaboration with Meridian to identify high priority areas and local organizations for us to work with to establish an incentivized process that gives riders credit if they drop-off near public transit stops. Bird would also greatly appreciate the City's support during any public events or press releases we may have regarding safe parking and riding practices. 21 We do not envision City staff playing a role in fielding complaints or suggestions, enforcing rider rules, or removing shared vehicles improperly or inconveniently parked. In the case of City staff encountering any of these issues, the best course o would be to contact us directly through our Governmen Service lines (described in Section 3 above) so we can t Partnerships team, our in -app Community Mode, or our Custome respond and correct any issues. As a company, we have dedicate f action r significant time and resources to ensure our fleet management is high-quality, our customer service is responsive, and our riders are well educated and have all the necessary tools to obey the rules of the road. Thus, we see the City as a partner with whom we will work together to implement innovations and make our services as high -functioning and equitable as possible, not as a regulator or an additional hand to oversee our operations. 6) Conditions of operation that will protect the public health, safety, and welfare and mitigate effects of the program on vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or property. The safety of the communities in which we operate is of paramount importance for Bird, and is something we take very seriously. This extends to people who ride Birds as well as those who do not. Accordingly, Bird believes and adheres to Vision Zero's core principles of human -centered design, data -driven policy, and systemic prevention. After tens of millions of shared e -scooter trips in M ore than 100 cities worldwide, shared e -scooter riding is proving as safe as bicycling and in some contexts may be safer. Any discussion around the safety of scooters and/or bicycles, however, must first recognize the most dangerous vehicles on the r oad, cars. Every year in the United States, 2.35 million people are injured and nearly 40,000 die from car crashes. There are also over 457,000 bicycle -related visits to the emergency room -- with more than 96% of them linked to collisions with cars. As e -scooter services have quickly grown to millions of trips per month, cities and states are considering how best to harness their benefits while protecting the safety of riders, pedestrians and other road users. This primer addresses frequently asked questions r egarding e -scooters, and what the relevant data indicate thus far. Please see Section 3 for a breakdown of our operations plan that ensures the safety and health of Meridian residents and visitors. Additionally, the pages below contain research findings from the cities of Portland, Austin, and Kansas City that analyze the i mpact of e -scooter programs on the public health and safety of their residents. 22 z 3 n BIR D B y The Numbers KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI Four months of EMS records show less than five e -scooter injuries per month A manual review of nearly 100,000 EMS records logged between July 2018 through October 2018 shows only 19 accidents involving electric scooters, according to the Kansas City Fire Department,, 96,850 19 0 CALLS RECEIVED IN 4 MONTHS CALLS FROM E -SCOOTER INJURIES LIFE-THREATENING CALLS AUSTIN, TEXAS E -scooters are as safe as bicycles According to data collected bv the Austin Emergency Medical Services and a 37 scooter injuries were reported among subsequent analysis by Aus 0 0 0 0 approximately one million scooter rides during a Tive-monTn period. i nis compares io tin Public Health, 81 reported bicycle injuries over the same period. Four months of EMS records show few e-s000ter related injuries. BIKES/E-BIKES SCOOTERS RESULTS INJURIES 81 37 1/2 See https://mailchi. m lo/kcrno.org/f ew-inju ries- related -to-electric-scootersoters See http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=307564 as many injuries reported on scooters 23 Case Study0 : Portland, Oregon In January, 201Transportationthe Portland Bureau of (PBOT) released its much anticiDated 2018 E-S000ter Findings Report. PBOT concluded that shared e-s000ters are just as safe as other modes of transportation: After reviewing emergency department and urgent care clinic data, we found that e -scooters have risks similar to other parts of the transportation system. We did not find a disproportionate risk that would discourage the city from allowing a scooter ride -share pilot. --Portland Environmental Health Director Jae Douglas, Ph.D. Other 0 key safety related findings from the study include: Sidewalk riding was protected bike lanes. less prevalent on streets with After ,..C•. r-: thnr, /0''0,00f1 trig ,there were only of pedestrian injury and no indication that either one was severe. In recognition of the strong link between driving and overall crash risk, the study highlighted the potential of increased e-s000ter ridership to make streets safer for everyone: 40% With 34 percent of Portland scooter riders stating they replaced car trips with e -scooter trips, an increase in e -scooter use has the potential to contribute to a reduction in serious injuries and fatalities. It; n BIR D Bird's Safety leadesrhip The safety of riders and communities is of paramount i industry- leading safety policies and practices include: • Ceasing late night operations, w e-s000ter operator to imple en mportanoe for Bird. Bird's hen risk to all r t this practice. W Developing an in -app proof -of -age requirement to prevent underage riding. oad users increases. Bird is the only • Instituting responsible, automatically governed speed limits in consultation with city officials. )porti • Enabling direct r feature. ng of dangerous parking behavior through the in -app Community Mode In addition to these industry- leading polic10 ies and practices,, Bird: Is a supporter of Vision Zero, the best -practice traffic safety policy that targets zero fatalities and serious injuries. Achieving Vision Zero requires continuous systemic and data -driven improvement to vehicle design, operations, user behavior, it it and most importantly, street design. Bird is actively engaged in this conversation,, and is closely allied w h advocacy groups pursuing these goals. Partnered with the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and Shared Streets to establish a robust data sharing standard with cities -- starting in Detroit. The associated data sharing trip and safety data easily accessible and actionable. platform will help make Hired Paul Steely White, the longtime head of Transportation Alternatives, New York's preeminent bicycling and traffic safety advocacy group. Established a Global Safety Advisory Board, chaired by former National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) David Strickland. This body leads Bird's best -in -class safety policy, drawing lessons from other transportation modes. Collaborated with AT&T on its "It Can Wait" oa paign4, the road and off their phones to promote road safety. encouraging all consumers to keep their eyes on Builds partnerships with local governments and safety advocates to trial innovative street design and parking schemes that promote road safety, and establish best practices to scale to other cities,, 4 See https://about.att.com/newsroom/2018/distracted-driving-two wheelshtmlhtml 25 7) Plan and capabilities for sharing vehicle and ridership data with City to inform and support public safety and transportation planning efforts, including anonymized trip records for each shared vehicle deployed within Meri trip start date, time, and location, duration; distance; trip end date, time, and location). than (e.g. We support the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) API, which includes a tokenized feed of detailed trip data such as trip route, duration, and distance, in addition to battery level and vehicle ID. We also host an open General Bikeshare Feed Specification (GBPS) availability feed, which can allow the City and third parties to access information on all currently available vehicles. We also support city -spec ifi Real-time aggregated, anonvmized data c data -sharing dashboards, which include: 0 Ridership heat maps with ride start -and -end information. Rider frequency. Contact information for a dedicated Government Relations Real-time maps of all Birds and all active rides in the City. 11 representative. Overview Maps Rides v REPORTS HEAT MAP I RIDE STARTS + ENDS POUNDS OF CO2 4 •� o • DAYS OF OPERATION EMISSIONS AVOIDED,;,,. • 256ith� ON. obill ) %.r� �11 40 RIDES UNIQUE RIDERS<<�r�� •� �il GAP 805 0. 8691855 2 41 9 RIDER FREQUENCY 7 DAY r 1, ALL TIME 1000 �% 750 HOURS ON A RIDE AVERAGE RIDE MINUTES�• •1�": .Y rhe d 211189 16.E ,� P4 . * • � �a01� MILES TRAVELED AVERAGE RIDE MILES 256379 1.7 `� • ' :'�•,;�!•' YOUR BIRD REP Annie Lint Government Relations Lead annie@bird.co 301-123-4567 250 0 01 2-5 6-10 11-25 26-49 60+ RIDES —� Overview Maps Rides ALL BIRDS ` Un1 #''', cif Cta - Los Aflgel65 {WIvdj�, I405 NESTS NO RIDE OR PARK AREAS y univegqy Of I '' Q - WS W& VJ(. )(A 1 •7115 1405 26 �ttina started with VOHr Bird MDS API s I R c The Bird API allows you to access in-depth data on Bird operations in your city. Built to the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) standard, developed bythe LADOT, our application program interface (API) can provide you with a wide range of information on vehicle availability, trips, and status changes. BEST PRACTICES Make smaller, more frequent calls To streamline the process of pulling real time data, you should ping Bird's API endpoints every 2-3 minutes, pulling only the data for that time window. This will also improve performance of any applications updating based on MDS data. Don't access the API through a web browser Because MDS request require an authentication header you can not use a web browser. You will need to use a different method, such as a command line interface or API development environment. TYPES OF INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE API Space out large requests When pulling large amounts of historical data, allow your system to properly ingest, process, load and store data by limiting your queries to one month periods and not making more than one call every five seconds. Leverage partners for sample code if needed If you're integrating data into a 3rd party tool, that partner will often have helpful sample code for how to integrate into their platform. TRIP INFORMATION Trip length including both duration and distance Start & end time timestamp for when trips and events happen Route including lat/log at ride start and end and regular observed points on route Vehicle information EO Cost including both standard and actual cost \ o � o � o -o � U Vehicle ID unique vehicle identification number also visible on the vehicle HOW TO GET STARTED Vehicle status such as available, reserved, unavailable, and removed Events that change status including service period, rider usage, maintenance, and battery level 1. Login at the provided [yourcity].open. bird -co landing page using your city email address. (Let your Bird contact know if you need access). 2. Click on your username in the upper right hand corner and select `settings' from the drop down menu. 3. To enable collaboration with other cities and identify where Bird can complement your mobility menu 4. Use this token to make an API request. For example, let's say you want to get availability information. You send a GET to https:Hmds.bird-co/availability. As the headers you'll send: Event location shared as a GeoJSON with latitude and longitude coordinates 27 8) Rider rules, regulations, and terms of use, including whether the following conditions will be recommended or required for riders: minimum age, helmet use, licensed driver. Rider Rules Bird explicitly instructs ri (email, push, and in -app notifications). This includes the proper way ders on rules of the road through the Bird app, on our website, and through outbound communicationsto n blocking driveways, entr ances, fired t mat aii bira naers are requ access r de and park scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not amps, etc.). Additionally, the Bird app features a comprehensive, animated safety video o watch and engage with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video, riders are shown how to ride and park vehicles in a responsible, showing riders that they are required to park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and not t doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language, t possible. legal, and compliant way. This includes o block access to ramps, driveways, o be as universally accessible as We can also implement Meridian -specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward to continuing to work with Meridian to rules of the road ride begins, customize t his messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages and %FW--' Terms of Use and Our Please see our Terms of www.bird.co/terms/. Rental Agreement Service in Appendix A and our Rental Agreement in Appendix B. Both are also available at: httios:Hp Recommendations and Requirements Minimum Age: We require all of our riders to be 18 years of age or older. To regulate this, riders are r driver's license when signing up. We have a dedicated team that monitors this process to ensure the li are no duplicates. Helmet Use: While Bird recommends regulated on the state level, and given , when using a Bird. Even though this practice is not required, riders are strongly encouraged to wear helmets as seen in our safety tutorial and other in -app messaging. In addition to messaging, Bird has given away over 65,000 helmets to -date. ri t ders wear a helmet as a responsible riding practice he differences in state laws across the U.S., equired to scan their cense is valid and there we recognize that helmet we cannot reauire all riders to wear a helmet use is Licensed Driver: We require all riders to be a licensed driver. As mentioned above, all new riders are required to scan their driver's license when signing up. We have a dedicated team that monitors this process to ensure the license is valid and there are no duplicates. Bill � 9:41 AM DRIVERS LICENSE 100°l° 9:41 AM 100% M. ■�11 DRIVERS LICENSE 9:41 AM DRIVERS LICENSE Please enter your Drivers License information First Name Last Nary Drivers License Number * 100% 1111111 Drivers License State Birthdate Q W E R T Y U 0 1 P A S D F G H J K L * Z X C V B N M<�) 123 Q y space return .tl1 A 9:41 AM DRIVERS LICENSE * 100% 1111111 29 9) Plan for public outreach and education prior to and during franchise term, including plan to contact Meridian business, school, and residential communities. Education In -App and Oi Bird is committed t every ride. Information provided on Bird scooters will inform riders on how to operate the device safely, including the following line Education o educating riders and the community about safety rules and regulations at the time of sign-up and before safety precautions as we II as best riding and parking practices: • Obey all applicable vehicle code requirements • Strongly encourage the use of helmets • Park in appropriate locations • Financial penalties for violation of any o f the above As mentioned previously, Bird explicitly instructs riders on the proper way to park e -scooters (such as in the furniture zone, not access rampsetc . .l in t blocking driveways, entrances4 r email, push, and in -app no he Bird app, on our website, and through outbound communications TiTications). The Bird app features a comprehensive animated safety video that all Bird riders are equired to watch and engage with when they first open the application. The video is always accessible in the app and in the safety section of the Bird website. In the animated video. riders are shown now io ride and park vehicles in a reSDonS!Die, t t ,t thattheyarerequired that they are required showing riders park out of the pedestrian right-of-way and no doorways, and more. The video relies on clear images, in addition to written language possible. legal, and compliant way. This includes o block access to ramps, driveways, o be as universally accessible as We can also implement Meridian -specific educational safety banners that riders see at the top of their mobile screen before each ride begins, and again while they are ending their ride and parking. We look forward to continuing to work with Meridian to customize this messaging in order to provide the most relevant safety messages and rules of the road. As noted in other sections, riders are required to submit end -of -ride photos that allow us to monitor parking behavior and adjust our online education efforts based on the feedback. Campaigns and Community Outreach We can use social media targeted at Meridian residents to help educate new and existing riders on how to ride and park responsibly, while also educating non -riders on how to report irresponsible behavior. As an example, Bird previously collaborated with AT&T on its "It Can Wait" campaign, encouraging all operators of vehicles to keep their eyes on the road and off their phones to promote road safety. This campaign reached audiences through Bird's social media, AT&T's blog and social media, and numerous news outlets covered the effort. .WW i ■ so - 0 MAN Additionally, Bird will hold a pre -launch community event that emphasizes safety, rules of the road, and responsible parking etiquette. We will provide ride credits to encourage riders to attend this event to learn about proper parking. Bird has also provided safety education events on university campuses and community events, and is eager to partner with community groups to do more, particularly in underserved communities. We plan to continue to partner with local universities like Idaho State University -Meridian, business improvement districts, and equity -focused groups to offer written materials about safe riding practices, and rules of the road. We will also deploy staff for community engagement, and our participation at events includes the oppo rt unity to download the app, go through the safety tutorials and test ride a scooter with the auidance of trained Bird staff. To date across the country. Bir d has given away more than 65,000 helmets 31 Organization Outreach Bir d has found that in-person community engagement can take rider education to the next level. Our Government Partnerships ill explore partnerships with local organizations to support expansion of the ambassador program. These organizations but are not limited to: team w include • Meridian Area Business Association: It is important for Bird to establish relationships with local businesses. We have partnered with various business associations across the United States and value the opportunity to learn more about the Meridian community. • Meridian Chamber of Commerce: Bird's priority i's the cities we serve, and we are dedicated to being accessible, strategic and empathetic partners. Partnering with the Meridian Chamber of Commerce will enable Bird to build relationships with local business events, and make ourselves available to the community to answer questions, provide demonstrations, and more. • Meridian YMCA/ Boys & Girls Club of Meridian: Bird has partnered with similar organizations across the United States to provide mentorship and educate young adults (18+) on how to properly ride and park Birds. We are also interested in speaking with young adults from these organizations about opportunities to join the Bird Charger program. Visitor Education: We recognize that Meridian includes more than just residents; it is a destination for many people around the country. We also recognize that visitors may not be aware of local rules regarding safe and legal e -scooter riding. Bird is committed to magnifying our rider education efforts during peak visitor seasons. We will also design outreach to target visitors who are most likely to be unfamiliar with local rules. Informational Meetings: Bird is committed to holding informational meetings on how to responsibly operate Birds for the community. We will use these meetings as an opportunity to inform and educate riders about the rules of the road and how to safely operate an e -scooter in the City of Meridian. We will partner with additional businesses, schools, residential communities, and other stakeholders to ensure we engage with a diverse selection of Meridian's community groups. 10) Plan for outreach and communication with Meridian Police Department regarding public safety issues prior to and during franchise term. Bird's top priority is safety. As such, we want to establish a long term, collaborative partnership with the Meridian Police Department. Our Government Partnerships team has already met with Meridian Police Department's Chief of Police to discuss responsible riding and innovative safety initiatives. In addition to this initial outreach and inviting members of the department to the aforementioned community outreach events, our team is happy to coordinate an individual meeting with the department. Our team is happy to give tutorials of how our application works, how to ride a Bird, and explain the multiple channels through which law enforcement and community members can report improper parking or issues with our fleet. During the franchise term, we want to establish an open line of communication with the entire police department. Officers should feel empowered to directly reach out to Bird with any questions or concerns. We can also partner with the police department to host community outreach events that emphasize responsible riding. 32 11) Plan for outreach and communication with tr regarding program's use of infrastructure prior t ansportation authorities and pathway easement property owners o and during franchise term. As a Dublic-facina company with devices that are parked on sidewalks and ridden in bike lanes and streets, we understand the importance of establishing close relations with both Meridian transportation officials and property owners before and during this program the Chie outreach to other groups and maintain an open dialogue with all of these groups in ordero ensure that our transparent as possible. Please see Section 9 for a complete breakdown of our community outreach efforts. . For this r f of Police. easonwe have already engaged with local authorities including the Mayor's office, the City Attorney's office, and the multiple members of the City Council. If we are selected to operate in Meridian, tt We do wish to note that many businesses enjoy the benefit of having Bir can drive foot traffic and business. Businesses in every city we operate i their storefronts. Nevert r heless.weheless we wnen we receive a reques t to r we will continue this services are as ds located on the sidewalks in front of their stores which n approach us with requests to locate nests outside of espect that not all private property owners desire this and we are immediately responsive emove Birds from private land. 12) Plan, including currently available technology, to remotely regulate or control shared vehicle speeds and locations, particularly in City parkspathways, and Facilities. Bird's vehicles are distributed throughout the world, and we have first -in -class experience tracking our vehicles across geographical areas while working seamlessly alongside multiple jurisdictions and agencies. Bird is able to track the location, speed, temperature, battery charge level, vehicle faults, and real-time status of a ride (in -ride, ready -to -ride, damaged, etc.). Policy Zones Bird has the capability to enable in -app Policy Zones to set Reduced -Speed Zones or Preferred Parking Zones (see Section 13 below) in specific areas, such as City parks, pathways, and Facilities. We will partner with City administrators to create the appropriate zones if and where necessary, taking into consideration Meridian's unique landmarks, buildings, and attractions. Reduced -Speed zones can be implemented to limit scooter speed in high pedestrian traffic areas. Our technology allows us to safely decrease vehicle speed, or, in some cases, slow vehicles until they come to a complete stop. Reduced -Speed Zones are highlighted on the in -app rider map. If the City is looking to implement Reduced -Speed Zones, we strongly encourage the City to select only operators who have demonstrated the capability to implement this advanced technology in other markets. We are happy to discuss our technology and demonstrate in-person to Meridian officials how our Reduced Speed Zones work. We would also be glad to provide examples of how we have successfully implemented these zones in other cities. For example, in San Antonio, we worked with the City to implement a policy zone to deter riding at the Alamo grounds. And in Santa Monica, we worked with the City to implement a Reduced Speed Zone along the Boardwalk to allow for safe interaction between bicyclists, pedestrians, and scooter riders. 33 13) Plan for locations and approach to installation of transmitters, if any, to identify parking locations to shared vehicles. Bird is currently experimenting with bluetooth beacon technology as a potential way to determine the parking location of a vehicle in its proximity with high precision. These beacons could be located along side of existing infrastructure (such as along sidewalks, or attached to buildings, lamp posts or bike racks) to accurately identify a rider's parking location and enforce compliant parking. These experiments are very early stage, and it is thus far unclear the future practicality of beacons. We also have other types of technology available today that can be implemented to address this same concern around parking and clutter, such as Preferred Parking, which is described below. Preferred Parking As mentioned in Section 3, Preferred Parking is a new, first of its kind in -app feature, providing a comprehensive parking solution that directs riders to park in predetermined parking locations using aeofencina capabilities, in -app education, real-world visual reference points, real-time navigation and GPS -enabled alerts. These predetermined locations will be created in partnership by Bird and Meridian. Preferred Parking areas would be highlighted in the app to encourage scooter parking in specific locations, and Riders could be further pushed toward appropriate utilization through incentives (such as credits towards future rides) or disincentives (such as fees ranging from $10 to the cost of any parking fines) for leaving a vehicle outside of these parking spaces. Once ample Preferred Parking spaces are available and riders have had an introductory peri rides until the vehicle is detected within the Preferred Parking space. od of Preferred Parking, Bird can prevent riders from ending This experience can also be coupled with existing or new infrastructure signaling parking locations (such as bike racks, parking signs, mats, stencils, etc) to create a holistic parking management solution that starts in the Bird app and ends in the real-world. We continue to build on our suite of parking tools and are currently iterating on our vehicles with various lock tests. We envision future collaboration with Meridian officials to identify high priority areas and work with local organizations to establish an incentivized process that gives riders credit if they drop-off near public transit stops. 14) Description of successes and lessons learned in other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). As the creator and most experienced operator in the e -scooter industry, Bird has worked closely with cities and communities to both launch in cities and resolve any issues concerning our operations as they arise. This has led to a number of successes relating to overcoming operational concerns, dealing with weather emergencies, and providing fair and equitable access to transit. The biggest lesson we have learned is that by listening and being as responsive as possible, we can form strong relationships with City officials, community groups, and private citizens. We acknowledge that at the start of this program, there will be occasional instances of issues like misparked Birds. While we will take a number of steps both before and during the program to mitigate this sort of issue, we have learned that the best approach is old-fashioned: maintaining a clear and open dialogue with all relevant local actors. Ultimately, a shared e -scooter program will provide several benefits to already -existing transportation, local commerce, the environment, traffic, and congestion to the City of Meridian. We believe that the occasional hiccup will actually serve to improve our operations by allowing us to further tailor our service to Meridian and its unique communities. Below are some examples of successes and lessons learned over the course of our operations relating to working with cities, improving access to transportation, and dealing with special events like weather emergencies and concerts. Memphis, Tennessee San Antonio, Texas Bird began operating in San Antonio in June 2018, and the City passed a 6 -month dockless allot oroaram in October 2018. The rules set out in the pilot program ensu service by enforcing a minimum rider age re safe and equitable of 16 (Bird requires all riders to be 18 or over), making bike lanes and/or streets the primary areas where riders should use Bird, and not setting a limit on the number of vehicles Bird can operate across San Antonio. Bird follows a strict utilization operational model, meaning that we will only add more Birds to a given market if there is an average of 2 rides per vehicle per day. This ensures we are meeting, but not exceeding, rider demand. After months of thoughtful deliberation, the City of San Antonio decided that the best way to ensure that it's residents will have access to this accessible, sustainable transportation option was by allowing Bird to responsibly allocate vehicles based on utilization - as opposed to implementing a "top down" cap that is inflexible and doesn't take account of ridership patterns, seasonality, etc. In June 2018, the City ot Memphis invited Bird to help them tackle their transportation challenges. After a series of meetings with City Staff, the parties agreed io an Interim Operating Agreement, which enables Bird to follow the utilization cap fleet management model, placing no cap on Bird's fleet sizes. Memphis has since emerged as a pioneer in the dockless mobility movement and is the first City to implement designated Bird parking spots. We continue to have a great working relationship with the City of Memphis and look forward to continuing to grow Bird's fleet to achieve our shared mobility goals. Dallas, Texas Dallas City Council announced a dockless vehicle ordinance in June 2018, the same month in which Bird began operating in the City. Over the last six months, we have formed close relations with the Dallas Department of Transportation (DOT), in large part because their dockless vehicle regulations prioritize both safety and innovation. These regulations state that e -scooters should be ridden in bike lanes whenever available, and should be parked out of the public right-of-way - two guidelines that Bird communicates to all riders prior to their first ride through an in -app tutorial. Dallas also does not limit the number of vehicles Bird operates in Dallas. Similar to San Antonio, this allows Bird to expand our fleet according to utilization and ultimately provide a more accessible and equitable service for all. 35 1ndianapO1Indianapolis,Indiana Bird worked closely with Indianapolis through the Summer of that permitted 1,500 vehicles for the first 30 days of operations This fleet size enabled Bird to provide a more equitable service the City with the highest concentration. This also enabled residents io consistently rely on Bird for their daily transportation needs as they navigate to/from t 2017 on developing a regulatory framework with the ability to scale up to 6,000 vehicles. to the community bv scaling beyond areas of he city as well as within it. However, while having an adequate fleet size is necessary for providing an equitable and reliable service, Bird recommends utilization caps - as this allows supply to scale with demand, and not oversaturate or undersupply markets. As metropolitan populat40 ions increase and more cars are added to already congested streets -traffic tightens, parking difficulties escalate, infrastructure lags behind, commute times increase, and air and noise pollution threaten the climate and our quality of life. Now is the perfect time for cities to invest in sustainable, people -centric transportation solutions, and Bird looks forward to partnering with cities as they ideate and create regulations for dockless mobility services in their community. .4 3: n �=Dft Cr BIR D Hurricane I IiDrerilDe Background Stud v In September of 2018, Hurricane Florence, a Category 4 hurricane with sustained winds of 130 mph, hit the Southeast region of the United States. This tragic event primarily affected the states of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia— including the following cities Bird operates in: Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Norfolk. This was the first weather event of its kind to occur since Bird began its operations in the Southeast region. prepare Hurricane Florence, Bird—in partnership with city officials—took a number of actions to prepare for t following is an overview of how Bird prepared and executed its operational plan during Hurricane Florence. The Execution Prior to Florence reaching U.S. soil, Bird mobilized our network of on -the -ground employees andtrained chargers to prepare for the storm, alerting them of the actions that needed to take place. The most intensive, and important, action that needed to take place was removing vehicles from the road in a timely manner. prior to the beginning of the storm. Bird immediately cleared the map of all Birds to prohibit usage, and within days, the team had successfully removed thousands of Birds in Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Norfolk. Throughou the storm, Bird's operations team continued monito the incoming storm and provided real-time status updates to our employees, city partners, chargers, and riders to promote transparency and ensure safety. t ring Once the storm had passed, Bird worked closely with local municipalities to determine when it was safe for Birds to return to city streets. Prior to resuming service and enabling rides, all Birds were thoroughly inspected for any damages, and only those deemed safe to ride were returned to streets. n order to adequately he storm. The Greensboro Winston-Salem Charlotte 37 Case Study: Bird x Aust What'I' Austin BACKGROUND s Austin City Limits? City Limits (ACE) is an on in Austin, Texas annual inC ity Limits music festival two consecutive three - held in Zilker Park day weekends. 450,000 f the people attend annually, creating heavy traffic getting in and out o park during these weekends. How was Bird involved? Three months prior to the event, Bird engaged the Austin Transportation Department (ATD (APD), Austin Parks Department, Austin Fir in conversation with Austin Po lice Department e Department, and the other dockless mobility companies and TNCs, to create a plan for operational ility success at companies the and ACL. The City of Austin asked that , r dockless ather than ATD, lead the efforts to create and game pian. egress for Their measurements for success were mplement clea r ingress the festival, keeping ADA accessible areas clear, and preventing any scooter How did Bird prepare? accidents. Bird, in partnership with the other dockless mobility operators, identified the top three potential problems that we would work together to address: 1 40 2. 340 scoote f estiva lack of cell service reception near the festival potential intoxicated scootering r pile1 - ups that blocked safe ingress and egress of the To address these conce sto r our rns, Bird rented a nearby parking lot to use for age of scooters and hardwired WiFi for us to communicate staff. Additionally, signage around the festival to direct designated drop-off zones and to the parking lot. THE RESULTS What happened on-site? At the festival, Bird deployed our field op Watchers, to manage the festival area. Bir with riders to erations team, known as Bird d Watchers moved Birds from drop off zones that blocked festival ingress and egress to the sto lot and back to areas of the city where the Birds could get rides. Based on the feedback from the city, and our safety goals not an option for concert -goers leaving the festival, to e were no safety incidents. rage Birds were sure there What was the City's reaction.? Overall, ATD was thrilled with our responsiveness, and the City of Austin was pleased with the way we were able to work with our competitors to make an event successful. There were no major incidents. The week after the event local tr ATD Director Rob Sp ansportation conference. filler gave positive feedback at a i d 1 l 1 1 le i 1 ■ � . ■. ■ � ' �� � ■ r ■ ■1 W -. e � Y gEl ee -� ■� ■ ■, �■ � .< r•Em _ ■ p ■ �!■ 1�1 . e ■ ® ■ ■ ■ . . ■ _■ - • 1 • •s. ■ 0 0 MV Al ■ •F E. _ ■ ■ ■ • of . y ■� e . e x■ m . - 1 ! ■0 _. -■ .,f a lips ■ ' r . ■ r E ® ■ G f' ■ . ■ , ` 1 ■ „� ■ - A ■ - i-- r 0 Em ol iEm• 61 1 ••ti F. T■ f _■f - ■ ■ r _ 1 ti. _ E i. • • 1■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ _ _'6 ■ u i _ 1 • ■ • " L ■ u r ■r El ii r, F. ■ Iv , ■ ■e _ ■ a 1 � i .107 -� G■ u -I If■15 �� EE ■ !NEI. ■ ■• E. 0 El El 0 Awl 0 N fT 05 c 0 EE- ro El ■ i M ■ 3�r ■■ n� ■■■ Y1 ■ . ■ _. ■ Iri ■ - ! � - .i a �o- li • ■ ■ ■ - - ■ _ ■ ■ r R. ■f' ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ 7■ - _ ffrrr� r IrT f u O ,� ■ ■ ml SE ■..■ I. ■ ■_ ■ ■ ■ ■... f ONE ■ ■ - ■ ti - ■ ml % 1�■ �■ : r..■,I■ 1 11r� r �' r�'e e■•` a ■ e El _ ■ �f� I■ 1 s r ■ E - • - - Z a y 4 ■ _ ■ fi ■ ■ • -f�- ■ I,.! 1 ffl ■ ■ .11 • • "� • . �• ■ ■® fm ■ r r- • - ■'7 Im El 0 NEER oil&0 1 ■ 1 ■ 0 _■- ■ ■® - - ® • f : :gym ■ J -i1 ■ P N: ■ G „1 G li Gi i. ' ■ ■ t f ■ _ ■ _ S� ■ � _ ! 1111■ � L� I� � u SLL '■ : - � 1.N � � .0I. 011 - 0 =0 El ANN= 0 ml IF fa[. - - ■ ■ 0- ENE f= - REI LEON - u _ c m_ REM �� _ ■ ■ m ■�, ■■' W_ 4L ■ r 0 a _tm EEEE r _ r• ■ ' 1 _ 1 r �••MEN El ONE Imm ® _ ■ ®;;_— a _■ ■, [ : ! _ mm c 01 NE IND AFF No L ■ ® m ■ ■ e e _ i lle 1 J. a0 0 , am e ■ m r !0I I? I L 7D Pi L i r ■ r - ■ ■ - - fl ■ 1 . ■ - —•1 ■ ■ �■ 1 ■ - W_ - �� - ■ ■ EA i■ce ®-. ■ ■ -LIM . ■ 3 ■c■ ■ ■ _ e ■ L ii � � ■ MEN I ■ �.� 1 L 1■ r• ON 0 ME 00 M%1 ■ I MEW 0 Err .� H • _ �. fElowl ME IS I �i ■ e I _ �I ■ _ ■ rno mi� L 1 .r r- ■ ■0 0■ �-1„ 7 1 T P _ _ _. - - !� SII ■" G .�� '� ■ ■ ■ -.- . � - ■W. T. "L •■ 161110�1 1 % . a, • EEL-- - _■ VIEu o ■ ■ e 1 NO L • 1 m es ■ -■ ■off ■ ME m 0 WE I _ ■ ■ ■p r eeG Norm ■ RKI O�� BIR D 70 Case Study: Portland, Oregon In October 2018, the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) published the results' of a survey of their e -scooter pilot, providing a detailed look at the ways in which more than 4,500 scooter riders (including Portland residents and visitors) were using dock -free scooters over its 120 -day pilot. Bringing in new riders 450/( Of all respondents reported "never" biking Connecting to transmit 27% Of Portlanders reported using an e -scooter to access public transit 1 httr)s://www.portlan Of all respondents reported never using the local bikeshare system prior to the e -scooter pilot Attracting women riders E1? Of all respondents reported as women riders reaon.aov/transaortation/article/7 3 Reducing car and ride hailing congestion Of Portlanders would have driven, had they not taken a scooter Providing financial inclusion 4 3 % Of Portlanders that rode e -scooters reported personal annual incomes of $50,000 or less 1 Of Portland visitors would have driven, had they not taken a scooter In high demand Of Portlanders reported being more likely to use scooters if more were available in the city 15) Contact information for up to five (5) references from other communities in which the Respondent has operated vehicle sharing program(s). City of Boise • October 5, 2018 - present • 150 N Capitol Blvd, Boise, ID 83702 • Craig Croner, City Clerk/Administrative Services Manager • ccroner@citvofboise.orgy • 208-972-8152 City of Coral Gables • October 13, 2018 - present • 405 Biltmore Way, Second Floor • Michael Mena, Commissioner • 305-460-5326 nr%ryi City of Oakland • June 22 • 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza; Oakland, CA 94612 • Ryan Russo; Director of Department Oakland of Transportation • 510-61 • rrusso, 1 2018 - Present 5-5566 klandca.aov City of San Diego • January • 202 C St. • Chris Wa 5, 2018 - Present San Diego, CA 92101 d, Council Member • 619-236-6633 • chriStODherwa rd@sandieao.aov City of San Jose • March 25, 2018 -Present • 200 E. Santa Clara St; San Jose, CA 95113 • John Brazil; • 408-975-32C Active Transportation Program Manager saniose.aov �T� Please view our Terms of Service below: The policies below are applicable to the Bird network of websites that link to these Terms of Service (including any versions ireiess or tablet device); email newsletters published or distributed by Bird; apps published by Bird, optimized for viewing on a w including the "Bird" app; or any other services, interactive features, and communications made available by B accessed and/or used, that are operated by us, made available by us &A I FA I companies ("Services"). ird, however or produced and maintained by us and our related BY USING OUR SERVICES, YOU ARE ACCEPTING THE PRACTICES DESCRIBED IN THESE TERMS OF SERVICE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS OF SERVICE, PLEASE DO NOT USE THE SERVICES. WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO MODIFY OR AMEND THESE TERMS OF SERVICE FROM TIME TO TIME WITHOUT NOTICE. YOUR CONTINUED USE OF OUR SERVICES FOLLOWING THE POSTING OF CHANGES TO THESE TERMS WILL MEAN YOU ACCEPT THOSE r.HANr-,F,q. UNLESS WE PROVIDE YOU WITH SPECIFIC NOTICE, NO CHANGES Tn OUR TERMS nF RETROACTIVELY. For certain of our and Release and/or Privacy Policy. Services, you may also be requ USE WILL APPLY red t i o execute Bird's Rental Agreement, Waiver of Liability This is a legal agreement between you ("you" or "user") and Bird that states the material terms and conditions that govern your use of the Services. This agreement, together with all updates, supplements, additional terms, and all of Bird's rules and policies collectively constitute this "Agreement" between you and Bird. 1. Access License. Bird grants you a limited, revocable, non-exclusive, non -transferable license to access and make use of the Services or its content. This license does not include any resale or commercial use of the Services or its contents; any collection and use of any product listings, descriptions, or prices; any derivative use of the Services or their contents; any downloading or copying of account information for the benefit of another merchant; or any use of data mining, robots, cookies, or similar data gathering and extraction tools. Except as expressly permitted herein, the Services and/or any portion of the Services may not be reproduced, sold, resold, visited or otherwise exploited for any purpose without Bird's express written consent. Any unauthorized use automatically terminates the permissions and/or licenses granted by us to you. 2. Copyright and Ownership. All of the content featured or displayed on the Services, including without limitation text, graphics, photographs, images, moving images, sound, and illustrations ("Content"), is owned by Bird, its licensors, vendors, agents and/or its Content providers. All elements of the Services, including without limitation the general design and the Content, are protected by trade dress, copyright, moral rights, trademark and other laws relating to intellectual property rights. The Services may only be used for the intended purpose for which such Services is being made available. Except as permitted by copyright law, you may not modify any of the materials and you may not copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any information or work contained on the Services. Except as authorized under the copyright laws, you are responsible for obtaining permission before reusing any copyrighted material that is available on the Services. You shall comply with all applicable domestic and international laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations regarding your use of the Services. The Services, Content and all related rights shall remain the exclusive property of Bird or its licensors, vendors, agents, and/or its Content providers unless otherwise expressly agreed. You will not remove any copyright, trademark or other proprietary notices from material found on the Services. 3. Trademarks/No Endorsement. All trademarks, service marks and trade names of Bird used herein (including but not limited to: Bird name, Bird corporate Joao, the Services desian, and any loaos) (collectively " Marks " 1 are trademarks or registered trademarks of Bird or its affiliates, partners, vendors or licensors. You may not use, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit, distribute, or modify Bird trademarks in any way, including in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of materials on the Services, without Bird's prior written consent. You sha symbols which could, in Bird's j II not use Bird's name or any language, pictures or udgment, imply Bird's endorsement in any (i) written or oral advertising or presentation, or (ii) brochure, newsletter, book, or other written material of whatever nature, without prior written consent. 4. Account Reaistration and Security. You understand that you will need to create an account to have access to the Services. You will: (a) provide true, accurate, current and complete information about yourself as prompted by the Services's registration, sign -in, or subscription page (such information being the "Registration Data") and (b) maintain and promptly update the Registration Data to keep it true, accurate, current and complete. If you provide any information that is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, or Bird has reasonable grounds to suspect that such information is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, Bird has the right to suspend or terminate your account and refuse any and all current or future use of the Services (or any portion thereof). You are responsible for the security and confidentiality of your password and account. Furthermore, you are responsible for any and all activities that occur under your account. You will not share your account information or your user name and password with any third party or permit any third party to logon to the Services using your account information. You agree to immediately notify us of any unauthorized use of your account or any other breach of security of which you become aware. You are responsible for taking precautions and providing security measures best suited for your situation and intended use of the Services. We have the right to provide user billing, account, Content or use records, and related information under certain circumstances (such as in response to legal responsibility, lawful process, orders, subpoenas, or warrants, or to protect our rights, customers or business). 5. Solicited Submission Policy. Where Bird has specifically invited or requested submissions or comments, Bird encourages you to submit content (e.g. comments to blog posts, participation in communities, tips, etc.) to Bird that they have created for consideration in connection with the Site ("User Submissions"). User Submissions remains the intellectual property of the individual user. By posting content on our Site, you expressly grant Bird anon-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty -free, fully paid-up worldwide, fully sub -licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, transmit, perform and display such content and your name, voice, and/or likeness as contained in your User Submission, in whole or in part, and in any form throughout the world in any media or technology, whether now known or hereafter discovered, including all promotion, advertising, marketing, merchandising, publicity and any other ancillary uses thereof, and including the unfettered right to sublicense such rights, in perpetuity throughout the universe. Any such User Submissions are deemed non -confidential and Bird shall be under no obligation to maintain the confidentiality of any information, in whatever form, contained in any User Submission. 6. Inappropriate User Submissions. Bird does not encourage, and does not seek User Submissions that: (i) may create a risk of harm, loss, physical or mental injury, emotional distress, death, disab physical or mental illness toouy, to any other person, or to any animal; (ii ) may create a risk of any person or property; or (iii) may constitute a crime or tort. foregoing activiti that result from any activity ility, disfigurement, or any other You agree that you have not and w es in connection with producing your User Submission. Wit ill not oss or damage to engage in any oT the nout limiting the foregoing, you agree that in conjunction with your submission, you will not inflict emotional distress on other people, will not humiliate other people (publicly or otherwise), will not assault or threaten other people, will not enter onto private property without permission, will not impersonate any other person or misrepresent your affiliation, title, or authority, and will not otherwise engage in any activity that may result in injury, death, property damage, and/or liability of any kind. Bird will reject any User Submissions in which Bird believes, in its sole discretion, that any such activities have occurred. If notified by a user of a submission that allegedly violates any provision of these Terms of Use, Bird reserves the right to determine, in its sole discretion, if such a violation has occurred, and to remove any such submission from the Services at any time and without notice. 7. Inappropriate Material. You are prohibited from using the Services to post or send any unlawful, infringing, threatening, defamatory, libelous, obscene, pornographic or profane material or any material that infringes or misappropriates third party intellectual property or could constitute or encourage conduct that would be considered a criminal offense or otherwise violate any law. You further agree that sending or posting unsolicited advertisements or " spam" on or through the Services is expressly prohibited by this Agreement. In addition to any remedies that we may have at law or in equity, if we determine, in our sole discretion, that you have violated or are likely to violate the foregoing prohibitions or any applicable rules or policies linked to in these Terms of Service, we may take any action we deem necessary to cure or prevent the violation, including without limitation, banning you from using the Services and/or the immediate removal of the related materials from the Services at any time without notice. We will fully cooperate with any law enforcement authorities or court order or subpoena requesting or directing us to disclose the identity of anyone posting such materials. 8. Access and Interference. You agree that you will not use any robot, spider, scraper or other automated means to access the Services for any purpose without our express written permission. Additionally, you agree that you will not: (i) take any action that imposes, or may impose in our sole discretion an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on our infrastructure; (ii) interfere or attempt to interfere with the proper working of the site or any activities conducted on the Services; or (iii) bypass any measures we may use to prevent or restrict access to the Services. 9. Right to Takedown Content. Except as disclosed in our Privacy Policy, we will not monitor, edit, or disclose the contents of a user's e-mail or content posted to the Services unless required in the course of normal maintenance of the Services and its systems or unless required to do so by law or in the good -faith belief that such action is necessary to: (1) comply with the law or comply with legal process served on Bird or the Services; (2) protect and defend the rights or property of Bird, the Services, or the users of the Services; or (3) act in an emergency to protect the personal safety of our users, the Services, or the public. Users shall remain solely responsible for the content of their messages and Bird shall have no obligation to prescreen any such content. However, we shall have the right in our sole discretion to edit, refuse to post or remove any material submitted to or posted on the Services at any time without notice. Without limiting the foregoing, we shall have the right to remove any material that we find to be in violation of the provisions hereof or otherwise objectionable, and the additional right to deny any user who fails to conform to any provision of these Terms of Service access to the Services or any part thereof. l0. User Published Content. User published Content and User associated with Bird, and we do not control this Content. Bird's endorsement of user Content on our Services or Submissions do no t r eDresent the views of Bird or anv individual re n no event shall youpresent or published Content. Bird does not vouch for the accuracy or credib User Submissions published through our Services ,and do no jagest, directly or indirectly, ility of any user published t take any responsibility or assume any liability for any actions you may take as a result of reviewing any such user published Content or User Submission. Through your use of the Services and Services, you may be exposed to Content that you may find offensive, objectionable, harmful, inaccurate or deceptive. There may also be risks of dealing with underage persons, people acting under false pretense, international ir risks. 11. Third Party Links. From ade issues and foreign nationals. By using our Services and Services, you assume all associated time to time, the Services may contain links to websites that are not owned, operated or controlled by Bird or its affiliates. All such links are provided solely as a convenience to you. If you use these links, you will leave the Services. Neither we nor any of our respective affiliates are responsible for any content, materials or other information located on or accessible from any other website. Neither we nor any of our respective affiliates endorse, guarantee, or make any representations or warranties regarding any other websites, or any content, materials or other information located or accessible from any other websites, or the results that you may obtain from using any other websites. If you decide to access any other websites linked to or from this Services, you do so entirely at your own risk. 12. Transactional Partners. In some cases we may partner with another entity to co -promote their services within our Services. In these cases, you may be transacting directly with the other party. On those pages or locations, the transactional partners' brand is clearly visible and their terms of service are posted. When using these partner pages, you are bound by partner terms of service in addition to remaining bound by Bird Terms of Service. When there is a conflict between these Terms of Service and the partner's terms of service, their terms of service will prevail. 13. Termination. You or we may suspend or terminate your right to use of this Services at any time, for any reason or for no reason. We may also block your access to our Services in the event that (a) you breach these Terms of Service; (b) we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us; or (c) we believe that your actions may cause financial loss or legal liability for you, our users or us. 14. Representations and Warranties. You represent that You are over the age of 18, have the right and authority to enter into this Agreement, are fully able and competent to satisfy the terms, conditions, and obligations herein, and Your use of the Services is and will be in compliance with all applicable laws. You represent that you have read, understood, agree with, and will abide by the terms of this agreement. In addition, you represent and warrant that your User Submissions and all elements thereof are (a) owned or controlled solely and exclusively by you, you have prior written permission from the rightful owner of the content included in your User Submissions, or you are otherwise legally entitled to grant Bird all of the rights granted herein; and (b) Bird's use of your User Submissions as described or contemplated herein do not and will not infringe on the copyrights, trademark rights, publicity rights or other rights of any person or entity, violate any law, regulation or right of any kind whatsoever, or otherwise give rise to any actionable claim or liability, including without limitation rights of publicity and privacy, and defamation. Furthermore, You shall be solely responsible for your own User Submissions and the consequences of posting or publishing them. l5. DISCLAIMERS. YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES IS AT YOUR RISK. THE INFORMATION, MATERIALS AND SERVICES PROVIDED ON OR THROUGH THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, SECURITY OR NON - INFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. NEITHER BIRD, NOR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES WARRANT THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THE INFORMATION, MATERIALS OR SERVICES PROVIDED ON OR THROUGH THE SERVICES. THE INFORMATION, MATERIALS AND SERVICES PROVIDED ON OR THROUGH THE SERVICES MAY BE OUT OF DATE, AND NEITHER BIRD, NOR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES MAKES ANY COMMITMENT OR ASSUMES ANY DUTY TO UPDATE SUCH INFORMATION, MATERIALS OR SERVICES. THE FOREGOING EXCLUSIONS OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES DO NOT APPLY TO THE EXTENT PROHIBITED BY LAW. PLEASE REFER TO YOUR LOCAL LAWS FOR ANY SUCH PROHIBITIONS. NO ADVICE OR INFORMATION, WHETHER ORAL OR WRITTEN, OBTAINED FROM BIRD OR THROUGH THE SERVICES WILL CREATE ANY WARRANTY NOT EXPRESSLY MADE HEREIN. 16. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY. BIRD DOES NOT ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY, OR WILL BE LIABLE, FOR ANY DAMAGES TO, OR ANY VIRUSES THAT MAY INFECT YOUR COMPUTER, TELECOMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT, OR OTHER PROPERTY CAUSED BY OR ARISING FROM YOUR ACCESS TO, USE OF, OR BROWSING THE SERVICES, OR YOUR DOWNLOADING OF ANY INFORMATION OR MATERIALS FROM THIS SERVICE. IN NO EVENT WILL BIRD, OR ANY OF ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, SHAREHOLDERS, AFFILIATES, AGENTS, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, NOR ANY PARTY INVOLVED IN THE CREATION, PRODUCTION OR TRANSMISSION OF THE SERVICES, BE LIABLE TO YOU OR ANYONE ELSE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE RESULTING FROM LOST PROFITS, LOST DATA OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) ARISING OUT OF THE USE, INABILITY TO USE, OR THE RESULTS OF USE OF THE SERVICE, OR THE MATERIALS, INFORMATION OR SERVICES CONTAINED ON ANY OR ALL OF THE SERVICE, WHETHER BASED ON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY AND WHETHER OR NOT ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. THE FOREGOING LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY DO NOT APPLY TO THE EXTENT PROHIBITED BY LAW. PLEASE REFER TO YOUR LOCAL LAWS FOR ANY SUCH PROHIBITIONS. IN THE EVENT OF ANY PROBLEM WITH THE SERVICES OR ANY MATERIALS, OR INFORMATION CONTAINED ON ANY OR ALL OF THE SERVICE, YOU AGREE THAT YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO CEASE USING THE SERVICE. IN NO EVENT SHALL BIRD'S TOTAL LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ALL DAMAGES, LOSSES, AND CAUSES OF ACTION WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE), OR OTHERWISE EXCEED THE GREATER OF (A) TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS (US $25.00). 1. Indemnity. You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Bird and any affiliated entity or individual harmless from any and all liabilities, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys'fees, related to or in connection with (i) the use of the Services or your placement or transmission of any User Submission or other content, message or information on this Services b'11y you or your authorized users; (ii) your violation of any term ofhits Agreement, including without limitation, your breach of any of the representations and warranties above; (iii) your violation of any third party right, including without limitation any right of privacy, publicity rights or intellectual property rights; (iv) your violation of any law, rule or regulation of the United States or any other country; (v) any claim or damages that arise as a result of any User Submission that you provide to Bird, including without limitation any claim or damages arising from a defamation or invasion of privacy claim; or (vi) any other party's access and use of the Services with your unique username, password or other appropriate security code. 2. Release. In the event that you have a dispute with one or more other users of the Services, you release Bird (and our officers, directors, agents, subsidiaries, joint ventures and employees) from cams,lidemands and damages (actual and consequential) of every kind and nature, known and unknown, suspected and unsuspected, disclosed and undisclosed, arising out of or in any way connected with such disputes. I � 3. Force Majeure. Neither Bird nor you shall be responsible for damages or for delays or failures in pe rformance resu acts or occurrences beyond their reasonable control, including, without limitation: fire, lightning, explosion, power failure, water, acts of God, war, revolution, civil commotion or acts of civil or military authorities or lting from >urge or any law, oraer, reaulaiion, orainance, or requirement or any government or legal Doav or any representative of any such government or legal body; or labor unrest, including without limitation, strikes, slowdowns, picketing, or boycotts; inability to secure raw materials, transportation facilities, fuel or energy shortages, or acts or omissions of other common carriers. Dublic enemies: 4. Privacy. Data collection and use, including data collection and use of personally identifiable information is governed bv Bird's Privacy Policy which is incorporated into and is a part of this Agreement. 5. General. Any claim relating to, and the use of, this Services and the materials contained herein is governed by the laws of the State of California. You consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in San Mateo County, California. A printed version of these Terms of upon or relating to t Service will be admissible in judicial and administr hese Terms of Service to the same extent and subject to t documents and records originally generated and maintained in printed form. ative proceedings based he same conditions as other business These Terms of Service set forth the entire understanding and agreement between us with respect to the subject matter hereof. We do not guarantee continuous, uninterrupted or secure access to our Services, and operation of the Services may be interfered with by numerous factors outside of our control. If any provision of these Terms of Service is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be struck and the remaining provisions shall be enforced. You agree that these Terms of Service and all incorporated agreements may be automatically assigned by Bird in our sole discretion. Headings are for reference purposes only and in no way define, limit, construe or describe the scope or extent of such section. Our failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to subsequent or similar breaches. All sections which by their context ought to survive this agreement shall survive any termination or expiration of this Agreement. 1. DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHTACT ("DIVICA") NOTICE. In operating the Services, we may act as a " services provider" (as defined by DMCA) and offer services as online provider of materials and links to third party websites. As a result, third party materials that we do not own or control may be transmitted, stored, accessed or otherwise made available using the Services. Bird has in place certain legally mandated procedures regarding allegations of copyright infringement occurring on the Services. Bird has adopted a policy that provides for the removal of any content or the potential suspension of any user that is found to have repeatedly infringed on the rights of Bird or of a third party, or that has otherwise violated any intellectual property laws or regulations, or any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If you believe any material available via the Services infringes a copyright, you should notify us using the notice procedure for claimed infringement under the DIVICA (17 U.S.C. Sect. 512(c)(2)). We will respond expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material claimed to be infringing and will follow the procedures specified in the DIVICA to resolve the claim between the notifying party and the alleged infringer who provided the Content. Our designated agent (i.e., proper party for notice) to whom you should address infringement notices under the DIVICA is birdleganLi @bird -co and cc hello@bird-co. Please provide the following notice: 1. Identify t 2. Identify t he copyrighted work or other intellectual property that you claim has been infringed; he material on the Services that you claim is infringing, with enough detail so that we may locate it on the Services by you that you have a good faith belief that the disputed use is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agen 3. A statement or the law; 4. A statement by you declaring under penalty of perjury that (a) the above information in your notice is accurate, and (b) that you are the owner of the copyright interest involved or that you are autho 5. Your address, telephone number, and email address; and 6. Your physical or electronic signature. rized to act on behalf of that owner; We may give notice to our users of any infringement notice by means of a general notice on any of our Services, electronic mail to a user's email address in our records, or by written communication sent by first-class mail to a user's physical address in our records. If you receive such an infringement notice, you may provide counter -notification in writing to the designated agent that includes the information below. To be effective, the counter -notification must be a written communication that includes the following: 1. Y Your physical or electronic signature 2. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled, and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled; 3. A statement from you under the penalty of perjury, that you have a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled; and 4. Your name, physical address and telephone number, and a statement that you consent to the jurisdiction of a Federal District Court for the judicial district in which your physical address is located, or if your physical address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which we may be found, and that you will accept service of process from the person who provided notification of allegedly infringing material or an agent of such person. 5. Additional Assistance. If you do n, ot understand any of the foregoing Terms of Service or if you have any questions or commentswe invite you to contact us at hello@bird-co. 6. Copyright Notice. All design, graphics, text selections, arrangements, and all software are Copyright O 2017, Bird Rides, Inc. and its related companies or its licensors. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 50 ■ ■ 51 Please view our Rental Agreement below: PLEASE READ THIS AGREEMENT CAREFULLY. IT SETS FORTH THE LEGALLY BINDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE. In consideration of Your use of any of the Bird Services (defined below) provided by Bird Rides, Inc. d/b/a Bird ("Bird"), Bird requires that You (" Rider," "You," or "Your" ) (acting for all of Rider's family, heirs, agents, affiliates, representatives, successors, and assigns) agree to all terms and conditions in this Bird Rental Agreement, Waiver of Liability, and Release ("Agreement'). The services provided by Bird include (1) Bird mobile application and related website, (2) Bird Electric Vehicles ("Vehicle" or "Vehicles"), (3) discretionary charging of the Vehicle by Rider per Section 1.15 below, and (4) all other related equipment, personnel, services applications, websites, and information provided or made available by Bird (collectively, the "Bird Services"). In addition to the Terms of Service, located at httDs://www.bird.co/terms, You expressly agreed to when you signed up for Bird, You should CAREFULLY READ all terms and conditions before entering into this Agreement, but here is a partial list of some of the terms that Bird wants to bring to Your initial attention in the event You are on a smartphone or other device with a small screen. Capitalized terms have the meanings given to them where defined in this Agreement. • THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINS RELEASES, DISCLAIMERS, AND ASSUMPTION -OF -RISK PROVISIONS AND A BINDING ARBITRATION AGREEMENT THAT LIMIT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. FOR MORE DETAILS, PLEASE REFER TO SECTIONS 9 AND 15 BELOW • The Vehicle must be locked at the conclusion of the ride. If the Vehicle is not locked, the trip will continue and You will continue to be charged. The max charge for a single trip is $100 for 24 hours. For more details, please refer to Section 2.3 below. • Upon conclusion of Your ride, the Vehicle must be parked at a lawful parking spot, i.e. the Vehicle cannot be parked on private property or in a locked area or in any other non-public space. • All applicable laws (including, without limitation, those applicable to traffic, pedestrians, parking, charging and electric Vehicles) must be obeyed, including any helmet laws in Your area. • You must promptly report any damaged or malfunctioning Vehicles to Bird via the Bird mobile application (the "Bird App") or via e-mail. Bird expressly agrees to let, and the Rider expressly agrees to take on, rental of the Vehicle subject to the terms and conditions set out herein. Unless otherwise indicated, all monetary values set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed to be denominated in U.S. dollars. 1. GENERAL RENTAL AND USE OF VEHICLE. 1. 1 Rider is Sole User. Bird and the Rider are the only parties to this Agreement. The Rider is the sole renter and is solely responsible for compliance with all terms and conditions contained herein. You understand that when You activate a Vehicle from the location, the Vehicle must be used only by You. You must not allow others to use a Vehicle that You have activated from the location. 1.2 Rider is At Least 18 Years Old. Rider represents and certifies that Rider is at least 18 years old. 52 1.3 Rider is a Competent Vehicle Operator. Rider represents and certifies that he/she is familiar with the operation of the Vehicle, and is reasonably competent and physically fit to ride the Vehicle. You can find materials provided by the Vehicle manufacturers here. This information may be updated periodically. Bv choosing to ride a Vehicle. Rider assumes all resDonsibilities and risks for are responsible for determining whethe r cond itions. including, withou o adjust Your riding behavior and braking distance to suit the weather, make it dangerous to operate a Vehicle. You are advised t visibility, surrounding environment, and traffic conditions. 1.4 Vehicle is the Exclusive Property of Bird. Rider agrees that the Vehicle and any Bird equipmen must not dismantle, write on, or otherwise modify, rer t limitation, rain, fog, any injuries or medical conditions. You snow, hail, ice, heat or electrical storms t attached thereto, at all times, remain the exclusive property of Bird. You pair or deface a Vehicle, any part of a Vehicle, or other Bird equipment in any way. You must not write on, peel, or otherwise modify or deface any sticker on a Vehicle in any way. You must not use a Vehicle, or other Bird equipment, for any advertising or other commercial purpose without the express written permission of Bird. 1.5 Vehicle Operating Hours and Vehicle Availability. Rider agrees and acknowledges that the Vehicles are not available 24 hours a day, 7 days/week, 365 days per year. Vehicles must be rented within the maximum rental time limits set forth below. The number of Vehicles are limited and Vehicle availability is never guaranteed. 1.6 Vehicle May be Used and/or Operated only in Metropo Rider agrees to only use, operate, and/or ride the Vehicle titan Areas. in metropolit an areas. 1.7 Rider Must Follow Laws Regarding Use and/or Operation of Vehicle. Rider agrees to follow all laws pertaining to the use, riding, parking, charging, and/or operation of the Vehicle, including all state and local laws and the rules and regulations pertaining to Vehicles in the area where You are operating the Vehicle, including any helmet laws. Rider also agrees to act with courtesy and respect toward others while using the Bird Services. 1.8 Prohibited Acts. Rider agrees to the following: • Bird recommends against operation of a Vehicle while carrying or holding a briefcase, backpack, bag, or other item that can alter balance or impair safe operation of the Vehicle. If You choose to use such an item, Bird recommends that You ensure the item fits snugly to Your body and does not impede Your ability to operate the Vehicle safely. • You must not place heavy objects on the handlebar of the Vehicle, such as heavy backpacks or bags. • While riding a Vehicle, You must not use any cellular telephone, text messaging device, portable music player, or other device that may distract You from operating the Vehicle safely. • You must not operate a Vehicle while under the influence of any alcohol, drugs, medication, or other substance that may impair Your ability to operate a Vehicle safely. • You must not carry a second person or child on a Vehicle. • You may only use locking mechanisms provided by Bird. You may not add another lock to the Vehicle or lock a Vehicle to anything. • The Vehicle must be parked at a lawful parking spot, in an upright position using the kickstand. The Vehicle cannot be parked on unauthorized private property, in a locked area, or in any other unapproved non-public space. You should not park the Vehicle in heavily trafficked areas if the Vehicle is in danger of being knocked down. • The Vehicle must be parked in a space that is visible. 53 1.9 Vehicle is Intended for Only Limited Types of Use. Rider agrees that he/she will not use the Vehicle for racing, mountain riding, or stunt or trick riding. Rider agrees that he/she will not operate and/or use the Vehicle on unpaved roads, through water (beyond normal urban riding), or in any location that is prohibited, illegal, and/or a nuisance to others. Rider agrees that he/she will not use the Vehicle for hire or reward, nor use it in violation of any law, ordinance or regulation. 1. 10 Weight and Cargo Limits. You must not exceed the maximum weight limit for the Vehicle (200 pounds). 1. 11 No Tampering. You must not tamper with, att this Agreement. 1. 12 Repo Rider i mus rt i t r empt to gain unauthorized access to, or otherwise use the Bird Services other than as specified in na of Damage or Crashes eport any accident, nvolves personal injury, property damage, or a stolen Vehicle, crash, damage, personal injury or stolen or lost Rider shall file a r hours. Rider agrees that he/she is responsible and liable for any misuse, consequences Vehicle to Bird as soon as possible. If a crash eport with the local police depart claims, suits or losses, liabilities, damages, injuries, costs and expenses, penalties, attorney's fees, judgments or • nature whatsoever related to a stolen or lost Vehicle. demands ment within 24 , causes of action, disbursements of any kind YOUR AUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE POLICIES MAY NOT PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OR DAMAGE TO THIS VEHICLE. TO DETERMINE IF COVERAGE IS PROVIDED, YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR AUTOMOTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY OR AGENT 1. 13 Rider Responsibility for Vehicle Use and Damage. Rider agrees to return wear and tear. the Vehicle to Bird in the same condition in which it was rented. Rider will not be responsible for normal 1.14 Electric Vehicle. The Vehicle is an electric Vehicle that requires periodic charging of its battery in order to operate. Rider agrees to use and operate the Vehicle safely and prudently in light of the Vehicle being an electric Vehicle and all of the limitations and requirements associated therewith. Rider understands and agrees with each of the following: • The level of charge power remaining in the Vehicle will decrease with use of the Vehicle (over both time and distance), and that as the level of charge power of the Vehicle decreases, the speed and other operational capabilities of the Vehicle may decrease (or cease in their entirety). • The level of charging power in the Vehicle at the time Rider initiates the rental or operation of the Vehicle is not guaranteed and will vary with each rental use. • The rate of loss of charging power during the use of the Vehicle is not guaranteed and will vary based on the Vehicle, road conditions, weather conditions, and other factors. • It is Rider's responsibility to check the level of charge power in the Vehicle and to ensure that it is adequate before initiating operation of the Vehicle. • The distance and/or time that Rider may operate the Vehicle before it loses charging power is never guaranteed. • The Vehicle may run out of charging power and cease to operate at any time during Rider's rental of the Vehicle, including before reaching Rider's desired destination. 1. 15 Charging of Vehicle. If the Vehicle runs out of charging power during a Agreement. Alternatively, in Rider's sole discretion approved charging cord into an outlet that may be lawfully used for such purpose. Rider agrees to follow a rental, i, Rider Rider shall conclude the ride in compliance with all t may charge the Vehicle only by plugging a prope pertaining to t pertaining to t he charging of the Vehicle, including all state and local laws and a erms of this r manufacturer - II laws and rules II public and private rules and regulations he area and to the property where Rider is charging the Vehicle. Rider agrees that he/she is responsible for all costs, charges, fees, expenses, penalties, and fines associated with the charging of the Vehicle, and that Bird will not reimburse Rider for such. Consistent with Section 1. 15, Rider agrees that he/she is responsible and liable for any misuse, consequences, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, liabilities, property or fire or other damages, injuries, costs, and expenses, penalties, attorney's fees, judgments, suits, or disbursements of any kind or nature whatsoever related to charging of the Vehicle. By choosing Vehicle, all other respect t Rider assumes full and complete responsibility for all related risks, dangers, and hazards, and Rider agrees Released Persons (defined below in Section 15) are not responsible for any injury, damage, or cost caused by Rider with to charge a that Bird and o any person or property, including the Vehicle itself, directly or indirectly related to the charging of the Vehicle 2. PAYMENT AND FEES. 2.1 Fees. Rider may use the Vehicle on a pay per ride basis or as otherwise in accordance with the pricing described in the Bird mobile application. In each case, fees and other charges may be subject to applicable taxes and other local government charges, which may be charged and collected by Bird. Bird will charge the Rider (through credit, or debit card or through another agreed payment method) the amount of the fees as described in this Agreement. 2.2 Promo Codes. Promo codes (discounts) are one-time offers and can be redeemed only via the Bird App. Bird reserves the right to modify or cancel discounts at any time. Discounts are limited to one per customer and account and may not be combined with other offers. Discounts are non -transferable and may not be resold. 2.3 Maximum Rental Time and Charges. Maximum rental time is 24 hours. Rider agrees that Rider will deactivate the Vehicle rental within 24 hours of renting a Vehicle. Rider may then rent again. Rider agrees that he/she is solely responsible for being aware of any elapsed time related to the timely locking of the Vehicle. The maximum day charge is $100 and is based on a calendar day. After return of the Vehicle, Rider will be charged the accumulated rental charges, or the maximum day charge, whichever is less. Vehicles not returned (locked and a ride concluded) within 48 hours will be considered lost or stolen, and Rider may be charged up to $500 and a police report may be filed. Bird may also charge a service fee of $25 for rentals in excess of 24 hours where the Vehicle is not lost or stolen. 2.4 Valid Credit Card or Debit Card. To be registered to use the Bird Services, Rider must provide Bird with a valid credit or debit card number and expiration date. Rider represents and warrants to Bird that Rider is authorized to use any credit or debit card Rider furnishes to Bird. Rider authorizes Bird to charge the card for all fees incurred by Rider. All fees are subject to applicable sales taxes and other local government charges, which may be charged and collected by Bird. If Rider disputes any charge on Rider's credit or debit card account, then Rider must contact Bird within 10 business days from the end of the month with the disputed charge, and provide to Bird all trip information that is necessary to identify the disputed charge, such as the date of the trip and the approximate starting and ending times of the ride associated with the disputed charge. Rider agrees to immediately inform Bird of all changes relating to the card. 55 2.5 Pick Up Fees. If You are unable to return a Vehicle to a valid area (i.e. You deactivate the Vehicle on private property, a locked community, or another unreachable area), and request that the Vehicle be picked up by Bird staff, Bird, at its sole discretion, may choose to charge You a pick-up fee up to $120. If any Vehicle accessed under Your account is abandoned without notice, You will be responsible for all trip fees until the Vehicle is recovered and deactivated, plus a service charge (currently $120.00) to recover the Vehicle. Fees are subject to change. 3. ADDITIONAL TERMS OF USE. 3.1 Safety Check. Before each use of (i) tr ueness of t a Vehicle, Ride r shall conduct ne wneeis; (ii) saTe operation of all a basic safety inspection of the Vehicle brakes and lights; (iii) good condition o which includes inspecting the following: f the frame; (iv) sufficient battery charge power; and (iv) any sign of damage, unusual or excessive wear, or other open and obvious mechanical problem/maintenance need. Rider agrees no Bird of any problems. t to ride the Vehicle if there are any noticeable issues, and to immediately notify customer service to alert 3.2 Lost or Stolen Vehicle. A Vehicle may be deemed lost or stolen if (a) the Vehicle is not returned within 24 consecutive hours, (b) the Vehicle's GPS unit is disabled, (c) the Vehicle is parked on unauthorized private property, in a locked area, or in any other non-public space for more than ten minutes after a ride ends, (d) the Vehicle moves more than thirty feet after a rental has ended and Bird believes such movement was not caused by another Rider or authorized third party, or (e) other facts and circumstances that suggest to Bird in its reasonable, good faith determination that a Vehicle has been lost or stolen. Bird and You agree that the last Rider of a Vehicle shall be responsible for a lost or stolen Vehicle unless facts and circumstances suggest otherwise to Bird in its reasonable, good faith determination. If Bird deems a Vehicle lost or stolen, Bird shall have the authority to take any and all actions it deems appropriate (with respect to the last Rider of a Vehicle or otherwise), including (without limitation) obtaining restitution and other appropriate compensation and damages and filing a police report with local authorities. Rider agrees the data generated by Bird's computer is conclusive evidence of the period of use of a Vehicle by a Rider. Rider agrees to report Vehicle disappearance or theft to Bird immediately or as soon as possible. 3.3 Helmets; Safety. Bird recommends that all Riders wear a Snell, CPSC, ANSI or ASTM approved helmet that has been properly sized, fitted and fastened according to the manufacturer's instructions. Bird and all other Released Persons (defined below in Section 15) do not represent or warrant the quality or safety characteristics of any helmet, and Rider agrees that none of the Released Persons is liable for any injury suffered by Rider while using any of the Bird Services, whether or not Rider is wearing a helmet at the time of injury. Rider assumes all risk of not wearing a helmet or other protective gear. Rider may need to take additional safety measures or precautions not specifically addressed in this Agreement. 3.4 Vehicle Routes. Rider agrees that Bird does not provide or maintain places to ride Vehicles, and that Bird does not guarantee that there will always be a safe place to ride a Vehicle. Roads, sidewalks, vehicle lanes, and vehicle routes may become dangerous due to weather, traffic, or other hazards. 56 3.5 Limitations on Vehicle Rental. Rider agrees that Bird is not a common carrier. Alternative means of public and private transportation are available to the general o Rider individually,incivaing publiclouses and rail service, taxis, and pedestrian paths. Bird provides Vehicles only as public and t a convenience, their Vehicle on and such rental availability is intended to be used only by those persons who are able and qualified to operate a own and who have agreed to all terms and conditions of this Agreement. 3.6 Limitations on Availability of Bird Services. Bird makes every effort to provide Bird all times, as unforeseen events or othe Services 365 days per r circumstances might Services is also conditioned on the availability of Vehicles. Bir year, but does not guarantee that Bird Services will be available at prevent Bird Tr om providing the Bird Services. Access to Bird a aoes not represent or warrant the availability of any oT Bird Services or the availability of any Vehicle at any time. Rider agrees that Bird may require Rider to return a Vehicle at any time. 4. TERMINATION. 4.1 Termination by Bird. At any time and from time to time, and without Services. in Bird's sole discretion and without time; this Agreement, and (iii) Rider may still be charged any applicable additional fees in accordance with this Agreement. This provided, however, that (i) no refund will Rider's consen t, Bird may unilaterally terminate Ride any notice or cause. Rider may terminate Ride r ) r's right to use the B i rd s use of the Bird Services at any be provided by Bird, (ii) the term of this Agreement continues in accordance with Agreement remains in full force and effect, in accordance with its terms and conditions, after any t use any of the Bird Services, regardless of how the Agreement is terminated. ermination of Rider's right to 5.1 Confidentiality of Information; Privacy Policies. You understand and agree that all personal information that is held by Bird and pertains to Riders, including all names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, passwords, payment information, and other information will be kept by Bird in accordance with its privacy policy located at http://www.bird.co/Privacv/ or 6. License to Image and Likeness. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, You do hereby knowingly, voluntarily, and irrevocably: (1) give Your full and unconditional consent to Bird and its affiliates, successors, and assigns to use at any time and from time to time, without any restriction, Your appearance and voice in photographs, videos, and other recordings related to Your use of the Bird Services, on all websites and for all press, promotional, advertising, publicity, and other commercial purposes, including all formats and media, whether now known or hereafter devised, throughout the world and in perpetuity; (2) grant to Bird and its affiliates, successors, and assigns (a) the right to photograph, videotape, and otherwise record Your appearance and voice related to Your use of the Bird Services, at any time and from time to time, (b) all rights, copyrights, title, and interests in the results of such photographs, videos, and other recordings, as a work for hire for copyright purposes, and (c) the right to use, reproduce, exhibit, distribute, transmit, alter, and exploit, at any time and from time to time and as Bird may decide in its sole discretion, such photographs, videos, and other recordings, or any component thereof, and all related merchandising, promotions, advertising, and publicity; and (3) waive, release, and discharge all Released Persons from all Claims (defined below in Section 15) that You have or may have for any libel, defamation, invasion of privacy, right of publicity, infringement of copyright, or violation of any right granted by You in this paragraph. 7. Notice. Bird may be contacted by emailing hello@bird.co or by mail at 406 Broadway #369, Santa Monica, CA 90401 57 8. Choice of Law; Dispute Resolution. This Agreement is governed by, and must be construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding principles of conflicts of laws. For every dispute regarding this Agreement: (i) the prevailing party is entitled to its costs, expenses, and reasonable attorney fees (whether incurred at trial, on appeal, or otherwise) incurred in resolving or settling the dispute, iadditionvn to all other damages or awards to which the party mabe entitled; (ii) each party consents to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of California and agrees that those courts have personal jurisdiction over each party; (iii) venue must be in Los Angeles, California. 9. Binding Arbitration and Class Action Waiver PLEASE READ THIS SECTION CAREFULLY I— RIGHT TO FILE A LAWSUIT IN COURT. 9.1 Initial Dispute Resolution Rider Support is available via the app to a Vehicle and/or this Agreement. The parties shall use theirdispute, claim, question, or disagreement and engage in good faith negotiations which shall be a condition to either party initiating mediation, arbitration, or a T MAY SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING YOUR addressanyconcernsyoumayhaveregardingyouruseofbesteffortsthroughthissupportprocesstosettleany address any concerns you may have regarding your use of best efforts through this support process to settle any lawsuit. 9.2 Binding Arbitration If the parties do not reach an agreed upon solution through the support process, then either party may initiate binding arbitration as the sole means to resolve claims, subject to the terms set forth below. Specifically, all claims arising out of or relating to use and rental of a Vehicle, this Agreement, and the parties' relationship with each other shall be finally settled by binding arbitration administered by JAMS, or alternatively a mutually agreed upon arbitrator or arbitration service, under the applicable commercial arbitration rules for JAMS or the mutually agreed upon arbitration service, excluding any rules or procedures governing or permitting class actions. The arbitrator, and not any federal, state or local court or agency, shall have exclusive authority to resolve all disputes arising out of or relating to the interpretation, applicability, enforceability or formation of this Agreement, including, but not limited to any claim that all or any part of this Agreement are void or voidable, or whether a claim is subject to arbitration. The arbitrator shall be empowered to grant whatever relief would be available in a court under law or in equity. The arbitrator's award shall be written, and binding on the parties and may be entered as a judgment in any court of competent jurisdiction. To the extent the filing fee for the arbitration exceeds the cost of filing a lawsuit, Bird will pay the additional cost. The arbitration rules also permit you to recover attorney's fees in certain cases. The parties understand that, absent this mandatory provision, they would have the right to sue in court and have a jury trial. They further understand that, in some instances, the costs of arbitration could exceed the costs of litigation and the right to discovery may be more limited in arbitration than in court. 9.3 Location The arbitration will take place in Los Angeles, California or a mutually agreed upon location. 9.4 Class Action Waiver The parties further agree that any arbitration shall be conducted in their individual capacities only and not as a class action or other representative action, and the parties expressly waive their right to file a class action or seek AND BIRD AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR relief on a class basis. YOU ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING. If any court or arbitrator determines that the class action waive r set forth in t his paragraph ImS void or unenforceable for any reason or i n its that an arbitration can proceed on a class basis, then the arbitration provision se entirety and the parties shall be deemed to have not agreed to arbitrate disputes 9.5 Litigation of Intellectual Property and Small Claims Court Claims t fort 0 h above shall be deemed null and void Notwithstanding the parties' decision to resolve all disputes through arbitration, either party may bring an action in state or federal court toprotect its intellectualpro ert rights ("intellectual property rights" means patents, copyrights, moral rights, trademarks 7 and trade secrets, but not privacy or publicity rights). Either party may also seek relief in a sma claims within the scope of that court's jurisdiction. 9.6 Right to Opt Out II claims court for disputes or You have the right to opt -out and not be bound by the arbitration and class action waiver provisions set forth above by sending written notice of your decision to opt -out to the following address: Bird Rides, Inc., 406 Broadway, #369, Santa Monica, California 90401. The notice must be sent within 30 days of the effective date or your first use of the Service, whichever is later, otherwise you shall be bound to arbitrate disputes in accordance with the terms of those paragraphs. If you opt -out of these arbitration provisions, Bird also will not be bound by them. 9.7 Changes to this Section Bird will provide prior written notice of any changes to this section. Changes will become effective only after prior written notice and will apply prospectively only to any claims arising after the notice period. For any dispute not subject to arbitration you and Bird agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of and venue in the federal and state courts located in Los Angeles, California. You further agree to accept service of process by mail, and hereby waive any and all jurisdictional and venue defenses otherwise available. 10. Waiver and Severability. No waiver of any breach of any provision of this Agreement is a waiver of any other breach or of any other provision of this Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement are independent of and separable from each other, and no provision shall be affected or rendered invalid or unenforceable by virtue of the fact that for any reason any other or others of them may be invalid or unenforceable in whole or in part. 11. Cumulative Remedies. All rights and remedies granted under or referred to in this Agreement are cumulative and nonexclusive, and resort to one does not preclude the availability or applicability of another or to any other right or remedy provided by law. 59 12. Final Agreement; Modification by Bird. This Agreement contains the complete, final, and exclusive integrated agreement between the parties with respect to its subject matter. This Agreement supersedes all other prior agreements, written or oral, relating to such subject matter. At any time and from time to time, and without Rider may unilaterally amend, modify, or change this Agreement, in its sole discretion. By continuing t sconsent,s consent, o use anvof the Bird Services after any amendment, modification, or change, Rider has agreed to be egular basis to and changes. Whenever a change is made to this Agreement, Bird will bound by all such amendments, modifications, and changes. Rider must carefully review this Agreement on a r maintain awareness of all amendments, modifications, post a notification on the Website. The pricing set forth on the Website supersedes all pricing set forth in this Agreement. 13. Contract Interpretation. The headings in this Agreement do not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. "Or" is not to be exclusive in its meaning. "Including" means "i the singular number or in the the masculine, feminine, and ncluding, but ncluding, but not not limited to." Unless limited to." Unless the the context otherwise context otherwise requires, words in requires, words in each include the singular number or the plural number. All pronouns include plural number %c.: neuter pronoun gall forn 14. Voluntary Execution of this Agreement. This Agreement is entered into voluntarily, with consideration he/she (a) has r the releases ii contains; Bird. Rider acknowledges that Agreement, including and without any duress or undue influence on the pa ead this Agreement; (b) and (c) is fully aware of t understands the terms and consequences o rt or f this he legal and binding effect of this Agreement. behalf of 15. RELEASES; DISCLAIMERS; ASSUMPTION OF RISK. In exchange for Rider being allowed to use Bird Services, Vehicles, and other equipment or related information provided by Bird, Rider agrees to fully release, indemnify, and hold harmless Bird and all of its owners, managers, affiliates, employees, contractors, officers, directors, shareholders, agents, representatives, successors, assigns, and to the fullest extent permitted by law any Municipality (including its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, contractors, and volunteers) with which the operators have contracted with to provide Bird Services, and every sponsor of any of the Bird Services and all of the sponsor's owners, managers, affiliates, employees, contractors, officers, directors, shareholders, agents, representatives, successors, and assigns (collectively, the "Released Persons") from liability for all "Claims" arising out of or in any way related to Rider's use of the Bird Services, Vehicles, or related equipment, including, but not limited to, those Claims based on Released Persons' alleged negligence, breach of contract, and/or breach of express or implied warranty, except for Claims based on Released Persons' gross negligence or willful misconduct. Such released are intended to be general and complete releases of all Claims. "Claims" means, collectively, any and all claims, injuries, demands, liabilities, disputes, causes of action (including statutory, contract, negligence, or other tort theories), proceedings, obligations, debts, liens, fines, charges, penalties, contracts, promises, costs, expenses (including attorney's fees, whether incurred at trial, on appeal, or otherwise), damages (including but not limited to, for personal injury, wrongful death, property damage, and injury to rider or to third parties, consequential, compensatory, or punitive damages), or losses (whether known, unknown, asserted, unasserted, fixed, conditional, or contingent) that arise from or relate to (a) any of the Bird Services, including any of the Vehicles, placement, equipment, maintenance, related information, this agreement or (b) Rider's use of any of the foregoing. To the fullest extent permitted by law, and as to Rider's use of any of the Bird Services, Vehicles, or related equipment, Bird and all other Released Persons disclaim all express and implied warranties, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. All of the Bird Services, Vehicles, and related equipment are provided " as is" and " as available," and Rider relies on them at Rider's own risk. Ride r is aware that Rider's use of any of the Bird Services, Vehicles risks, dangers result in injury or death dangers, and hazards cannot always be predicted or avoided and hazards that may and hazards that may • vehicles and other • pedestrians; • traff ic; objects; venicie or componen • road conditions; • weather conditions; • failure to follow applicable laws regarding use and/or operation of the Vehicle pursuant to Section 1.7; t malfunction; and related equipment involves obvious and not -so -obvious to Rider or others and damage to property, and that such risks, . Risks, dangers, and hazards, include, but are not limited to: • commission of any of the prohibited acts listed in Section 1.8; • failure to perform the required safety check pursuant to Section 3.1; • failure to wear a helmet where required by law; and • negligent acts or omissions by Bird, any other Released Person, Ride Rider is solely ai may malfunction r, or third party. fully responsible for the safe operation of Vehicle at all times. Rider agrees that Vehicles are machines that even if the Vehicle is properly maintained and that such malfunction may cause injury. Rider assumes full and complete responsibility for all related risks, dangers, and hazards. To the fullest extent permitted by law, this release and hold harmless agreement includes any and all Claims related to or arising from the sole or partial negligence of Bird, the Released Parties, any Municipality or any other party. Rider hereby expressly waives any claims against the Released Parties, any Municipality or any other party which Rider does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time o preserve Rider's unknown claims. fuse of Bird Services, and expressly waives Rider's rights under any statutes that purport to RIDER ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT • I certify that I have read and expressly agree to the terms and conditions of Section 15 Releases; Disclaimers; Assumption of Risk, and I acknowledge that this section limits my legal rights and remedies. I intend my assent to this Agreement to be a complete and unconditional release of all liability to the greatest extent permitted by law. I represent and certify that I am familiar with the operation of the Vehicle, and am reasonably competent and physically fit to ride the Vehicle. • I certify that I am the Rider, I am 18 years old or over, I will wear a helmet where required by law, I will not ride a Bird with another occupant, I will obey all traffic laws, I will ride at my own risk, and I have read and expressly agree to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 61 I _ o ■ yr s, `a ri_` Tom,. WIN V All _ - r ■ ■ Jim ® - IN IN Mims f^mL 0 '�IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� .� ■ w '• 117 i ■ ■ w im a IN a _ 09 e r l ,_ � a - n, ii Is I a IF IN ' _ -- . - sel - y� �, I We ■ ■ - "i a■ _■ ■■■■ ■ o IF i �= Id ■ Mimi 1 r �Pl IN IN MEMNON 111111. y 1 ■ e 1 � �I— ■ ,t a pi mwzk it lo im I■u_ P 1� M4 ,I I■ ■ - t® 1■ J IL 19 0 I� 1 ■ a - 01 _ n I - ■■ III I ■ Is � to I _ 1 yy I. -� - l ■_ �. --a Nib rl _ - I- T ■ o I. ■� y I �'1 ■ - r"I - 01 6- d. 1t 117 Egg is PF fit. a [I p you T >• �VAR s f ■ Ow _V C7; � r■ ON ■■5 Ti - I ■i r ■ ■ - 'i■ - r - 9 ■■ .■ e _ IN e ■r 11■•�iaR. H■i s mm: ■l ims- ■ 7 z - ■ - CI Mr or. ■W ET I it Is Fir �-�- - - ■ - ■■_119T IN It NOW r, ■ �r-: --- ■ ■ ■ - �- y ■ ■ _¶' r - a...I ' IIS - _I IS ■ -': __ . LII A _. IIgT ■' IN -- _LII r - Ell .� ■ ■ IS _. I 111 ,■ I • i ■ I■ ■ ■� ■ - ■mile ,n ■° - _ ■ A ' u■ p �, ■� ■� _ ■ III IN JiFF is - ■_ It IN ■ 4 ® - If --r ® S n� ■ I ■ 4 It ■ m... 11i _ - On to It OR w MINI IMP r ■, . pl � u I I ■ I �u 1 ■ It F h 7■1ME IN = ' • 6, It It I� , r I I ■ ■ 7 �■ ®I Z ■ ■■_ al k x r - rn r■,r r ■ ■ ■ ■ Film- III r IN NO 1 ■ t MIL® �I .e 1` r =ti J HL It r - �i , a .. � ■ tl�■ .+ ■ e : ■■ If r lilt H1 I �� Ill .■ nll L ■ C • ■ ■ ■ � ■ ■ ■ IIPM � i - , 1 !7 r 5 r -tee r ■ IN ■ _ =a- ■ -� -. '-T . - - -- F -in■ L� I -4116I 1 pIs -IN .i. ■ rmrirrl. r ` I "r' - ■ " 1 • 111 1 "■,i F.6 i ■ - } ■■ ■11 IS - m �■ 11 It 12 I '° — A - J - - It a e■ ■ 1% I ,• IN III r ; siL f IS , P ■ -7 IN n■ a ® ■ im_im o ■n ■ ■ e,c ■ im ■e -. 1 I . . — WE NO E 'll sm, ■c INZ 1� ■ _ ■ IN ow. a - —' .- .I III �-Im 2016 E. IN i ■ I� "■ • III_ =■ sm, I_ _ � _, � V H tom■ IN � Lir1 ■ -� ■ t = ■ x 'u� ■ ■ ■ •■ P:■ i r � a i 1 ��■ � ill IN■1i I ■ -if_ 1 1 ■�y �. a n. . ■ - � ■ -. ■ ■■■ F^ IF ■ . I - - 11 � a I. ■ Mimi — - - miim -� i! _7 IIi lfi _■ ■. _ � UY r ff _ It Iff, r -� ■■ '_� ! u - - - r _ — _. _ = ,i. ■ a■- T .� a . ■ago .■ ■� ■ ' - L ® � .,I - 1 • MIN PINOr ■ ■ r�_ . ■ i tr a • ■ ■1 i I e `` ■ "imp • miss ■ IN aIII � h;ra. ■r "■ ■ IS Ni ■ _ ■ me =I its Irl I _- r 7 ■ s li _ T ■ = L Z i U n - pp Is - 1 ■ ■ r ' ei. ■ - SII _ II _■� 1 _ _ _ _ 6 ■ _ _ _ - ■■a. _ ■ r ■ _ _w _ r _ c rip t ' ■■ I ■ - I r u , ■. " ■ - :. _ � _ 7 = i _ � 71 ral�' 3 ■°r _ = 1 � � � _ - ® u '� ■ �• - ■ , � � 1 TI ' M I La r � u I ... � � � � ■ I - " - I , � r � 'I - ■ r ■ ■ 1 � aT - - — • - � II' I` - I - -' �- '� `7■ u� �' — r IL k_ 1�■- r�' ". r - !! 1jus ■u A_ � i _y.� -- , _ - 11 ■ z � I■r `� e illim - d iu rr ■ - - I ■•! _ _ -■ .tel _ ■ i r ■: ■ .�'.-.- ■-.I - �uu�i ■� WW L J �7 Y7,q jr r - I. Mi mw 1 - = � � I r. � � - � — � r r, � _ '•im l � �■ � � - I ■ r 11 � 1, . � 1 � � a ' n ■� -IrIN � r ■ !i - - s s ■ u �"� a �' .xr ■ ■i - " ' - ■ 1 ■ ° moi. • ■ �' m ■ ! f. - li, ■ J u I IT X■ r- - > ■ = r ■■ a ■ ' _ —� "' - _I - . Ilr — 71 L p -I�j' 9 _ 1 ] _ l■ �F - ME V' ■i _.. . .. . ■ll.l _ i _ _ f ■ u ■- ■ - nt �I m •. ■ S'. Yap.. d ■ {A .� . • ■ � ■ _. - - — a f 1 a .Lr _ — 1• - _- a i ' n �■ _ r Ilr - ■ ' r P - _ �■ -' r1• �i s L4: �'il� E, t _ y� _ �_�� _ r� r� ° - _ - G' ■ ''#i-�' 1■ •�!- � _ - "1 � � ■I I ■ � ��� � 'R■ � � �7 MI 1, �� �j � i� �� ! , I I �'!� � ,L '• B , 1 r �I� -, _- s r , `■I■ ■■ �■ - - ■ �� — u _ mi EE _ ■ ® r I ' 1 i ■ bL■ � i � _ P Ir ■ ■ _ ■ ■� ■d ■ r ` _ ■ - r .. - v ' u -'ni �. : ■_ ° _ �;:I - _ ■ - I _i 1yrr - _ - ■_ ■ = -til. ■ :16 Ims el f -k1"S� t �_ r r �■ moi° 1. r R ■gd.-� r r ■NO�i i r I �I ; m ■ n ■ 1 ■ t' " i 1. Y■ a it rl T.` i r IN ■■ 1 L 1 I� ® �i �° i `rl� ti i i ■. is nr PeRKM COTe May 21, 2019 Chris Johnson City Clerk City of Meridian 33. E. Broadway Ave., Suite 104 Meridian, Idaho 83642 1111 West Jefferson Street O +1.208.343.3434 Suite 500 O +1.208.343.3232 Boise, ID 83702-5391 PerkinsCoie.com Re: Notice of Appeal and Request to Move Hearing Date 2019 Request For Proposals, Project No. WR -1921-11034 Dear Mr. Johnson: William K. Miller WMiller@perkinscoie.com My firm represents Neutron Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Lime ("Lime") with respect to Request for Proposals, Project No. MYR-1921-11034 (the "RFP") issued by the City of Meridian (the "City"). On May 16, 2019, Lime submitted a protest letter to the City challenging the outcome of the RFP (the "Protest Letter"). On May 17, 2019, the City issued a written denial of that request (the "City's Denial"). A. Notice of Appeal Lime hereby appeals the City's Denial to the City Council and incorporates the Protest Letter, and the information and positions taken therein, as part of its appeal. Lime will submit additional materials and briefing, if any, in support of its appeal to the City by 12:00 p.m., May 23, 2019; provided that, Lime reserves the right to submit supplemental materials and briefing after that date based on documents it receives in response to its pending public records request (PRR 19-2855) (see below). B. Request to Move Hearing Date On May 16, 2019, Lime submitted a public records request in support of its protest which seeks emails and other documents related to the RFP; in particular, Lime seeks emails between members of the evaluation committee related to the RFP process. The City recently informed Lime that it will provide a response to this request by May 31, 2019. The City's Denial states that an appeal of the City's Denial will be heard by the City Council at its meeting on May 28, 2019, which is three days before Lime is to receive a response to its public records request. As a result, Lime respectfully requests that the hearing date for its anneal be moved to June 4. 2019. which is the next regularly scheduled Citv Council meeting. Granting this request for a short, one-week continuance will not prejudice the City or the other 144464450.1 Chris Johnson May 21, 2019 Page 2 vendor in this process, Bird Rides Inc. ("Bird"), and is necessary to ensure that Lime receives adequate due process as with respect to its protest and appeal. Please contact me with questions or concerns. Very truly yours, k- 0�� William Miller 144464450.1 Perkins Coie LLP Thank you Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 582 of 664 C/�& IDIZ IA*,-----NDAHO CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 11 A Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Legal: Budget Amendment For Dairy Days Parade FY19 for the amount of $1,100 Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 11.A . Presenter: Bill Nary or J eff L avey Estimated Time for P resentation: 2 miinutes Title of I tem - L egal: Budget Amendment for F Y19 in the Amount of $1,100 for D airy Days Parade (Action Item) Budget Amendment for an additional $1100 f or the D airy Days to supplement the $4900 already budgeted. Estimate of $6000 to Specialty Construction for barricades, f laggers and signs. C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate B udget A mendment f or $1100 for D airy Days Parade B udget A mendment 5/23/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate L egal.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/23/2019 - 11:24 A M L egal.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 2:47 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 583 of 664 R, Gl r O O O O O O O O Sk ro m T zi N N N N N N N N a n l�if 2 '7 T I"F• O O O O O O O O A A A A A A A A O O O O W N N N lNfl W N N A O OOi O O O O O O O O O m -n O rD b N O o o 6 rt 3 w Cfl �- rt 3 o W �o �_ n C D � Q 7 O CQ O � w CD F r -r ° 7 = D - IQ v D p S H 3 �C O � � n w n ?� '° ° Q Sp a � (D CD M (D v v a d �o 4 h Gl u I O O O O O O O O Sk ro m T zi N N N N N N N N a n l�if 2 '7 T I"F• O O O O O O O O A A A A A A A A O O O O W N N N lNfl W N N A O OOi O O O O O O O O O m -n O rD b N O o o 6 rt 3 w Cfl �- rt 3 o W �o �_ n C D � Q 7 O CQ O � w CD F r -r ° 7 = D - IQ v D p S H 3 �C O � � n w n ?� '° ° Q Sp a � (D CD M (D v v a d �o 4 h Gl o O O Sk ro m T zi Gl Gl T C N C (D a n l�if 2 '7 T I"F• n n O n o m rD m a � C N 0 M. 3 n� 3 (D 3 rt O 0 r cn m -n O rD b N O o o 6 rt 3 w Cfl rt (D W C Q O CQ CD F r -r ° 7 = D - IQ v D p S H 3 �C O ?� '° ° Q o =1 w rt m m a Ll y CD M (D v v a d �o 4 h Gl u 3 D S!^ Ie -n CD rD Jn 'O+ rt CTQ 4 Z S D)ID IIV SIJ (D V1 T D D AO J a a n (D O (D O O d i 10 'tom G O �Y 3k N k / !D rD wo 9 rD N(D m a d r O O V1 O O Sk 3t Gl Gl a n l�if N T I"F• n n O O m rD m a � C N 0 M. 3 Q 3 (D 3 rt O 0 m -n o N O O 3 w Cfl (D W C Q O CQ CD G7 r -r ° 7 = D - IQ v D p S H 3 �C O ?� '° ° Q o =1 w rt m m a CD M (D v v a d �o 4 h 3 D S!^ Ie -n CD rD Jn 'O+ rt CTQ 4 Z S D)ID IIV SIJ (D V1 T D D AO J a a n (D O (D O O d i 10 'tom G O �Y 3k N k / !D rD wo 9 rD N(D m a d r O O V1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 585 of 664 EIDIANDAHO C-- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 11 B Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Parks and Recreation Department: FY2019 Net -Zero Budget Amendment For Volunteer Ambassador Utility Vehicle Batteries Meeting Notes: 9 I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 11.B . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Parks and Recreation Department: F Y 2019 Net-Zero B udget Amendment for Volunteer Ambassador Utility Vehicle B atteries (Action Item) C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate B udget A mendment C over Memo 5/24/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 2:18 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 586 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 587 of 664 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 588 of 664 �irE IDIAN?- CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 12 A Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Ordinance No. 19-1828: Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-1(b), regarding the definition of Vehicle Immobilization. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 12.A . Presenter: Bill Nary Estimated Time for P resentation: 1 minute Title of I tem - Ordinance No. 19-1828: Amending M eridian City Code Section 3-3-1(B), Regarding the Definition of Vehicle Immobilization C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate V I Def inition Update C over Memo 5/20/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate L egal.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/20/2019 - 5:16 P M L egal.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/24/2019 - 2:47 P M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 589 of 664 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 19-1828 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, MILAM, PALMER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 3-3-1(B), REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION; ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, under Idaho Code section 49-1819 and Article XII, section 2, Idaho Constitution, municipalities are duly authorized to establish regulations not in conflict with the general laws, including Idaho Code sections 49-1806(1), authorizing property owners to boot vehicles where the property is posted with notice that unauthorized vehicles may be booted at the owner's expense; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian seeks by this ordinance to establish consistency and clarity in regulation of vehicle immobilization; protect public safety, consumer interests, and property; and institute due process protections; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that the following ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That Meridian City Code section 3-3-1(B) shall be amended as follows: B. VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION: the impounding, incapacitating, or immobilizing of any vehicle, whether motorized or not, without the permission of the owner or agent of the owner of the vehicle, by the use of any device, wheel clamp, object, bagel, boot, mechanism, or method, whether attached to the vehicle or not, that does not allow the owner of the vehicle, or his or her authorized agent, to freely or lawfully move the vehicle from the place where it is immobilized; the removal of such device; and/or the demand, acceptance, or processing of payment for, or other transaction related to, such actions or services. Section 2. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby voided. Section 3. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. 2019. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 28 day of May, APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 28�"day of May, 2019. VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION ORDINANCE PAGE I APPROVED: ATTEST: Tammy , Mayor C o —,hrterim City Clerk STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 19-1828 The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Ordinance no. 19-1828 of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-901A(3). DATED this 2,8� day of MOAA , 2019. u William L.M. Nary, City Attorney NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 19-1828 An ordinance amending Meridian City Code section 3-3-1(B), regarding the definition of vehicle immobilization; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date. rty of a—n Mayo d City Council By: Chris Johnson, Interim City Clerk First Reading: 5-255- -_/f Adopted after first reading by suspension of the rule as allowed pui cant to Idaho Code § 50-902: YES NO Second Third Reading: /A - VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION ORDINANCE PAGE 2 EIDIAtN?- �J CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 12 B Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Ordinance No. 19-1827: Second Reading An Ordinance to amend the Municipal Code of The City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, Amending Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 12€(2), Meridian City Code, Known as the Meridian Impact Fee Ordinance Fee Schedule, To Provide for an amendment to the Police, Fire and Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Schedules; and Providing an Effective Date. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 12.B . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Second Reading of Ordinance No. 19- 1827: An Ordinance To Amend T he M unicipal Code Of T he City O f M eridian, C ounty Of Ada, S tate Of Idaho, Amending Title 10, C hapter 7, S ection 12(E )(2), M eridian C ity C ode, Known As T he M eridian Impact F ee Ordinance Fee S chedule; To P rovide F or An Amendment To T he P olice, F ire, And Parks And Recreation Impact F ee Schedules; And P roviding An E ffective D ate. C ouncil Notes: AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate I mpact Fee Report C over Memo 5/28/2019 I mpact Fee Ordinance Revision C over Memo 5/28/2019 RE V I E WE RS : Department R eviewer Action D ate Clerk.J ohnson, Chris Approved 5/28/2019 - 9:53 A M Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 592 of 664 Development Impact Fees Study Final Report March 28, 2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 593 of 664 227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400 Charlotte, NC 28202 www.raftelis.com March 28,2019 Mr.Todd Lavoie Chief Financial Officer City of Meridian 33 E Broadway Ave Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject:Development Impact Fees Report Dear Mr.Lavoie, Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (Raftelis) is pleased to provide the 2019 development impact fee update for the City of Meridian.After collaborating with staff and receiving input from the Impact Fee Advisory Committee,Raftelis recommends several changes to improve consistency with Idaho’s enabling legislation, including: Updated development projections and land use assumptions based on Meridian data Documentation of current infrastructure standards and projected need for additional facilities Proportionate fees for two types of nonresidential development and five size thresholds for residential development Our report summarizes key findings and recommendations related to the growth cost of capital improvements,to be funded by development impact fees,along with the need for other revenue sources to ensure a financially feasible Comprehensive Financial Plan. It has been a pleasure working with you and we thank City staff for engaging with quality information and insight regarding best practices for the City of Meridian. Sincerely, Dwayne Guthrie, PhD, AICP Manager Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 594 of 664 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................................................1 UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IDAHO IMPACT FEE ACT .......................................................................................................................1 PROPOSED IMPACT FEES ..................................................................................................................................................................2 PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEES..................................................................................................................................4 CITYWIDE PARKS.............................................................................................................................................................................4 RECREATION BUILDINGS ...................................................................................................................................................................6 REVENUE CREDIT EVALUATION ..........................................................................................................................................................6 PROPOSED AND CURRENT IMPACT FEES ..............................................................................................................................................6 FORECAST OF REVENUES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION...........................................................................................................................8 COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR PARKS AND RECREATION .............................................................................................................9 POLICE IMPACT FEES ............................................................................................................................................................10 PROPORTIONATE SHARE .................................................................................................................................................................10 EXCLUDED COSTS..........................................................................................................................................................................11 CURRENT USE AND AVAILABLE CAPACITY...........................................................................................................................................11 POLICE FACILITIES,SERVICE UNITS,AND STANDARDS ...........................................................................................................................11 POLICE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS......................................................................................................................................................12 REVENUE CREDIT EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................................................12 POLICE DEVELOPMENT FEES............................................................................................................................................................12 PROJECTED REVENUE FOR POLICE FACILITIES ......................................................................................................................................14 COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR POLICE ...................................................................................................................................15 FIRE IMPACT FEES ................................................................................................................................................................16 EXISTING STANDARDS FOR FIRE FACILITIES .........................................................................................................................................16 FIRE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS .........................................................................................................................................................17 REVENUE CREDIT EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................................................18 CURRENT AND PROPOSED FIRE IMPACT FEES......................................................................................................................................18 PROJECTED REVENUE FOR FIRE FACILITIES..........................................................................................................................................21 COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR FIRE FACILITIES ........................................................................................................................22 FEE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION ...................................................................................................................23 COST OF CFP PREPARATION ...........................................................................................................................................................23 DEVELOPMENT CATEGORIES ...........................................................................................................................................................23 CREDITS AND REIMBURSEMENTS......................................................................................................................................................24 APPENDIX A: LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ..............................................................................................................................25 SERVICE AREAS.............................................................................................................................................................................25 SUMMARY OF GROWTH INDICATORS ................................................................................................................................................25 PROPORTIONATE SHARE .................................................................................................................................................................26 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT ............................................................................................................27 DEMAND INDICATORS BY DWELLING SIZE ..........................................................................................................................................28 JOBS AND NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................................................................30 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 595 of 664 1 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Executive Summary Impact fees are one-time payments used to construct system improvements that serve multiple development projects or even the entire jurisdiction.By law, impact fees can only be used for capital improvements, not operating or maintenance costs.Impact fees are subject to legal standards that satisfy three key tests:need, benefit,and proportionality. First, to justify a fee for public facilities, local government must demonstrate a need for capital improvements. Second, new development must derive a benefit from the payment of the fees (i.e., in the form of public facilities constructed within a reasonable timeframe). Third, the fee paid should not exceed a development’s proportionate share of the capital cost. As documented in this report, the City of Meridian has complied with applicable legal precedents. Impact fees are proportionate and reasonably related to the capital improvement demands of new development, with the projects identified in this study taken from Meridian’s Comprehensive Financial Plan (CFP). Specific costs have been identified using local data and current dollars. With input from City staff,Raftelis determined service units for each type of infrastructure and calculated proportionate share factors to allocate costs by type of development.This report documents the formulas and input variables used to calculate the impact fees for each type of public facility. Impact fee methodologies also identify the extent to which new development is entitled to various types of credits to avoid potent ial double payment of growth-related capital costs. The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Idaho Code Title 67 Chapter 82) sets forth “an equitable program for planning and financing public facilities needed to serve new growth.” The enabling legislation c alls for three integrated products: 1) Land Use Assumptions (LUA) for at least 20 years, 2) Capital Improvements Plan, which the City of Meridian calls Comprehensive Financial Plan (CFP), and 3) Development Impact Fees (DIFs). The LUA (see Appendix A) uses population and housing unit projections provided by City staff. In addition, the CFP and DIF for fire and police facilities require demographic data on nonresidential development. This document includes nonresidential land use assumptions such as jobs and floor area within the City of Meridian, along with service units by residential size thresholds. The CFP and DIF are in the middle section of this report, organized by chapters pertaining to each public facility type (i.e., parks/recreation, police and fire). Each chapter documents existing infrastructure standards, the projected need for improvements to accommodate new development, the updated DIF compared to current fees, revenue projections and funding strategy for growth -related infrastructure, and a CFP listing specific improvements to be completed by the City of Meridian. Unique Requirements of the Idaho Impact Fee Act The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act has several requirements not common in the enabling legislation of other states. This overview summarizes these unique requirements, which have been met by the City of Meridian, as documented in this study. First, as specified in 67 -8204(2) of the Idaho Act, “development impact fees shall be calculated on the basis of levels of service for public facilities . . . applicable to existing Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 596 of 664 2 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT development as well as new growth and development.” Second, Idaho requires a Capital Improvements Plan (aka CFP in Meridian) [see 67-8208]. The CFP requirements are summarized in this report, with more detailed information maintained by City staff responsible for each type of infrastructure funded by impact fees. Third, the Idaho Act states the cost per service unit (i.e., impact fee) may not exceed the cost of growth - related system improvements divided by the number of projected service units attributable to new development [see 67-8204(16)]. Fourth, Idaho requires a proportionate share determination [see 67 -8207]. The City of Meridian has complied by considering various types of applicable credits that may re duce the capital costs attributable to new development. Fifth, Idaho requires a Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee established to: a) assist in adopting land use assumptions, b) review the CFP and file written comments, c) monitor and evaluate implementation of the CFP, d) file periodic reports on perceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing DIFs, and e) advise the governmental entity of the need to update the LUA, CFP and DIF study. Proposed Impact Fees Figure 1 summarizes the methods and cost components used for each type of public facility in Meridian’s 2019 impact fee study. City Council may change the proposed impact fees by eliminating infrastructure types, cost components, and/or specific capital improvements. If changes are ma de during the adoption process, Raftelis will update the fee study to be consistent with legislative policy decisions. Figure 1: Proposed Fee Methods and Cost Components Figure 2 summarizes proposed 2019 impact fees for new development in the City of Meridian.As discussed in Appendix A,Raftelis recommends that residential fees be imposed by dwelling size, base d on climate- controlled space. In contrast, the 2013 study used a “one size fits all” approach, whereby all housing units paid the same DIF.The 2019 size threshold that matches the average fee according to the 2013 method is a residential dwelling with 2501 to 3200 square feet. As shown below, the average fee per dwelling increased from $2,017 in 2013 to $2,943 in 2019, which is an increase of $926 (46%). In addition, the 2019 study recommends nonresidential fees by two general categories, Commercial and All Other types of nonresidential development. Commercial includes all buildings within a shopping center, plus stand-alone retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All Other includes industrial, warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non -residential development not considered Commercial). The previous study had a single fee for all types of nonresidential Type of Impact Fee Service Area Incremental Expansion (current standards) Cost Allocation Parks and Recreation Facilities Citywide Park Improvements and Recreation Centers Residential Police Facilities Citywide Police Buildings Functional Population and Inbound Vehicle Trips to Nonresidential Development Fire Facilities Citywide Fire Stations and Apparatus Functional Population and Jobs Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 597 of 664 3 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT development.The average fee per square foot for nonresidential development increased from $0.47 in 2013 to $0.56 in 2019, which is an increase of $0.09 per square foot (20%). Figure 2: Proposed Impact Fee Schedule Citywide Service Area Park and Recreation Facilities Police Facilities Fire Facilities Proposed Total (2019) Existing Total (2013) Increase or Decrease % Change Residential (per housing unit) by Square Feet of Climate-Controlled Floor Area 1000 or less $781 $56 $258 $1,095 $2,017 ($922)-46% 1001 to 1500 $1,361 $98 $450 $1,909 $2,017 ($108)-5% 1501 to 2500 $1,770 $128 $585 $2,483 $2,017 $466 23% 2501 to 3200 $2,098 $152 $693 $2,943 $2,017 $926 46% 3201 or more $2,447 $177 $809 $3,433 $2,017 $1,416 70% Nonresidential (per square foot of building) Commercial $0.00 $0.24 $0.64 $0.88 $0.47 $0.41 87% All Other $0.00 $0.05 $0.41 $0.46 $0.47 ($0.01)-2% Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 598 of 664 4 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Parks and Recreation Impact Fees The 2019 updated impact fee for parks and recreation facilities will enable Meridian to maintain current infrastructure standards for improved acres of parks and floor area of recreation buildings. All parks and recreation facilities included in the impact fees have a citywide service area. Cost components are allocated 100% percent to residential development. Figure PR1 documents recent cost factors per acre for park improvements and land. Based on four park site acquisitions, land for parks in Meridian is expected to cost approximately $61,000 per acre. City staff confirmed this land cost factor is reasonable and consistent with a recent land v aluation of $65,000 per acre quoted for expansion of the City’s wastewater treatment plant. As shown in the table below, park improvements have been averaging $241,000 per acre. Figure PR1: Cost Factors for Park Improvements Citywide Parks Citywide parks have active amenities, such as a soccer/football/baseball fields, basketball/volleyball courts, and playgrounds that will attract patrons from the entire service area. As shown in Figure PR2, the current infrastructure standard is 2.91 acres per 1,000 residents. At the bottom of the table below is a needs analysis for citywide park improvements. To maintain current standards over the next ten years, Meridian will improve 102.3 acres of parks, expected to cost approximately $24.65 million. Estimated Costs Park Name Acres Land Improvements Discovery Park 27.00 $405,184 $8,261,000 Reta Huskey Park 8.92 $680,007 $1,495,126 Keith Bird Legacy Park 7.50 $1,274,995 $1,382,621 Hillsdale Park 9.53 $857,700 $1,622,282 Total Costs 52.95 $3,217,886 $12,761,029 Weighted Average Cost per Acre =>$61,000 $241,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 599 of 664 5 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure PR2: Citywide Parks Standards and Need for Improved Acres Existing Parks Improved Acres Julius M. Kleiner Park 58.2 Settlers Park 57.7 Heroes Park 30.1 Discovery Park 27.0 Fuller Park 23.2 Bear Creak Park 18.8 Tully Park 18.7 Storey Park & Bark Park 17.9 Gordon Harris Park 11.1 Hillsdale Park 9.5 Reta Husky Park 8.9 Jabil Soccer Fields 8.4 Keith Bird Legacy Park 7.5 Seasons Park 7.1 Chateau Park 6.7 Renaissance Park 6.5 Champion Park 6.0 Heritage MS Ball Fields 5.6 8th Street Park 2.8 Centennial Park 0.4 Total =>332.2 Allocation Factors for Parks Improvements Cost per Acre $241,000 Residential Proportionate Share 100% Service Units Population in 2019 114,102 Infrastructure Standards for Parks Improved Acres Residential (per person)0.00291 Park Needs Year Population Improved Acres Base 2019 114,102 332.2 Year 1 2020 121,126 352.7 Year 2 2021 126,812 369.2 Year 3 2022 132,163 384.8 Year 4 2023 136,845 398.4 Year 5 2024 140,190 408.2 Year 10 2029 149,248 434.5 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 102.3 Growth Cost of Parks =>$24,654,300 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 600 of 664 6 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Recreation Buildings Figure PR3 lists current floor area for recreation centers. Based on input from the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, Meridian should expect to spend at least $225 per square foot to construct future recreation buildings. The lower portion of the table below indicates projected service units over the next ten years. To maintain current standards, Meridian will need 17,096 additional square feet of recreation building space, expected to cost approximately $3.85 million. Figure PR3: Infrastructure Standards and Needs for Recreation Buildings Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Because impact fees fully fund expected growth costs, there is no potential double-payment from other revenue sources. Proposed and Current Impact Fees At the top of Figure PR4 is a summary of the infrastructure needs due to growth. The projected need for acres of improved parks and square feet of recreation centers was addressed above. The need to acquire an additional five acres of land for parks is based on staff’s comparison of the existing inventory of undeveloped park sites (i.e., 97 acres) to the projected need for 102 additional acres over the next ten years. In addit ion to the growth cost of parks and recreation facilities, impact fees include the cost of professional services related to the CFP (authorized by the Idaho impact fee enabling legislation), less the projected park impact fee fund Existing Recreation Centers Square Feet Meridian Community Center 4,200 1 Meridian Homecourt 51,303 1 Total to Include in Current Standards 55,503 Allocation Factors for Recreation Centers Building plus Land Cost per Square Foot*$225 Residential Proportionate Share 100% 2019 Meridian Population 114,102 * Based on local developer estimate. Square Feet Residential (per person)0.49 Recreation Center Needs Year Population Square Feet Base 2019 114,102 55,503 Year 1 2020 121,126 58,920 Year 2 2021 126,812 61,686 Year 3 2022 132,163 64,288 Year 4 2023 136,845 66,566 Year 5 2024 140,190 68,193 Year 10 2029 149,248 72,599 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 17,096 Growth Cost for Recreation Buildings =>$3,847,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 601 of 664 7 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT balance at the end of the current fiscal year. The net growth cost of $26,168,471 divided by the projected increase in population from 2019 to 2029, yields a cost of $744 per service unit. To be consistent with 67-8204(16) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act, impact fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per dwelling. The row highlighted light green indicates the updated impact fee for an average-size dwelling, which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit. The latter was derived by dividing the projected increase in population by the projected increase in housing units over the next ten years. Please see Appendix A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.11). The blue arrow shown in the table below compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lower impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space. Figure PR4: Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Schedule 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Park Improvements acres 102 $241,000 $24,654,000 Park Land acres 5 $61,000 $305,000 Recreation Centers sq ft 17,096 $225 $3,847,000 Total =>$28,806,000 Professional Services Cost =>$18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 =>-$2,656,132 Net Growth Cost =>$26,168,471 Population Increase 2019 to 2029 35,146 Cost per Service Unit $744 Residential Impact Fees (per dwelling) Square Feet of Climate-Controlled Space Persons per Housing Unit Proposed Parks & Recreation Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $781 $1,113 ($332)-30% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $1,361 $1,113 $248 22% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $1,770 $1,113 $657 59% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $2,098 $1,113 $985 88% 3201 or more 3.29 $2,447 $1,113 $1,334 120% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $2,099 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 602 of 664 8 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Forecast of Revenues for Parks and Recreation Figure PR5 indicates Meridian should receive approximately $26.15 million in parks and recreation impact fee revenue over the next ten years, if actual development matches the projections documented in Appendix A. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the need for infrastructure and impact fee revenue. Figure PR5: Projected Impact Fee Revenue Ten-Year Growth Cost =>$26,168,471 Parks Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential $2,098 Year per housing unit Hsg Units Base 2019 42,345 Year 1 2020 44,445 Year 2 2021 46,145 Year 3 2022 47,746 Year 4 2023 49,145 Year 5 2024 50,145 Year 10 2029 54,811 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 Projected Revenue =>$26,150,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 603 of 664 9 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Comprehensive Financial Plan for Parks and Recreation As specified in 67-8203(29), development impact fees in Meridian exclude costs to provide better service to existing development. Existing parks and recreation centers are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. City staff recommends the improvements listed in Figure PR6 to accommodate additional development over the next ten years. Total impact fee funding of approximately $28.8 million represents a growth share of 80%, requiring approximately $7.28 million from other revenue sources over the next ten years. Figure PR6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Parks and Recreation Needed Planned Improved Acres 102.3 151 Building Sq Ft 17,096 22,000 FY Description Amount Units Cost 2020 West Meridian Regional Park - Design $500,000 2022 West Meridian Regional Park - Construction 47 acres $5,147,500 2021 New Community Center - Design & Construction Documents $500,000 2023 New Community Center - Construction 22,000 square feet $5,000,000 2027 Margaret Aldape Park - Design $994,000 2029 Margaret Aldape Park - Construction 70 acres $10,012,500 2021 Discovery Park, Phase 2 - Design $500,000 2023 Discovery Park, Phase 2 - Construction 25 $5,160,000 2023 Discovery Park, Phase 3 - Design $500,000 2025 Discovery Park, Phase 3 - Construction 25 acres $5,160,000 2022 Brundage/Graycliff Park - Design $185,000 2024 Brundage/Graycliff Park - Construction 9 acres $1,906,500 2021 Additional Land Acquisition 5 acres $525,000 Total Cost =>$36,090,500 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees =>$28,806,000 Growth Share =>80% Existing Development Share to be Funded by Other Revenues =>$7,284,500 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 604 of 664 10 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Police Impact Fees The City of Meridian will use an incremental expansion cost method to maintain existing infrastructure standards for police buildings. Proportionate Share In Meridian, police and fire infrastructure standards, projected needs, and development fees are based on both residential and nonresidential development. As shown in Figure P1, functional population was used to allocate public safety infrastructure and costs to residential and nonresidential development . Functional population is like the U.S. Census Bureau’s "daytime population," by accounting for people living and working in a jurisdiction. It also considers commuting patterns and time spent at residential versus nonresidential locations. Residents that don't work are assigned 20 hours per day to residential development and four hours per day to nonresidential development (annualized averages). Residents that work in Meridian are assigned 14 hours to residential development and 10 hours to nonresiden tial development. Residents that work outside Meridian are assigned 14 hours to residential development. Inflow commuters are assigned 10 hours to nonresidential development. Based on 2015 functional population data for Meridian, the cost allocation for residential development is 73% while nonresidential development accounts for 27% of the demand for fire infrastructure. Figure P1: Functional Population Functional Population Cost Allocation for Public Safety Demand Units in 2015 Demand Person Residential Hours/Day Hours Population*91,360 61%Residents Not Working 55,961 20 1,119,220 39%Resident Workers**35,399 20%Worked in City**7,231 14 101,234 80%Worked Outside City**28,168 14 394,352 Residential Subtotal 1,614,806 Residential Share =>73% Nonresidential Non-working Residents 55,961 4 223,844 Jobs Located in City**36,676 20%Residents Working in City**7,231 10 72,310 80%Non-Resident Workers (inflow commuters)29,445 10 294,450 Nonresidential Subtotal 590,604 Nonresidential Share =>27% TOTAL 2,205,410* 2015 U.S. Census Bureau population estimate. ** 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap web application, U.S. Census Bureau data for all jobs. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 605 of 664 11 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Excluded Costs Police development fees in Meridian exclude costs to meet existing needs and strict er safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. The City’s CFP addresses the cost of these excluded items. Also excluded from the police development fees are public safety vehicles and equipment that do not meet the minimum useful life requirement in Idaho’s Impact Fee Act. Current Use and Available Capacity In Meridian, police facilities are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. Meridian has determined that police building space will require expansion to a ccommodate future development. Police Facilities, Service Units, and Standards Police development fees in Meridian are based on the same level of service provided to existing development. Figure P2 inventories police buildings in Meridian. Because the training center is also used by the Fire Department, floor area was reduced to indicate the portion used by Meridian police. For residential development, Meridian will use year-round population within the service areas to derive current police infrastructure standards. For nonresidential development, Meridian will use inbound, average - weekday, vehicle trips as the service unit. Figure P2 indicates the allocation of police building space to residential and nonresidential development, along with FY18 -19 service units in Meridian. Vehicle trips to nonresidential development are based on floor area estimates for industrial, commercial, institutional, office and other services, as documented in the Land Use Assumptions. For police development fees, Meridian will use a cost factor of $333 per square foot (provided by City staff). The cost factor includes design and construction management. Based on FY18 -19 service units, the standard in Meridian is 0.26 square feet of police building floor area per person in the service area. For nonresidential development, Meridian’s standard is 0.06 square feet of police building per inbound vehicle trip to nonresidential development, on an average weekday. Figure P2: Meridian Police Buildings and Standards Police Buildings Square Feet PSTC (half)7,250 Admin Building 33,000 TOTAL 40,250 Source: City of Meridian Police Department. Police Buildings Standards Residential Nonresidential Proportionate Share (based on functional population)73%27% Growth Indicator Population Avg Wkdy Veh Trips to Nonres Dev Service Units in FY18-19 114,102 179,607 Square Feet per Service Unit 0.26 0.06 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 606 of 664 12 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Police Infrastructure Needs Idaho’s development fee enabling legislation requires jurisdictions to convert land use assumptions into service units and the corresponding need for additional infrastructure over the next ten years. As shown in Figure P3, projected population and inbound nonresidential vehicle trips drive the need for police buildings and vehicles. Meridian will need 12,161 additional square feet of police buildings. The ten -year, growth- related capital cost of police buildings is approximately $4.05 million. Figure P3: Police Facilities Needed to Accommodate Growth Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to police facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Based on the City of Meridian’s legislative policy decision to fully fund expected growth costs from impact fees, there is no potentia l double-payment from other revenue sources. Police Development Fees Infrastructure standards and cost factors for police are summarized in the upper portion of Figure P4. The conversion of infrastructure needs and costs per service unit into a cost per d evelopment unit is also shown in the table below. For residential development, average number of persons in a housing unit provides the necessary conversion. Persons per housing unit, by size threshold are documented in the Land Use Assumptions. For nonresidential development, trip generation rates by type of development are from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 2017). To ensure the analysis is based on travel demand associated with nonresidential development within Meridian, trip ends (ent ering and exiting) are converted to inbound trips using a basic 50% adjustment factor. Police Infrastructure Standards and Capital Costs Buildings - Residential 0.26 Sq Ft per person Buildings - Nonresidential 0.06 Sq Ft per trip Police Buildings Cost $333 per square foot Infrastructure Needed Veh Trips to Police Year Population Nonres in Meridian Buildings (sq ft) Base 2019 114,102 179,607 40,250 Year 1 2020 121,126 184,062 42,328 Year 2 2021 126,812 188,819 44,080 Year 3 2022 132,163 193,625 45,749 Year 4 2023 136,845 198,637 47,258 Year 5 2024 140,190 203,714 48,427 Year 10 2029 149,248 231,013 52,411 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 51,406 12,161 Growth Cost of Police Buildings =>$4,050,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 607 of 664 13 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT In addition to the growth cost of police facilities, impact fees include the cost of professional services related to the CFP (authorized by the Idaho Impact Fee Act), less the projected police impact fee fund balance expected at the end of the current fiscal year. The net growth cost of $2,633,140, divided by the projected increase in population from 2019 to 2029, yields a cost of $54 per residential service unit. Impa ct fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per development unit. The row highlighted light blue indicates the updated police fee for an average -size dwelling is $152 (truncated), which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit. The latter was derived by dividing the projected increase in population by the projected increase in housing units over the next ten years. Please see Appendix A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.11). The blue arrow shown in the table below compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lowe r impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate -controlled space. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 608 of 664 14 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure P4: Police Impact Fees per Development Unit Projected Revenue for Police Facilities Over the next ten years, police development fee revenue is projected to approximately match the growth cost of police infrastructure, which has a ten-year total cost of approximately $2.6 million (see the upper portion of Figure P5). The table below indicates Meridian should receive approximately $2.5 million in police 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Police Buildings square feet 12,161 $333 $4,050,000 Outdoor Training Facility 23%$690,000 Total =>$4,740,000 Professional Services Cost =>$18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 =>-$2,125,463 Net Growth Cost =>$2,633,140 Residential 73% Nonresidential 27% Residential $1,922,192 Nonresidential $710,948 Cost per Service Unit Residential (persons)35,146 $54 Nonresidential (vehicle trips)51,406 $13 Residential Impact Fees (per housing unit) Square Feet of Climate- Controlled Space Persons per Housing Unit Proposed Police Facilities Fees Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $56 $223 ($167)-75% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $98 $223 ($125)-56% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $128 $223 ($95)-43% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $152 $223 ($71)-32% 3201 or more 3.29 $177 $223 ($46)-21% Nonresidential Impact Fees (square foot of building) Type Avg Wkdy Veh Trip Ends per KSF Trip Adjustment Factors Proposed Police Facilities Fees Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change Commercial 37.75 50%$0.24 $0.12 $0.12 100% All Other 9.00 50%$0.05 $0.12 ($0.07)-58% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $154 Nonresidential Floor Area Increase 2019 to 2029 6,960,000 Impact Fee per Square Foot $0.10 Cost Allocation Allocated Cost by Land Use Growth 2019 to 2029 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 609 of 664 15 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT development fee revenue, if actual development matches the land use assumptions. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the need f or infrastructure and development fee revenue. Figure P5: Police Development Fee Revenue Comprehensive Financial Plan for Police City staff recommends the improvements listed in Figure P6 to accommodate additional development over the next ten years.Impact fees will pay for approximately $4.74 million, representing a growth share of 59%. Other revenue sources will be required to fund approximately $3.26 million in police facilities over the next ten years. Figure P6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Police Ten-Year Growth Cost of Police Facilities =>$2,633,140 Police Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential Industrial Commercial Institutional Office & Other Services $152 $50 $240 $50 $50 per housing unit per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ftper 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft Year Hsg Units KSF KSF KSF KSF Base 2019 42,345 9,070 4,890 4,450 5,890 Year 1 2020 44,445 9,300 5,010 4,560 6,040 Year 2 2021 46,145 9,540 5,140 4,680 6,190 Year 3 2022 47,746 9,780 5,270 4,800 6,350 Year 10 2029 54,811 11,670 6,290 5,720 7,580 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 2,600 1,400 1,270 1,690 Projected Revenue =>$1,895,000 $130,000 $336,000 $64,000 $85,000 Total Projected Revenues (rounded) =>$2,510,000 Buildings Description Square Feet Total Cost Training Facility Classroom 3,000 $1,000,000 Administrative Building Expansion Phase 1 3,000 $1,000,000 Administrative Building Expansion Phase 2 3,000 $1,000,000 Substation 6,000 $2,000,000 Total =>15,000 $5,000,000 Cost per Square Foot =>$333 Outdoor Facilities Description Cost Outdoor Training Facility $3,000,000 Total =>$8,000,000 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees =>$4,740,000 Growth Share Funded by Impact Fees =>59% Share to be Funded by Other Revenues =>$3,260,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 610 of 664 16 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Fire Impact Fees After evaluating calls for service data to general types of development, Raftelis recommends functional population to allocate the cost of additional fire infrastructure to residential and nonresidential development (see Figure P1 above and related text). Fire development fees in Meridian are based on the same level of service currently provided to existing development. Existing Standards for Fire Facilities Figure F1 inventories Fire Department buildings in Meridian. Because the training center is also used by the Police Department, floor area was reduced to indicate the portion used by Meridian Fire Department. The standard for fire buildings is 0.44 square feet per person and 0.46 square feet per job. Figure F1: Existing Fire Buildings Development fees will be used to expand the fleet of fire vehicles and purchase communications equipment with a useful life of at least ten years. Figure F2 lists fire vehicles and communications equipment currently used by the Meridian Fire Department. Following the same methodology used for fire buildings, the total cost of fire vehicles and equipment was allocated 73% to residential and 27% to nonresidential development in Meridian. As shown below, every additional resident will require M eridian to spend approximately $62 for additional fire vehicles and equipment. Every additional job requires the City to spend approximately $64 for additional fire vehicles and equipment. Fire Stations Square Feet Fire Station # 1 (540 E. Franklin Rd)11,700 Fire Station # 3 (3545 N. Locust Grove)7,040 Fire Station # 2 (2401 N. Ten Mile Rd)6,770 Fire Station # 4 (2515 S. Eagle Rd)7,077 Fire Station # 5 (N. Linder Rd)7,360 Fire Station # 6 0 PSTC (half)7,250 Training Tower @ Station #1 6,523 Fire Safety Center (1901 Leighfield Dr)1,744 Fire Admin Space (City Hall)13,511 TOTAL 68,975 Allocation Factors for Fire Stations Residential Share 73%Functional Nonresidential Share 27%Population Population in 2019 114,102 Jobs in 2019 40,575 Infrastructure Standards for Fire Stations Square Feet Residential (per person)0.44 Nonresidential (per job)0.46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 611 of 664 17 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure F2: Existing Standards for Fire Vehicles Fire Infrastructure Needs The City’s Comprehensive Plan and website describe existing fire facilities. In Meridian, fire facilities are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. The City has determined that fire facilities will require expansion to accommodate future development. As specified in 67-8203(29), development impact fees in Meridian exclude costs to repair, upgrade, update, expand or replace existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development. To accommodate projected development over the next ten years, Meridian will expand fire buildings by 20,859 square feet and spend $2.93 million to expand the fleet of fire vehicles. Fire Apparatus and Equipment Coding Total Cost Engines FE $5,148,000 Ladder Truck LT $1,600,000 Pickup Trucks PT $539,659 Other Vehicles OV $287,700 Communications Equipment CE $2,112,284 TOTAL $9,687,643 Allocation Factors for Fire Apparatus and Communications Residential Share 73%Functional Nonresidential Share 27%population Population in 2019 114,102 Jobs in 2019 40,575 Infrastructure Standards for Fire Apparatus and Communications Apparatus and Communications Residential (per person)$61.98 Nonresidential (per job)$64.46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 612 of 664 18 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure F3: Growth-Related Need for Fire Facilities Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to fire facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Based on the City of Meridian’s legislative policy decision to fully fund expected growth costs from impact fees, there is no potential double -payment from other revenue sources. Current and Proposed Fire Impact Fees Figure F4 indicates proposed impact fees for fire facilities in Meridian. Residential fees are derived from average number of persons per housing unit and the cost per person. Nonresidential fees are based on average jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area and the cost per job. The cost factors for fire facilities are summarized in the upper portion of Figure F4. Persons per unit, by dwelling size, are based on local data, as discussed in the Land Use Assumptions. For nonresidential development, average jobs per thous and square feet of floor area are also documented in the Land Use Assumptions. To be consistent with 67-8204(16) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act, impact fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per development unit. The row highlighted light orange indicates the updated impact fee for an average-size dwelling is $693 (truncated), which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit and a cost of $246 per additional person. Please see Appendix Fire Infrastructure Standards and Capital Costs Fire Stations - Residential 0.44 Sq Ft per household Fire Stations - Nonresidential 0.46 Sq Ft per job Fire Station Cost $535 per square foot Fire Apparatus/Communications - Residential $61.98 Cost per person Fire Apparatus/Communications - Nonres $64.46 Cost per job Facilities Needed Population Meridian Sq Ft of Fire Fire Apparatus and Year Jobs Stations Communications Base 2019 114,102 40,575 68,975 $9,687,643 Year 1 2020 121,126 41,612 72,551 $10,189,837 Year 2 2021 126,812 42,677 75,549 $10,610,907 Year 3 2022 132,163 43,768 78,411 $11,012,890 Year 4 2023 136,845 44,887 80,990 $11,375,214 Year 5 2024 140,190 46,035 82,993 $11,656,541 Year 6 2025 143,578 47,214 85,030 $11,942,532 Year 7 2026 144,996 48,421 86,209 $12,108,228 Year 8 2027 146,413 49,659 87,403 $12,275,860 Year 9 2028 147,831 50,929 88,611 $12,445,618 Year 10 2029 149,248 52,231 89,834 $12,617,376 Ten -Yr Increase 35,146 11,656 20,859 $2,929,733 Cost of Fire Stations =>$11,160,000 Cost of Fire Apparatus and Communications =>$2,930,000 Total Growth Cost =>$14,090,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 613 of 664 19 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.1 1). The blue arrow shown in the table below compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee of $695 for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lower impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space. Proposed nonresidential development fees for fire facilities are shown in the column with light orange shading. The 2019 study recommends nonresidential fees by two general categories, Commercial and All Other types of nonresidential development. Commercial includes all buildings within a shopp ing center, plus stand-alone retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All Other includes industrial, warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non -residential development not considered Commercial). The previous study had a single fee for all types of nonresidential development.The average fire impact fee per square foot for nonresidential development increased from $0.35 in 2013 to $0.46 in 2019. Based on the 2019 fee schedule, a new warehouse would be in the category of All Other. This fee category assumes 1.50 jobs per thousand square feet of floor area. To convert the fee to an amount per square foot, we divide by 1000 then multiply by the cost factor per job ($274). The result is $0.41 (truncated) per square foot. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 614 of 664 20 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure F4: Fee Schedule for Fire Facilities 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Fire Stations square feet 20,859 $535 $11,160,000 Fire Apparatus dollars $2,930,000 Total =>$14,090,000 Professional Services Cost =>$18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 =>-$2,241,236 Net Growth Cost =>$11,867,367 Residential 73% Nonresidential 27% Residential $8,663,178 Nonresidential $3,204,189 Cost per Service Unit Residential (persons)35,146 $246 Nonresidential (jobs)11,656 $274 Residential Impact Fees (per housing unit) Square Feet of Climate- Controlled Space Persons per Hsg Unit Proposed Fire Facilities Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $258 $681 ($423)-62% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $450 $681 ($231)-34% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $585 $681 ($96)-14% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $693 $681 $12 2% 3201 or more 3.29 $809 $681 $128 19% Nonresidential Impact Fees (square foot of building) Type Jobs per 1,000 Sq Ft Proposed Fire Facilities Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change Commercial 2.34 $0.64 $0.35 $0.29 83% All Other 1.50 $0.41 $0.35 $0.06 17% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $695 Nonresidential Sq Ft Increase 2019 to 2029 6,960,000 Impact Fee per Square Foot)$0.46 Cost Allocation Allocated Cost by Land Use Growth 2019 to 2029 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 615 of 664 21 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Projected Revenue for Fire Facilities Over the next ten years, fire development fee revenue is projected to approximately match the growth cost of fire infrastructure, which has a ten-year growth cost of $11,867,367 (see the upper portion of Figure F5). The table below indicates Meridian should receive approximately $11.82 million in fire development fee revenue, if actual development matches the land use assumptions. The revenue projection assumes implementation of the proposed fire fees and that development from 2019 to 2029 is consistent w ith the land use assumptions described in Appendix A. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the development fee revenue. Figure F5: Fire Development Fee Revenue Ten-Year Cost of Growth-Related Fire Facilities =>$11,867,367 Fire Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential Industrial Commercial Institutional Office and Other Services $693 $410 $640 $410 $410 Year per housing unit per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft Hsg Units KSF KSF KSF KSF Base 2019 42,345 9,070 4,890 4,450 5,890 Year 1 2020 44,445 9,300 5,010 4,560 6,040 Year 2 2021 46,145 9,540 5,140 4,680 6,190 Year 3 2022 47,746 9,780 5,270 4,800 6,350 Year 4 2023 49,145 10,030 5,410 4,920 6,510 Year 5 2024 50,145 10,290 5,550 5,040 6,680 Year 6 2025 51,159 10,550 5,690 5,170 6,850 Year 7 2026 52,071 10,820 5,830 5,310 7,030 Year 8 2027 52,984 11,100 5,980 5,440 7,210 Year 9 2028 53,898 11,380 6,140 5,580 7,390 Year 10 2029 54,811 11,670 6,290 5,720 7,580 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 2,600 1,400 1,270 1,690 Projected Revenue =>$8,640,000 $1,070,000 $900,000 $520,000 $690,000 Total Projected Revenues (rounded) =>$11,820,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 616 of 664 22 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Comprehensive Financial Plan for Fire Facilities Using impact fee funding over the next ten years, Figure F6 indicates that Meridian plans to expand fire station floor area by approximately 25,000 square feet. Meridian will also purchase additional fire vehicles costing approximately $4.38 million. The total cost for these projects is approximately $17.75 million. The growth cost funded by impact fees is $14.09 million over ten years, which is 79% of the total cost. An additional $3.66 million in other revenues wil l be required to fully fund the Fire Department’s CFP for growth-related improvements. Figure F6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Fire Facilities Fire Stations Square Feet Total Cost Purchase Land for Fire Station #7 $500,000 Design Fire Station #7 $800,000 Build Fire Station #7 12,500 $5,387,500 Purchase Land for Fire Station #8 $250,000 Design Fire Station #8 $800,000 Build Fire Station #8 12,500 $5,637,500 Total =>25,000 $13,375,000 Cost per Sq Ft Based on Stations #7 & #8 =>$535 Fire Apparatus Units Total Cost Quint Truck 1 $1,600,000 Heavy Rescue Vehicle 1 $800,000 Fire Engine Station #7 1 $572,000 Fire Engine Station #8 1 $572,000 Vehicle for EMS Captain 1 $63,000 Vehicle for Fire Inspector/Investigator 1 $63,000 Vehicle for Battalion Chiefs 1 $63,000 Alternative Response Unit 2 $642,000 Total =>9 $4,375,000 Total =>$17,750,000 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees =>$14,090,000 Growth Share =>79% Funded by Other Revenues =>$3,660,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 617 of 664 23 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Fee Implementation and Administration Consistent with best practices and Idaho’s enabling legislation,Meridian updates capital improvements and development impact fees every five years. In addition, some jurisdictions make annual adjustments for inflation using a price index like the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index published by McGraw-Hill Companies. This index could be applied to the adopted impact fee schedule, reviewed by the Advisory Committee, then approved by City Council. If cost estimates or demand indicators change significantly, the City should redo the fee calculations. Another best practice is to spend impact fees as soon as possible, tracking funds according to first in, first out accounting, using aggregate rather than project-specific tracking. Impact fees and accrued interest are maintained in a separate fund that is not comingled with other revenues. In Idaho, an annual report is mandatory, indicating impact fee collections, expenditures, and fund balances by type of infrastructure. Cost of CFP Preparation As stated in Idaho’s enabling legislation, a surcharge on the collection of development impact fees may be used to fund the cost of preparing the CFP that is attributable to the impact fee determination. This minor cost ($18,603 per infrastructure type) was added to the 2019 Meridian impact fees. Development Categories Proposed impact fees for residential development are by square feet of climate-controlled space, excluding porches, garage and unfinished space, such as basements and attics. For an apartment building, the average size threshold is derived for an entire building. The recommended procedure is to identify the aggregate climate-controlled floor area for the entire building, divided by the number of dwelling units in the building. Apartment complexes and some residential development provide common area s for use by residents, such as exercise rooms and clubhouses. Common areas for the private use of residents are ancillary uses to the dwelling units and not subject to additional impact fees. Also, Section 67 -8204(20) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act states that an addition to an existing residential building, that does not increase the number of service units, should be exempt from additional impact fees. Given the relatively small fee increase across size thresholds and the high transaction cost to assess fees for additions to residential buildings, Raftelis recommends that additions to residential buildings should not be subject to additional impact fees. The two general nonresidential development categories in the proposed impact fee schedule can be used for all new construction within Meridian. Nonresidential development categories represent general groups of land uses that share similar average weekday vehicle trip generation rates and job density (i.e. jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area), as documented in Appendix A. “Commercial” includes retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All land uses within a shopping center will pay the impact fee for commercial development. All Other includes industrial,warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non-residential development not considered Commercial). An applicant may submit an independent study to document unique demand indicators (i.e., service units per development unit). The independent study should be prepared by a professional engineer or certified planner and use the same type of input variables as those in Meridian’s impact fee study. For residential development, impact fees are based on average persons per housing unit. For nonresidential development, impact fees are based on inbound average weekday vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area, and the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 618 of 664 24 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT average number of jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The independent fee study will be rev iewed by City staff and can be accepted as the basis for a unique fee calculation. If staff determines the independent fee study is not reasonable, the applicant may appeal the administrative decision to Meridian’s elected officials for their consideration. Credits and Reimbursements A general requirement that is common to impact fee methodologies is the evaluation of credits. A revenue credit may be necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from one -time impact fees plus on-going payment of other revenues that may also fund growth -related capital improvements. The determination of revenue credits is dependent upon the impact fee methodology used in the cost analysis. Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits should be addressed in the ordinance that establishes the impact fees. Project-level improvements, required as part of the development approval process, are not eligible for credits against impact fees. If a developer constructs a system improvement included in th e fee calculations, it will be necessary to either reimburse the developer or provide a credit against the fees. The latter option is more difficult to administer because it creates unique fees for specific geographic areas. Based on national experience,Raftelis recommends a jurisdiction establish a reimbursement agreement with the developer that constructs a system improvement. The reimbursement agreement should be limited to a payback period of no more than ten years and the City should not pay intere st on the outstanding balance. The developer must provide documentation of the actual cost incurred for the system improvement. The City should only agree to pay the lesser of the actual construction cost or the estimated cost used in the impact fee analysis. If the City pays more than the cost used in the fee analysis, there will be insufficient fee revenue. Reimbursement agreements should only obligate the City to reimburse developers annually according to actual fee collections from the benefiting area. The supporting documentation for each type of impact fee describes the types of infrastructure considered to be system improvements. Site specific credits or developer reimbursements for one type of system improvement does not negate an impact fee for other system improvements. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 619 of 664 25 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Appendix A: Land Use Assumptions Appendix A contains the land use assumptions for Meridian’s 2019 DIF update. The CFP must be developed in coordination with the Advisory Committee and utilize land use assumptions most recently adopted by the appropriate land planning agency [see Idaho Code 67-8206(2)]. Idaho’s enabling legislation defines land use assumptions as: “a description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a 20-year period.” Service Areas To ensure a substantial benefit to new development paying impact fees, the City of Meridian has evaluated collection and expenditure zones for public facilities that may have distinct benefit or service areas. In the City of Meridian, impact fees for parks/recreation, police and fire facilities will benefit new development throughout the entire incorporated area. Raftelis recommends o ne citywide service area for Meridian impact fees. Idaho Code 67-8203(26) defines “service area” as: “Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity, or by intergovernmental agreement, in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles, or both.” The City’s adopted Future Land Use Map indicates land uses, densities, and intensities of development, as required by Idaho Code 67-8203(16). The service area is defined as all land within the city limits of Meridian, as modified over time. Summary of Growth Indicators Population, housing unit,jobs and nonresidential floor area are the “service units” or demand indicators that will be used to evaluate the need for growth-related infrastructure. The demographic data and development projections discussed below will also be used to demonstrate proportionality. All land use assumptions are consistent with Meridian’s Comprehensive Plan. In contrast to th e Comprehensive Plan, which is more general and has a long-range horizon, development impact fees require more specific quantitative analysis and have a short-range focus. Typically, impact fee studies look out five to ten years, with the expectation that fees will be periodically updated (e.g. every 5 years).Infrastructure standards will be calibrated using fiscal year 2018-19 data. In Meridian, the fiscal year begins on October 1st. Key development projections for the City of Meridian are housing unit s and nonresidential floor area, as shown in Figure A1. These projections will be used to estimate development fee revenue and to indicate the anticipated need for growth-related infrastructure. The goal is to have reasonable projections without being overly concerned with precision. Because impact fee methods are designed to reduce sensitivity to development projections in the determination of the proportionate -share fee amounts, if actual development is slower than projected, fee revenue will decline,but so will the need for growth-related infrastructure. In contrast, if development is faster than anticipated, the City will receive an increase in fee revenue, but will also need to accelerate infrastructure improvements to keep pace with the actual rat e of development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 620 of 664 26 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Population and housing unit projections were provided by City staff. During the next ten years, the impact fee study assumes Meridian’s population increase at a growth rate of approximately 2.7% per year. Over the next ten years, jobs are expected to increase at a growth rate of approximately 2.6% per year, which is from the Communities in Motion employment forecast from 2010 to 2040. Figure A1:Annual Development Projections Proportionate Share The term “proportionate” is found throughout Idaho’s Development Impact Fee Act. For example, Idaho Code 67 - 8202(2) states the intent to, “Promote orderly growth and development by establishing uniform standards by which local governments may require that those who benefit from new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new public facilities needed to serve new growth and development;” Because DIFS must be proportionate, jurisdictions derive fees for various land uses per unit of development, as stated in Idaho Code 67-8404(17). Meridian, Idaho FY18-19 FY19-20 FY20-21 FY21-22 FY23-24 FY28-29 FY38-39 Fiscal Year Begins Oct 1st 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024 2029 2039 Base Yr 1 2 3 5 10 20 Total Population City of Meridian 114,102 121,126 126,812 132,163 140,190 149,248 164,187 Annual Increase 7.2%6.2%4.7%4.2%2.4%1.0%1.0% Housing Units Single Family 35,911 37,649 39,056 40,381 42,367 46,229 54,516 Annual Increase 5.6%4.8%3.7%3.4%2.0%1.7%1.7% Multi-Family 6,434 6,796 7,089 7,365 7,778 8,582 10,322 Annual Increase 6.6%5.6%4.3%3.9%2.3%1.9%1.9% Total Housing Units 42,345 44,445 46,145 47,746 50,145 54,811 64,838 Annual Increase 5.7%5.0%3.8%3.5%2.0%1.7%1.7% Persons per Hsg Unit 2.69 2.73 2.75 2.77 2.80 2.72 2.53 Jobs (by place of work) Industrial 7,501 7,693 7,890 8,092 8,511 9,656 12,430 Commercial 11,455 11,748 12,048 12,356 12,996 14,746 18,982 Institutional 4,133 4,238 4,347 4,458 4,689 5,320 6,848 Office & Other Services 17,486 17,933 18,392 18,862 19,839 22,509 28,976 Total Jobs 40,575 41,612 42,677 43,768 46,035 52,231 67,236 Annual Increase 2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6% Jobs to Housing Ratio 0.96 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.04 Nonresidential Floor Area (square feet in thousands) Industrial 9,070 9,300 9,540 9,780 10,290 11,670 15,030 Commercial 4,890 5,010 5,140 5,270 5,550 6,290 8,100 Institutional 4,450 4,560 4,680 4,800 5,040 5,720 7,370 Office & Other Services 5,890 6,040 6,190 6,350 6,680 7,580 9,760 Total KSF 24,300 24,910 25,550 26,200 27,560 31,260 40,260 Avg Sq Ft Per Job 599 599 599 599 599 598 599 Avg Jobs per KSF 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 621 of 664 27 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT “A development impact fee ordinance shall include a schedule of development impact fees for various land uses per unit of development. The ordinance shall provide that a developer shall have the right to elect to pay a project's proportionate share of system improvement costs by payment of development impact fees according to the fee schedule as full and complete payment of the development project's proportionate share of system improvement costs…” Even though formulas and methods are not specified in Idaho’s Development Impact Fee Act, DIFs must be reasonable and fair, as stated in section 67-8201(1). “All development impact fees shall be based on a reasonable and fair formula or method under which the development impact fee imposed does not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the governmental entity in the provision of system improvements to serve the new development. In the following sections, Raftelis describes reasonable and fair formulas and methods that can be used in the City of Meridian to make DIFs proportionate by size of residential development and type of nonresidential development. Residential Development and Persons per Housing Unit The 2010 census did not obtain detailed information using a “lo ng-form” questionnaire. Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau has switched to a continuous monthly mailing of surveys, known as the American Community Survey (ACS), which is limited by sample-size constraints. For example, data on detached housing units are now combined with attached single units (commonly known as townhouses). Part of the rationale for imposing fees by size threshold, as discussed further below, is to address this ACS data limitation. Because townhouses and apartments generally have fewer bedrooms and less floor area than detached units, size thresholds makes fees more proportionate and facilitates construction of affordable units. As shown Figure A2, dwellings with a single unit per structure (detached and attached) average 2.85 persons per housing unit. Dwellings in structures with two or more units average 2.00 year -round residents per unit. This category includes duplexes, which have two dwellings on a single land parcel. According to the latest available data, the overall average is 2.76 year-round residents per housing unit and 2.82 persons per household. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a household is a housing unit that is occupied by year - round residents. Development fees often use per capita standards and persons per housing unit, or persons per household, to derive proportionate-share fee amounts. Raftelis recommends that fees for residential development in the City of Meridian be imposed according to the number of year -round residents per housing unit. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 622 of 664 28 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure A2:Year-Round Persons per Unit by Type of Housing Demand Indicators by Dwelling Size Impact fees must be proportionate to the demand for infrastructure. Because the average number of persons per housing unit has a strong, positive correlation to the number of bed rooms, Raftelis recommends residential fee schedules that increase by dwelling size.Custom tabulations of demographic data by bedroom range can be created from individual survey responses provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, in files known as Public Use Micro-Data Samples (PUMS). PUMS files are only available for areas of at least 100,000 persons, with the City of Meridian included in Public Use Micro -Data Area (PUMA) 701. As shown in Figure A3, Raftelis derived average persons per housing unit by bedroom range, from un-weighted PUMS data. The recommended multipliers by bedroom range (shown below) are for all types of housing units, adjusted to the control totals for Meridian. As shown above, the U.S. Census Bureau indicates that Meridian averages 2.76 persons per housing unit. Figure A3:Persons by Bedroom Range Meridian Population and Housing Characteristics Units in Structure Persons House-Persons per Housing Persons per Housing Vacancy holds Household Units Housing Unit Mix Rate Single Unit *81,202 27,793 2.92 28,448 2.85 89%2% All Other **6,765 3,379 2.00 3,378 2.00 11%0% Subtotal 87,967 31,172 2.82 31,826 2.76 2% Group Quarters 4,864 TOTAL 92,831 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, Tables B25024, B25032, B25033, and B26001. *Single unit includes attached and detached. ** All other includes multifamily and mobile homes. Recommended Multipliers (2) Bedrooms Persons Housing Persons per Housing (1)Units (1)Housing Unit Mix 0-1 48 39 1.30 2.8% 2 353 194 1.92 14.1% 3 1,598 678 2.48 49.2% 4+1,614 467 3.64 33.9% Total 3,613 1,378 2.76 100.0% (1) American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample for ID PUMA 701 (2012-2016 5-year database). (2) Recommended persons per housing unit are scaled to make the average derived from PUMS survey data match the control total for Meridian (i.e. 2.76 persons per housing unit). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 623 of 664 29 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT DIFs based on size of dwelling are generally easier to administer when expressed in square feet of finished living space for all types of housing. Basing fees on floor area rather than the number of bedrooms eliminates the need for criteria to make administrative decisions on whether a room qualifies as a bedroom. To translate dwelling size by number of bedrooms into square feet of living space, Raftelis used the 2018 Ada County Assessor’s residential database to derive average square feet by bedroom range (i.e., two, three, and four or more bedrooms). Raftelis recommends that DIFs for residential development be imposed based on finished square feet of living space, excluding garages, patios and porches that are not climate-controlled. Average floor area and number of persons by bedroom range are plotted in Figure A4, with a logarithmic trend line derived from actual averages for Meridian. Using the trend line formula shown in the chart, Ra ftelis derived the estimated average number of persons, by dwelling size, in size thresholds like those currently used by the City of Boise. As shown with yellow highlighting, the lowest floor area range (1000 square feet or less) has an estimated average of 1.16 persons per housing unit. At the upper end of the floor area range (3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space), the average is 3.63 persons per housing unit. For a building with more than one residential unit, City staff will determine the average size threshold for the entire building by dividing total climate-controlled floor area by the total number of dwellings in the building. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 624 of 664 30 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure A4:Persons by Square Feet of Living Space Jobs and Nonresidential Development In addition to data on residential development, the calculation of impact fees requires data on nonresidential development.Raftelis uses the term “jobs” to refer to employment by place of work.In Figure A5, color shading indicates nonresidential development prototypes the will be used by Raftelis to derive average weekday vehicle trips and nonresidential floor area. For future industrial development, Raftelis averaged Light Industrial (ITE code 110) and Warehousing (ITE 150) to derive an average of 1,209 square feet p er industrial job. The prototype for future commercial development is an average -size Shopping Center (ITE code 820). Commercial development (i.e., retail and eating/drinking places) is assumed to average 427 square feet per job. For institutional devel opment, such as schools, daycare and churches, the impact fee study assumes an average of 1,076 square feet per job. The prototype for institutional development is an Elementary School (ITE 520). For office and other services, an average -size Office (ITE 710) is the prototype for future development, averaging of 337 square feet per job. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 625 of 664 31 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure A5:Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends Figure A6 indicates 2015 estimates of jobs and nonresidential floor area within Meridian. Job estimates, by type of nonresidential, are from Meridian’s Work Area Profile, available through the U.S. Census Bureau’s online web application known as OnTheMap. The number of jobs in Meridian is based on quarterly workforce reports supplied by employers. Floor area estimates are derived from the number of jobs by type of nonresidential development and average square feet per job ratios, as discussed on the previous page. Total floor area of nonresidential development in Meridian is consistent with property tax parcel informa tion obtained from Ada County. ITE Land Use / Size Demand Wkdy Trip Ends Wkdy Trip Ends Emp Per Sq Ft Code Unit Per Dmd Unit*Per Employee*Dmd Unit Per Emp 110 Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 4.96 3.05 1.63 615 140 Manufacturing 1,000 Sq Ft 3.93 2.47 1.59 628 150 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 1.74 5.05 0.34 2,902 520 Elementary School 1,000 Sq Ft 19.52 21.00 0.93 1,076 530 High School 1,000 Sq Ft 14.07 22.25 0.63 1,581 610 Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 10.72 3.79 2.83 354 620 Nursing Home 1,000 Sq Ft 6.64 2.91 2.28 438 710 General Office 1,000 Sq Ft 9.74 3.28 2.97 337 760 Research & Dev Center 1,000 Sq Ft 11.26 3.29 3.42 292 770 Business Park 1,000 Sq Ft 12.44 4.04 3.08 325 820 Shopping Center (avg size)1,000 Sq Ft 37.75 16.11 2.34 427 857 Discount Club 1,000 Sq Ft 41.80 32.21 1.30 771 Industrial in Meridian 1,000 Sq Ft 3.35 4.05 0.83 1,209 *Trip Generation , Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 626 of 664 32 2019 MERIDIAN DEVELO PMENT IMPACT FEES REPORT Figure A6:Jobs and Floor Area Estimates Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 627 of 664 IMPACT FEE ORDIINANCE AMENDMENT – Page 1 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, MILAM, PALMER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 7, SECTION 12(E)(2), MERIDIAN CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE MERIDIAN IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE FEE SCHEDULE; TO PROVIDE FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE POLICE, FIRE, AND PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE SCHEDULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in Section 67-8201, et seq., Idaho Code, the City of Meridian ("the City") may impose Impact Fees to fund expenditures by the City Police Department, the City Fire Department and the City Parks and Recreation Department on Capital Improvements needed to serve new growth and development; and WHEREAS, the City retained Raftelis ("Consultant") to analyze and assess new growth and development projections in order to determine the demand for police, fire, and parks and recreation Capital Improvements to accommodate new growth and development in the City and the City's area of city impact; and WHEREAS, the City of Meridian Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvements Plan, prepared by Consultant, dated March 28, 2019 attached hereto as Exhibit “A” (the "Impact Fee Study"), sets forth a reasonable methodology and analysis for determining and quantifying the impacts of various types of new residential and nonresidential Development on the City's police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities; quantifies the reasonable impact of new growth and development on the System Improvements addressed therein; determines the costs necessary to meet demands created by new growth and development; and determines Impact Fees as set forth in this Chapter that are at a level no greater than necessary to defray the cost of planned Capital Improvements to increase the service capacity of the City's existing police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities. The City hereby establishes as the City standards the assumptions and Level of Service standards referenced in the Impact Fee Study as part of the City's current plans for future expansions to the police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities. WHEREAS, based on reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of new growth and development on the City's police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities, the Impact Fee Study quantifies the impacts of new growth and development on Public Facilities, and establishes Impact Fees on new growth and development no greater than necessary to defray the cost of Capital Improvements that will increase the service capacity of Public Facilities to serve new growth and development. WHEREAS , in preparing the Impact Fee Study, Consultant reviewed and has relied upon the City's ten (10) year Capital Improvements Plans proposed by the City, and has reviewed and analyzed what elements of new growth and development are or would generate demand for additional police, fire, and parks and recreation Capital Improvements addressed therein; and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 628 of 664 IMPACT FEE ORDIINANCE AMENDMENT – Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS , all of Capital Improvements planned for and included in the Impact Fee Study, which are to be funded by police, fire, and parks and recreation Impact Fees are directly related to services that the City is authorized to provide, and are services required by the general policies of the City pursuant to resolution, code or ordinance; and WHEREAS , an equitable program for planning and financing Capital Improvements to increase the service capacity of Public Facilities needed to serve new growth and development is necessary in order to promote and accommodate orderly growth and development and to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City and City's area of City impact. Such protection requires that the City's police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities be expanded to accommodate new growth and development within the City, and the City's area of city impact. WHEREAS , if the adopted fee is less than the fees proposed under the methodology set forth in the Impact Fee Study, the impact fee eligible portions of adopted Capital Improvement Plan will not be fully funded unless general fund revenue or other income sources are used to fund the difference between the maximum allowable fee and the adopted fee; and WHEREAS , the Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee met on April 12, 2019 and passed a motion to approve the Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvements Plans and recommend that the City Council hold the required public hearing on the Capital Improvements Plans and the updated Impact Fees and WHEREAS , after due and timely notice, the City Council held a public hearing to discuss, review and hear public comments on the proposed Capital Improvements Plans and the revised Impact Fee as recommended by the Development Impact Fee Committee; and WHEREAS , based upon the Impact Fee Study, the testimony at a public hearing and a review of all of the facts and circumstances, in the reasonable judgment of the City Council, the police, fire, and parks and recreation Impact Fees hereby established are at levels no greater than necessary to defray the cost of Capital Improvements directly related to the categories of residential and nonresidential land Development listed herein; and WHEREAS , in adopting the police, fire, and parks and recreation Capital Improvements Impact Fees, the City Council intends and has determined that such Impact Fees are designed to and do address Capital Improvements needs that are brought about by new growth and development, which needs are separate and distinct from the impacts and needs addressed by other requirements of the City's codes and ordinances, and in no circumstance do the Impact Fees set forth herein address the same subjects as other requirements of the City's codes and ordinances for site specific dedications or improvements; and WHEREAS , the police, fire, and parks and recreation Impact Fees to be imposed on new growth and development will be and are hereby legislatively adopted, will be generally applicable to a broad class of property and are intended to defray the projected impacts on such Capital Improvements caused by new growth and development as required by law; and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 629 of 664 IMPACT FEE ORDIINANCE AMENDMENT – Page 3 of 4 WHEREAS , the Impact Fees adopted hereby shall be collected and accounted for in accordance with Section 67-8201, et seq., Idaho Code; and WHEREAS , the Impact Fees adopted by this Ordinance are fair and rational, charge new growth and development according to new growth and development's impact on the City's police, fire, and parks and recreation Public Facilities and benefit those who pay Impact Fees in a tangible way. BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby affirmed and incorporated herein by this reference as findings of the City Council. Section 2. The Impact Fee Study set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto is hereby approved. Section 3. That Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 12(E)(2) of the Meridian City Code is REPEALED AND REPLACED as follows: 10-7-12: ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS: E. 2. Except for such impact fee as may be calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an independent impact fee calculation study, the amount of each impact fee shall be as follows effective the _____ day of ____________, 2019: Park and Recreation Facilities Police Facilities Fire Facilities Total Fees Residential (per housing unit) by Square Feet of Climate-Controlled Floor Area 1000 or less $781 $56 $258 $1,095 1001 to 1500 $1,361 $98 $450 $1,909 1501 to 2500 $1,770 $128 $585 $2,483 2501 to 3200 $2,098 $152 $693 $2,943 3201 or more $2,447 $177 $809 $3,433 Nonresidential (per square foot of building) Commercial $0.00 $0.24 $0.64 $0.88 All Other $0.00 $0.05 $0.41 $0.46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 630 of 664 IMPACT FEE ORDIINANCE AMENDMENT – Page 4 of 4 Section 2: That all other provisions of Title 10, Chapter 7 remain unchanged. Section 3: This Fee Schedule shall be in effect on the ________ day of ________, 2019, which shall be no sooner than thirty (30) days after adoption and publication of this Ordinance. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this _______ day of ________________, 2019. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ______ day of _________________, 2019. APPROVED: ______________________________ Tammy de Weerd, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Chris Johnson, Interim City Clerk Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 631 of 664 IMPACT FEE ORDIINANCE AMENDMENT – Page 5 of 4 EXHIBIT A Development Impact Fees Study Final Report March 28, 2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 632 of 664 227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400 Charlotte, NC 28202 www.raftelis.com March 28, 2019 Mr. Todd Lavoie Chief Financial Officer City of Meridian 33 E Broadway Ave Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Development Impact Fees Report Dear Mr. Lavoie, Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (Raftelis) is pleased to provide the 2019 development impact fee update for the City of Meridian. After collaborating with staff and receiving input from the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, Raftelis recommends several changes to improve consistency with Idaho’s enabling legislation, including: • Updated development projections and land use assumptions based on Meridian data • Documentation of current infrastructure standards and projected need for additional facilities • Proportionate fees for two types of nonresidential development and five size thresholds for residential development Our report summarizes key findings and recommendations related to the growth cost of capital improvements, to be funded by development impact fees, along with the need for other revenue sources to ensure a financially feasible Comprehensive Financial Plan. It has been a pleasure working with you and we thank City staff for engaging with quality information and insight regarding best practices for the City of Meridian. Sincerely, Dwayne Guthrie, PhD, AICP Manager Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 633 of 664 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Unique Requirements of the Idaho Impact Fee Act .................................................................................................................. 8 Proposed Impact Fees ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Parks and Recreation Impact Fees ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Citywide Parks ......................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Recreation Buildings ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Revenue Credit Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Proposed and Current Impact Fees ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Forecast of Revenues for Parks and Recreation ...................................................................................................................... 15 Comprehensive Financial Plan for Parks and Recreation ........................................................................................................ 16 Police Impact Fees ............................................................................................................................................................... 17 Proportionate Share ................................................................................................................................................................ 17 Excluded Costs ......................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Current Use and Available Capacity ........................................................................................................................................ 18 Police Facilities, Service Units, and Standards ......................................................................................................................... 18 Police Infrastructure Needs ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 Revenue Credit Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Police Development Fees ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 Projected Revenue for Police Facilities.................................................................................................................................... 20 Comprehensive Financial Plan for Police ................................................................................................................................. 21 Fire Impact Fees ................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Existing Standards for Fire Facilities ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Fire Infrastructure Needs ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 Revenue Credit Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................................... 24 Current and Proposed Fire Impact Fees .................................................................................................................................. 24 Projected Revenue for Fire Facilities ....................................................................................................................................... 27 Comprehensive Financial Plan for Fire Facilities ..................................................................................................................... 28 Fee Implementation and Administration ............................................................................................................................. 29 Cost of CFP Preparation ........................................................................................................................................................... 29 Development Categories ......................................................................................................................................................... 29 Credits and Reimbursements .................................................................................................................................................. 30 Appendix A: Land Use Assumptions .................................................................................................................................... 31 Service Areas ........................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Summary of Growth Indicators ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Proportionate Share ................................................................................................................................................................ 32 Residential Development and Persons per Housing Unit ........................................................................................................ 33 Demand Indicators by Dwelling Size ....................................................................................................................................... 33 Jobs and Nonresidential Development.................................................................................................................................... 35 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 634 of 664 Executive Summary Impact fees are one-time payments used to construct system improvements that serve multiple development projects or even the entire jurisdiction. By law, impact fees can only be used for capital improvements, not operating or maintenance costs. Impact fees are subject to legal standards that satisfy three key tests: need, benefit, and proportionality . • First, to justify a fee for public facilities, local government must demonstrate a need for capital improvements. • Second, new development must derive a benefit from the payment of the fees (i.e., in the form of public facilities constructed within a reasonable timeframe). • Third, the fee paid should not exceed a development’s proportionate share of the capital cost. As documented in this report, the City of Meridian has complied with applicable legal precedents. Impact fees are proportionate and reasonably related to the capital improvement demands of new development, with the projects identified in this study taken from Meridian’s Comprehensive Financial Plan (CFP). Specific costs have been identified using local data and current dollars. With input from City staff, Raftelis determined service units for each type of infrastructure and calculated proportionate share factors to allocate costs by type of development. This report documents the formulas and input variables used to calculate the impact fees for each type of public facility. Impact fee methodologies also identify the extent to which new development is entitled to various types of credits to avoid potential double payment of growth- related capital costs. The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Idaho Code Title 67 Chapter 82) sets forth “an equitable program for planning and financing public facilities needed to serve new growth.” The enabling legislation calls for three integrated products: 1) Land Use Assumptions (LUA) for at least 20 years, 2) Capital Improvements Plan, which the City of Meridian calls Comprehensive Financial Plan (CFP), and 3) Development Impact Fees (DIFs). The LUA (see Appendix A) uses population and housing unit projections provided by City staff. In addition, the CFP and DIF for fire and police facilities require demographic data on nonresidential development. This document includes nonresidential land use assumptions such as jobs and floor area within the City of Meridian, along with service units by residential size thresholds. The CFP and DIF are in the middle section of this report, organized by chapters pertaining to each public facility type (i.e., parks/recreation, police and fire). Each chapter documents existing infrastructure standards, the projected need for improvements to accommodate new development, the updated DIF compared to current fees, revenue projections and funding strategy for growth-related infrastructure, and a CFP listing specific improvements to be completed by the City of Meridian. Unique Requirements of the Idaho Impact Fee Act The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act has several requirements not common in the enabling legislation of other states. This overview summarizes these unique requirements, which have been met by the City of Meridian, as documented in this study. First, as specified in 67-8204(2) of the Idaho Act, “development impact fees shall be calculated on the basis of levels of service for public facilities . . . applicable to existing development as well as new growth and development.” Second, Idaho requires a Capital Improvements Plan (aka CFP in Meridian) [see Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 635 of 664 67-8208]. The CFP requirements are summarized in this report, with more detailed information maintained by City staff responsible for each type of infrastructure funded by impact fees. Third, the Idaho Act states the cost per service unit (i.e., impact fee) may not exceed the cost of growth-related system improvements divided by the number of projected service units attributable to new development [see 67-8204(16)]. Fourth, Idaho requires a proportionate share determination [see 67-8207]. The City of Meridian has complied by considering various types of applicable credits that may reduce the capital costs attributable to new development. Fifth, Idaho requires a Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee established to: a) assist in adopting land use assumptions, b) review the CFP and file written comments, c) monitor and evaluate implementation of the CFP, d) file periodic reports on perceived inequities in implementing the plan or imposing DIFs, and e) advise the governmental entity of the need to update the LUA, CFP and DIF study. Proposed Impact Fees Figure 1 summarizes the methods and cost components used for each type of public facility in Meridian’s 2019 impact fee study. City Council may change the proposed impact fees by eliminating infrastructure types, cost components, and/or specific capital improvements. If changes are made during the adoption process, Raftelis will update the fee study to be consistent with legislative policy decisions. Figure 1: Proposed Fee Methods and Cost Components Figure 2 summarizes proposed 2019 impact fees for new development in the City of Meridian. As discussed in Appendix A, Raftelis recommends that residential fees be imposed by dwelling size, based on climate-controlled space. In contrast, the 2013 study used a “one size fits all” approach, whereby all housing units paid the same DIF. The 2019 size threshold that matches the average fee according to the 2013 method is a residential dwelling with 2501 to 3200 square feet. As shown below, the average fee per dwelling increased from $2,017 in 2013 to $2,943 in 2019, which is an increase of $926 (46%). In addition, the 2019 study recommends nonresidential fees by two general categories, Commercial and All Other types of nonresidential development. Commercial includes all buildings within a shopping center, plus stand-alone retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All Other includes industrial, warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non-residential development not considered Commercial). The previous study had a single fee for all types of nonresidential development. The average fee per square foot for nonresidential development increased from $0.47 in 2013 to $0.56 in 2019, which is an increase of $0.09 per square foot (20%). Type of Impact Fee Service Area Incremental Expansion (current standards) Cost Allocation Parks and Recreation Facilities Citywide Park Improvements and Recreation Centers Residential Police Facilities Citywide Police Buildings Functional Population and Inbound Vehicle Trips to Nonresidential Development Fire Facilities Citywide Fire Stations and Apparatus Functional Population and Jobs Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 636 of 664 Figure 2: Proposed Impact Fee Schedule Citywide Service Area Park and Recreation Facilities Police Facilities Fire Facilities Proposed Total (2019) Existing Total (2013) Increase or Decrease % Change Residential (per housing unit) by Square Feet of Climate-Controlled Floor Area 1000 or less $781 $56 $258 $1,095 $2,017 ($922) -46% 1001 to 1500 $1,361 $98 $450 $1,909 $2,017 ($108) -5% 1501 to 2500 $1,770 $128 $585 $2,483 $2,017 $466 23% 2501 to 3200 $2,098 $152 $693 $2,943 $2,017 $926 46% 3201 or more $2,447 $177 $809 $3,433 $2,017 $1,416 70% Nonresidential (per square foot of building) Commercial $0.00 $0.24 $0.64 $0.88 $0.47 $0.41 87% All Other $0.00 $0.05 $0.41 $0.46 $0.47 ($0.01) -2% Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 637 of 664 Parks and Recreation Impact Fees The 2019 updated impact fee for parks and recreation facilities will enable Meridian to maintain current infrastructure standards for improved acres of parks and floor area of recreation buildings. All parks and recreation facilities included in the impact fees have a citywide service area. Cost components are allocated 100% percent to residential development. Figure PR1 documents recent cost factors per acre for park improvements and land. Based on four park site acquisitions, land for parks in Meridian is expected to cost approximately $61,000 per acre. City staff confirmed this land cost factor is reasonable and consistent with a recent land valuation of $65,000 per acre quoted for expansion of the City’s wastewater treatment plant. As shown in the table below, park improvements have been averaging $241,000 per acre. Figure PR1: Cost Factors for Park Improvements Citywide Parks Citywide parks have active amenities, such as a soccer/football/baseball fields, basketball/volleyball courts, and playgrounds that will attract patrons from the entire service area. As shown in Figure PR2, the current infrastructure standard is 2.91 acres per 1,000 residents. At the bottom of the table below is a needs analysis for citywide park improvements. To maintain current standards over the next ten years, Meridian will improve 102.3 acres of parks, expected to cost approximately $24.65 million. Estimated Costs Park Name Acres Land Improvements Discovery Park 27.00 $405,184 $8,261,000 Reta Huskey Park 8.92 $680,007 $1,495,126 Keith Bird Legacy Park 7.50 $1,274,995 $1,382,621 Hillsdale Park 9.53 $857,700 $1,622,282 Total Costs 52.95 $3,217,886 $12,761,029 Weighted Average Cost per Acre => $61,000 $241,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 638 of 664 Figure PR2: Citywide Parks Standards and Need for Improved Acres Existing Parks Improved Acres Julius M. Kleiner Park 58.2 Settlers Park 57.7 Heroes Park 30.1 Discovery Park 27.0 Fuller Park 23.2 Bear Creak Park 18.8 Tully Park 18.7 Storey Park & Bark Park 17.9 Gordon Harris Park 11.1 Hillsdale Park 9.5 Reta Husky Park 8.9 Jabil Soccer Fields 8.4 Keith Bird Legacy Park 7.5 Seasons Park 7.1 Chateau Park 6.7 Renaissance Park 6.5 Champion Park 6.0 Heritage MS Ball Fields 5.6 8th Street Park 2.8 Centennial Park 0.4 Total => 332.2 Allocation Factors for Parks Improvements Cost per Acre $241,000 Residential Proportionate Share 100% Service Units Population in 2019 114,102 Infrastructure Standards for Parks Improved Acres Residential (per person) 0.00291 Park Needs Year Population Improved Acres Base 2019 114,102 332.2 Year 1 2020 121,126 352.7 Year 2 2021 126,812 369.2 Year 3 2022 132,163 384.8 Year 4 2023 136,845 398.4 Year 5 2024 140,190 408.2 Year 10 2029 149,248 434.5 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 102.3 Growth Cost of Parks => $24,654,300 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 639 of 664 Recreation Buildings Figure PR3 lists current floor area for recreation centers. Based on input from the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, Meridian should expect to spend at least $225 per square foot to construct future recreation buildings. The lower portion of the table below indicates projected service units over the next ten years. To maintain current standards, Meridian will need 17,096 additional square feet of recreation building space, expected to cost approximately $3.85 million. Figure PR3: Infrastructure Standards and Needs for Recreation Buildings Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Because impact fees fully fund expected growth costs, there is no potential double-payment from other revenue sources. Proposed and Current Impact Fees At the top of Figure PR4 is a summary of the infrastructure needs due to growth. The projected need for acres of improved parks and square feet of recreation centers was addressed above. The need to acquire an additional five acres of land for parks is based on staff’s comparison of the existing inventory of undeveloped park sites (i.e., 97 acres) to the projected need for 102 additional acres over the next ten years. In addition to the growth cost of parks and recreation facilities, impact fees include the cost of professional services related to the CFP (authorized by the Idaho impact fee enabling legislation), less the projected park impact fee fund balance at the end of the current fiscal year. The net growth cost of $26,168,471 divided by the projected increase in population from 2019 to 2029, yields a cost of $744 per service unit. To be consistent with 67-8204(16) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act, impact fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per Existing Recreation Centers Square Feet Meridian Community Center 4,200 1 Meridian Homecourt 51,303 1 Total to Include in Current Standards 55,503 Allocation Factors for Recreation Centers Building plus Land Cost per Square Foot* $225 Residential Proportionate Share 100% 2019 Meridian Population 114,102 * Based on local developer estimate. Square Feet Residential (per person) 0.49 Recreation Center Needs Year Population Square Feet Base 2019 114,102 55,503 Year 1 2020 121,126 58,920 Year 2 2021 126,812 61,686 Year 3 2022 132,163 64,288 Year 4 2023 136,845 66,566 Year 5 2024 140,190 68,193 Year 10 2029 149,248 72,599 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 17,096 Growth Cost for Recreation Buildings => $3,847,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 640 of 664 dwelling. The row highlighted light green indicates the updated impact fee for an average-size dwelling, which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit. The latter was derived by dividing the projected increase in population by the projected increase in housing units over the next ten years. Please see Appendix A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.11). The blue arrow shown in the table below compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lower impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space. Figure PR4: Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Schedule 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Park Improvements acres 102 $241,000 $24,654,000 Park Land acres 5 $61,000 $305,000 Recreation Centers sq ft 17,096 $225 $3,847,000 Total => $28,806,000 Professional Services Cost => $18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 => -$2,656,132 Net Growth Cost => $26,168,471 Population Increase 2019 to 2029 35,146 Cost per Service Unit $744 Residential Impact Fees (per dwelling) Square Feet of Climate-Controlled Space Persons per Housing Unit Proposed Parks & Recreation Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $781 $1,113 ($332) -30% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $1,361 $1,113 $248 22% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $1,770 $1,113 $657 59% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $2,098 $1,113 $985 88% 3201 or more 3.29 $2,447 $1,113 $1,334 120% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $2,099 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 641 of 664 Forecast of Revenues for Parks and Recreation Figure PR5 indicates Meridian should receive approximately $26.15 million in parks and recreation impact fee revenue over the next ten years, if actual development matches the projections documented in Appendix A. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the need for infrastructure and impact fee revenue. Figure PR5: Projected Impact Fee Revenue Ten-Year Growth Cost => $26,168,471 Parks Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential $2,098 Year per housing unit Hsg Units Base 2019 42,345 Year 1 2020 44,445 Year 2 2021 46,145 Year 3 2022 47,746 Year 4 2023 49,145 Year 5 2024 50,145 Year 10 2029 54,811 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 Projected Revenue => $26,150,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 642 of 664 Comprehensive Financial Plan for Parks and Recreation As specified in 67-8203(29), development impact fees in Meridian exclude costs to provide better service to existing development. Existing parks and recreation centers are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. City staff recommends the improvements listed in Figure PR6 to accommodate additional development over the next ten years. Total impact fee funding of approximately $28.8 million represents a growth share of 80%, requiring approximately $7.28 million from other revenue sources over the next ten years. Figure PR6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Parks and Recreation Needed Planned Improved Acres 102.3 151 Building Sq Ft 17,096 22,000 FY Description Amount Units Cost 2020 West Meridian Regional Park - Design $500,000 2022 West Meridian Regional Park - Construction 47 acres $5,147,500 2021 New Community Center - Design & Construction Documents $500,000 2023 New Community Center - Construction 22,000 square feet $5,000,000 2027 Margaret Aldape Park - Design $994,000 2029 Margaret Aldape Park - Construction 70 acres $10,012,500 2021 Discovery Park, Phase 2 - Design $500,000 2023 Discovery Park, Phase 2 - Construction 25 $5,160,000 2023 Discovery Park, Phase 3 - Design $500,000 2025 Discovery Park, Phase 3 - Construction 25 acres $5,160,000 2022 Brundage/Graycliff Park - Design $185,000 2024 Brundage/Graycliff Park - Construction 9 acres $1,906,500 2021 Additional Land Acquisition 5 acres $525,000 Total Cost => $36,090,500 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees => $28,806,000 Growth Share => 80% Existing Development Share to be Funded by Other Revenues => $7,284,500 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 643 of 664 Police Impact Fees The City of Meridian will use an incremental expansion cost method to maintain existing infrastructure standards for police buildings. Proportionate Share In Meridian, police and fire infrastructure standards, projected needs, and development fees are based on both residential and nonresidential development. As shown in Figure P1, functional population was used to allocate public safety infrastructure and costs to residential and nonresidential development. Functional population is like the U.S. Census Bureau’s "daytime population," by accounting for people living and working in a jurisdiction. It also considers commuting patterns and time spent at residential versus nonresidential locations. Residents that don't work are assigned 20 hours per day to residential development and four hours per day to nonresidential development (annualized averages). Residents that work in Meridian are assigned 14 hours to residential development and 10 hours to nonresidential development. Residents that work outside Meridian are assigned 14 hours to residential development. Inflow commuters are assigned 10 hours to nonresidential development. Based on 2015 functional population data for Meridian, the cost allocation for residential development is 73% while nonresidential development accounts for 27% of the demand for fire infrastructure. Figure P1: Functional Population Excluded Costs Police development fees in Meridian exclude costs to meet existing needs and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards. The City’s CFP addresses the cost of these excluded items. Also excluded from the police development fees are public safety vehicles and Functional Population Cost Allocation for Public Safety Demand Units in 2015 Demand Person Residential Hours/Day Hours Population* 91,360 61% Residents Not Working 55,961 20 1,119,220 39% Resident Workers** 35,399 20% Worked in City** 7,231 14 101,234 80% Worked Outside City** 28,168 14 394,352 Residential Subtotal 1,614,806 Residential Share => 73% Nonresidential Non-working Residents 55,961 4 223,844 Jobs Located in City** 36,676 20% Residents Working in City** 7,231 10 72,310 80% Non-Resident Workers (inflow commuters) 29,445 10 294,450 Nonresidential Subtotal 590,604 Nonresidential Share => 27% TOTAL 2,205,410 * 2015 U.S. Census Bureau population estimate. ** 2015 Inflow/Outflow Analysis, OnTheMap web application, U.S. Census Bureau data for all jobs. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 644 of 664 equipment that do not meet the minimum useful life requirement in Idaho’s Impact Fee Act. Current Use and Available Capacity In Meridian, police facilities are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. Meridian has determined that police building space will require expansion to accommodate future development. Police Facilities, Service Units, and Standards Police development fees in Meridian are based on the same level of service provided to existing development. Figure P2 inventories police buildings in Meridian. Because the training center is also used by the Fire Department, floor area was reduced to indicate the portion used by Meridian police. For residential development, Meridian will use year-round population within the service areas to derive current police infrastructure standards. For nonresidential development, Meridian will use inbound, average-weekday, vehicle trips as the service unit. Figure P2 indicates the allocation of police building space to residential and nonresidential development, along with FY18-19 service units in Meridian. Vehicle trips to nonresidential development are based on floor area estimates for industrial, commercial, institutional, office and other services, as documented in the Land Use Assumptions. For police development fees, Meridian will use a cost factor of $333 per square foot (provided by City staff). The cost factor includes design and construction management. Based on FY18- 19 service units, the standard in Meridian is 0.26 square feet of police building floor area per person in the service area. For nonresidential development, Meridian’s standard is 0.06 square feet of police building per inbound vehicle trip to nonresidential development, on an average weekday. Figure P2: Meridian Police Buildings and Standards Police Infrastructure Needs Idaho’s development fee enabling legislation requires jurisdictions to convert land use assumptions into service units and the corresponding need for additional infrastructure over the next ten years. As shown in Figure P3, projected population and inbound nonresidential vehicle trips drive the need for police buildings and vehicles. Meridian will need 12,161 additional square feet of police buildings. The ten-year, growth-related capital cost of police buildings is approximately $4.05 million. Police Buildings Square Feet PSTC (half) 7,250 Admin Building 33,000 TOTAL 40,250 Source: City of Meridian Police Department. Police Buildings Standards Residential Nonresidential Proportionate Share (based on functional population) 73% 27% Growth Indicator Population Avg Wkdy Veh Trips to Nonres Dev Service Units in FY18-19 114,102 179,607 Square Feet per Service Unit 0.26 0.06 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 645 of 664 Figure P3: Police Facilities Needed to Accommodate Growth Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to police facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Based on the City of Meridian’s legislative policy decision to fully fund expected growth costs from impact fees, there is no potential double-payment from other revenue sources. Police Development Fees Infrastructure standards and cost factors for police are summarized in the upper portion of Figure P4. The conversion of infrastructure needs and costs per service unit into a cost per development unit is also shown in the table below. For residential development, average number of persons in a housing unit provides the necessary conversion. Persons per housing unit, by size threshold are documented in the Land Use Assumptions. For nonresidential development, trip generation rates by type of development are from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 2017). To ensure the analysis is based on travel demand associated with nonresidential development within Meridian, trip ends (entering and exiting) are converted to inbound trips using a basic 50% adjustment factor. In addition to the growth cost of police facilities, impact fees include the cost of professional services related to the CFP (authorized by the Idaho Impact Fee Act), less the projected police impact fee fund balance expected at the end of the current fiscal year. The net growth cost of $2,633,140, divided by the projected increase in population from 2019 to 2029, yields a cost of $54 per residential service unit. Impact fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per development unit. The row highlighted light blue indicates the updated police fee for an average-size dwelling is $152 (truncated), which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit. The latter was derived by dividing the projected increase in population by the projected increase in housing units over the next ten years. Please see Appendix A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.11). The blue arrow shown in the table below compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact Police Infrastructure Standards and Capital Costs Buildings - Residential 0.26 Sq Ft per person Buildings - Nonresidential 0.06 Sq Ft per trip Police Buildings Cost $333 per square foot Infrastructure Needed Veh Trips to Police Year Population Nonres in Meridian Buildings (sq ft) Base 2019 114,102 179,607 40,250 Year 1 2020 121,126 184,062 42,328 Year 2 2021 126,812 188,819 44,080 Year 3 2022 132,163 193,625 45,749 Year 4 2023 136,845 198,637 47,258 Year 5 2024 140,190 203,714 48,427 Year 10 2029 149,248 231,013 52,411 Ten-Yr Increase 35,146 51,406 12,161 Growth Cost of Police Buildings => $4,050,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 646 of 664 fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lower impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space. Figure P4: Police Impact Fees per Development Unit Projected Revenue for Police Facilities Over the next ten years, police development fee revenue is projected to approximately match the growth cost of police infrastructure, which has a ten-year total cost of approximately $2.6 million (see the upper portion of Figure P5). The table below indicates Meridian should receive 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Police Buildings square feet 12,161 $333 $4,050,000 Outdoor Training Facility 23% $690,000 Total => $4,740,000 Professional Services Cost => $18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 => -$2,125,463 Net Growth Cost => $2,633,140 Residential 73% Nonresidential 27% Residential $1,922,192 Nonresidential $710,948 Cost per Service Unit Residential (persons) 35,146 $54 Nonresidential (vehicle trips) 51,406 $13 Residential Impact Fees (per housing unit) Square Feet of Climate- Controlled Space Persons per Housing Unit Proposed Police Facilities Fees Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $56 $223 ($167) -75% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $98 $223 ($125) -56% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $128 $223 ($95) -43% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $152 $223 ($71) -32% 3201 or more 3.29 $177 $223 ($46) -21% Nonresidential Impact Fees (square foot of building) Type Avg Wkdy Veh Trip Ends per KSF Trip Adjustment Factors Proposed Police Facilities Fees Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change Commercial 37.75 50% $0.24 $0.12 $0.12 100% All Other 9.00 50% $0.05 $0.12 ($0.07) -58% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $154 Nonresidential Floor Area Increase 2019 to 2029 6,960,000 Impact Fee per Square Foot $0.10 Cost Allocation Allocated Cost by Land Use Growth 2019 to 2029 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 647 of 664 approximately $2.5 million in police development fee revenue, if actual development matches the land use assumptions. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the need for infrastructure and development fee revenue. Figure P5: Police Development Fee Revenue Comprehensive Financial Plan for Police City staff recommends the improvements listed in Figure P6 to accommodate additional development over the next ten years. Impact fees will pay for approximately $4.74 million, representing a growth share of 59%. Other revenue sources will be required to fund approximately $3.26 million in police facilities over the next ten years. Figure P6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Police Ten-Year Growth Cost of Police Facilities => $2,633,140 Police Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential Industrial Commercial Institutional Office & Other Services $152 $50 $240 $50 $50 per housing unit per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft Year Hsg Units KSF KSF KSF KSF Base 2019 42,345 9,070 4,890 4,450 5,890 Year 1 2020 44,445 9,300 5,010 4,560 6,040 Year 2 2021 46,145 9,540 5,140 4,680 6,190 Year 3 2022 47,746 9,780 5,270 4,800 6,350 Year 10 2029 54,811 11,670 6,290 5,720 7,580 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 2,600 1,400 1,270 1,690 Projected Revenue => $1,895,000 $130,000 $336,000 $64,000 $85,000 Total Projected Revenues (rounded) => $2,510,000 Buildings Description Square Feet Total Cost Training Facility Classroom 3,000 $1,000,000 Administrative Building Expansion Phase 1 3,000 $1,000,000 Administrative Building Expansion Phase 2 3,000 $1,000,000 Substation 6,000 $2,000,000 Total => 15,000 $5,000,000 Cost per Square Foot => $333 Outdoor Facilities Description Cost Outdoor Training Facility $3,000,000 Total => $8,000,000 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees => $4,740,000 Growth Share Funded by Impact Fees => 59% Share to be Funded by Other Revenues => $3,260,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 648 of 664 Fire Impact Fees After evaluating calls for service data to general types of development, Raftelis recommends functional population to allocate the cost of additional fire infrastructure to residential and nonresidential development (see Figure P1 above and related text). Fire development fees in Meridian are based on the same level of service currently provided to existing development. Existing Standards for Fire Facilities Figure F1 inventories Fire Department buildings in Meridian. Because the training center is also used by the Police Department, floor area was reduced to indicate the portion used by Meridian Fire Department. The standard for fire buildings is 0.44 square feet per person and 0.46 square feet per job. Figure F1: Existing Fire Buildings Development fees will be used to expand the fleet of fire vehicles and purchase communications equipment with a useful life of at least ten years. Figure F2 lists fire vehicles and communications equipment currently used by the Meridian Fire Department. Following the same methodology used for fire buildings, the total cost of fire vehicles and equipment was allocated 73% to residential and 27% to nonresidential development in Meridian. As shown below, every additional resident will require Meridian to spend approximately $62 for additional fire vehicles and equipment. Every additional job requires the City to spend approximately $64 for additional fire vehicles and equipment. Fire Stations Square Feet Fire Station # 1 (540 E. Franklin Rd) 11,700 Fire Station # 3 (3545 N. Locust Grove) 7,040 Fire Station # 2 (2401 N. Ten Mile Rd) 6,770 Fire Station # 4 (2515 S. Eagle Rd) 7,077 Fire Station # 5 (N. Linder Rd) 7,360 Fire Station # 6 0 PSTC (half) 7,250 Training Tower @ Station #1 6,523 Fire Safety Center (1901 Leighfield Dr) 1,744 Fire Admin Space (City Hall) 13,511 TOTAL 68,975 Allocation Factors for Fire Stations Residential Share 73% Functional Nonresidential Share 27% Population Population in 2019 114,102 Jobs in 2019 40,575 Infrastructure Standards for Fire Stations Square Feet Residential (per person) 0.44 Nonresidential (per job) 0.46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 649 of 664 Figure F2: Existing Standards for Fire Vehicles Fire Infrastructure Needs The City’s Comprehensive Plan and website describe existing fire facilities. In Meridian, fire facilities are fully utilized and there is no surplus capacity for future development. The City has determined that fire facilities will require expansion to accommodate future development. As specified in 67-8203(29), development impact fees in Meridian exclude costs to repair, upgrade, update, expand or replace existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development. To accommodate projected development over the next ten years, Meridian will expand fire buildings by 20,859 square feet and spend $2.93 million to expand the fleet of fire vehicles. Fire Apparatus and Equipment Coding Total Cost Engines FE $5,148,000 Ladder Truck LT $1,600,000 Pickup Trucks PT $539,659 Other Vehicles OV $287,700 Communications Equipment CE $2,112,284 TOTAL $9,687,643 Allocation Factors for Fire Apparatus and Communications Residential Share 73% Functional Nonresidential Share 27% population Population in 2019 114,102 Jobs in 2019 40,575 Infrastructure Standards for Fire Apparatus and Communications Apparatus and Communications Residential (per person) $61.98 Nonresidential (per job) $64.46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 650 of 664 Figure F3: Growth-Related Need for Fire Facilities Revenue Credit Evaluation Currently the City of Meridian does not have any outstanding debt related to fire facilities. Therefore, a revenue credit for bond payments is not applicable. As shown in the cash flow analysis below, projected impact fee revenue matches the growth cost of new facilities. Based on the City of Meridian’s legislative policy decision to fully fund expected growth costs from impact fees, there is no potential double-payment from other revenue sources. Current and Proposed Fire Impact Fees Figure F4 indicates proposed impact fees for fire facilities in Meridian. Residential fees are derived from average number of persons per housing unit and the cost per person. Nonresidential fees are based on average jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area and the cost per job. The cost factors for fire facilities are summarized in the upper portion of Figure F4. Persons per unit, by dwelling size, are based on local data, as discussed in the Land Use Assumptions. For nonresidential development, average jobs per thousand square feet of floor area are also documented in the Land Use Assumptions. To be consistent with 67-8204(16) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act, impact fees are derived using the cost per service unit multiplied by the average number of service units per development unit. The row highlighted light orange indicates the updated impact fee for an average-size dwelling is $693 (truncated), which assumes 2.82 persons per housing unit and a cost of $246 per additional person. Please see Appendix A for supporting documentation on the average number of persons by dwelling size in Meridian (note: the person per housing unit values shown in Figure A4 were adjusted downward by multiplying the value for each size threshold by the ratio of 2.82 divided by 3.11). The blue arrow shown in the table below Fire Infrastructure Standards and Capital Costs Fire Station s - Residential 0.44 Sq Ft per household Fire Station s - Nonresidential 0.46 Sq Ft per job Fire Station Cost $535 per square foot Fire Apparatus/Communications - Residential $61.98 Cost per person Fire Apparatus/Communications - Nonres $64.46 Cost per job Facilities Needed Population Meridian Sq Ft of Fire Fire Apparatus and Year Jobs Stations Communications Base 2019 114,102 40,575 68,975 $9,687,643 Year 1 2020 121,126 41,612 72,551 $10,189,837 Year 2 2021 126,812 42,677 75,549 $10,610,907 Year 3 2022 132,163 43,768 78,411 $11,012,890 Year 4 2023 136,845 44,887 80,990 $11,375,214 Year 5 2024 140,190 46,035 82,993 $11,656,541 Year 6 2025 143,578 47,214 85,030 $11,942,532 Year 7 2026 144,996 48,421 86,209 $12,108,228 Year 8 2027 146,413 49,659 87,403 $12,275,860 Year 9 2028 147,831 50,929 88,611 $12,445,618 Year 10 2029 149,248 52,231 89,834 $12,617,376 Ten -Yr Increase 35,146 11,656 20,859 $2,929,733 Cost of Fire Stations => $11,160,000 Cost of Fire Apparatus and Communications => $2,930,000 Total Growth Cost => $14,090,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 651 of 664 compares the updated fee for the average size dwelling to the average impact fee per housing unit based on the allocation methodology from the 2013 impact fee study. In contrast to the “one size fits all” flat fee of $695 for all dwellings, the updated methodology proposes lower impact fees for smaller, more affordable units, along with a higher fee for dwellings with 3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space. Proposed nonresidential development fees for fire facilities are shown in the column with light orange shading. The 2019 study recommends nonresidential fees by two general categories, Commercial and All Other types of nonresidential development. Commercial includes all buildings within a shopping center, plus stand-alone retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All Other includes industrial, warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non-residential development not considered Commercial). The previous study had a single fee for all types of nonresidential development. The average fire impact fee per square foot for nonresidential development increased from $0.35 in 2013 to $0.46 in 2019. Based on the 2019 fee schedule, a new warehouse would be in the category of All Other. This fee category assumes 1.50 jobs per thousand square feet of floor area. To convert the fee to an amount per square foot, we divide by 1000 then multiply by the cost factor per job ($274). The result is $0.41 (truncated) per square foot. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 652 of 664 Figure F4: Fee Schedule for Fire Facilities 2019 Input Variables Infrastructure Type Infrastructure Units Growth Quantity Over Ten Years Cost Factor per Unit Growth Cost (rounded) Fire Stations square feet 20,859 $535 $11,160,000 Fire Apparatus dollars $2,930,000 Total => $14,090,000 Professional Services Cost => $18,603 Less Projected Fund Balance 9/30/2019 => -$2,241,236 Net Growth Cost => $11,867,367 Residential 73% Nonresidential 27% Residential $8,663,178 Nonresidential $3,204,189 Cost per Service Unit Residential (persons) 35,146 $246 Nonresidential (jobs) 11,656 $274 Residential Impact Fees (per housing unit) Square Feet of Climate- Controlled Space Persons per Hsg Unit Proposed Fire Facilities Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change 1000 or less 1.05 $258 $681 ($423) -62% 1001 to 1500 1.83 $450 $681 ($231) -34% 1501 to 2500 2.38 $585 $681 ($96) -14% 2501 to 3200 2.82 $693 $681 $12 2% 3201 or more 3.29 $809 $681 $128 19% Nonresidential Impact Fees (square foot of building) Type Jobs per 1,000 Sq Ft Proposed Fire Facilities Fee Current Fees Increase or Decrease % Change Commercial 2.34 $0.64 $0.35 $0.29 83% All Other 1.50 $0.41 $0.35 $0.06 17% Comparison to 2013 Method Housing Unit Increase 2019 to 2029 12,466 Impact Fee per Housing Unit $695 Nonresidential Sq Ft Increase 2019 to 2029 6,960,000 Impact Fee per Square Foot) $0.46 Cost Allocation Allocated Cost by Land Use Growth 2019 to 2029 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 653 of 664 Projected Revenue for Fire Facilities Over the next ten years, fire development fee revenue is projected to approximately match the growth cost of fire infrastructure, which has a ten-year growth cost of $11,867,367 (see the upper portion of Figure F5). The table below indicates Meridian should receive approximately $11.82 million in fire development fee revenue, if actual development matches the land use assumptions. The revenue projection assumes implementation of the proposed fire fees and that development from 2019 to 2029 is consistent with the land use assumptions described in Appendix A. To the extent the rate of development either accelerates or slows down, there will be a corresponding change in the development fee revenue. Figure F5: Fire Development Fee Revenue Ten-Year Cost of Growth-Related Fire Facilities => $11,867,367 Fire Impact Fee Revenue Average Residential Industrial Commercial Institutional Office and Other Services $693 $410 $640 $410 $410 Year per housing unit per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft per 1000 Sq Ft Hsg Units KSF KSF KSF KSF Base 2019 42,345 9,070 4,890 4,450 5,890 Year 1 2020 44,445 9,300 5,010 4,560 6,040 Year 2 2021 46,145 9,540 5,140 4,680 6,190 Year 3 2022 47,746 9,780 5,270 4,800 6,350 Year 4 2023 49,145 10,030 5,410 4,920 6,510 Year 5 2024 50,145 10,290 5,550 5,040 6,680 Year 6 2025 51,159 10,550 5,690 5,170 6,850 Year 7 2026 52,071 10,820 5,830 5,310 7,030 Year 8 2027 52,984 11,100 5,980 5,440 7,210 Year 9 2028 53,898 11,380 6,140 5,580 7,390 Year 10 2029 54,811 11,670 6,290 5,720 7,580 Ten-Yr Increase 12,466 2,600 1,400 1,270 1,690 Projected Revenue => $8,640,000 $1,070,000 $900,000 $520,000 $690,000 Total Projected Revenues (rounded) => $11,820,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 654 of 664 Comprehensive Financial Plan for Fire Facilities Using impact fee funding over the next ten years, Figure F6 indicates that Meridian plans to expand fire station floor area by approximately 25,000 square feet. Meridian will also purchase additional fire vehicles costing approximately $4.38 million. The total cost for these projects is approximately $17.75 million. The growth cost funded by impact fees is $14.09 million over ten years, which is 79% of the total cost. An additional $3.66 million in other revenues will be required to fully fund the Fire Department’s CFP for growth-related improvements. Figure F6: Summary of Ten-Year CFP for Fire Facilities Fire Stations Square Feet Total Cost Purchase Land for Fire Station #7 $500,000 Design Fire Station #7 $800,000 Build Fire Station #7 12,500 $5,387,500 Purchase Land for Fire Station #8 $250,000 Design Fire Station #8 $800,000 Build Fire Station #8 12,500 $5,637,500 Total => 25,000 $13,375,000 Cost per Sq Ft Based on Stations #7 & #8 => $535 Fire Apparatus Units Total Cost Quint Truck 1 $1,600,000 Heavy Rescue Vehicle 1 $800,000 Fire Engine Station #7 1 $572,000 Fire Engine Station #8 1 $572,000 Vehicle for EMS Captain 1 $63,000 Vehicle for Fire Inspector/Investigator 1 $63,000 Vehicle for Battalion Chiefs 1 $63,000 Alternative Response Unit 2 $642,000 Total => 9 $4,375,000 Total => $17,750,000 Growth Cost Funded by Impact Fees => $14,090,000 Growth Share => 79% Funded by Other Revenues => $3,660,000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 655 of 664 Fee Implementation and Administration Consistent with best practices and Idaho’s enabling legislation, Meridian updates capital improvements and development impact fees every five years. In addition, some jurisdictions make annual adjustments for inflation using a price index like the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index published by McGraw-Hill Companies. This index could be applied to the adopted impact fee schedule, reviewed by the Advisory Committee, then approved by City Council. If cost estimates or demand indicators change significantly, the City should redo the fee calculations. Another best practice is to spend impact fees as soon as possible, tracking funds according to first in, first out accounting, using aggregate rather than project-specific tracking. Impact fees and accrued interest are maintained in a separate fund that is not comingled with other revenues. In Idaho, an annual report is mandatory, indicating impact fee collections, expenditures, and fund balances by type of infrastructure. Cost of CFP Preparation As stated in Idaho’s enabling legislation, a surcharge on the collection of development impact fees may be used to fund the cost of preparing the CFP that is attributable to the impact fee determination. This minor cost ($18,603 per infrastructure type) was added to the 2019 Meridian impact fees. Development Categories Proposed impact fees for residential development are by square feet of climate-controlled space, excluding porches, garage and unfinished space, such as basements and attics. For an apartment building, the average size threshold is derived for an entire building. The recommended procedure is to identify the aggregate climate-controlled floor area for the entire building, divided by the number of dwelling units in the building. Apartment complexes and some residential development provide common areas for use by residents, such as exercise rooms and clubhouses. Common areas for the private use of residents are ancillary uses to the dwelling units and not subject to additional impact fees. Also, Section 67-8204(20) of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act states that an addition to an existing residential building, that does not increase the number of service units, should be exempt from additional impact fees. Given the relatively small fee increase across size thresholds and the high transaction cost to assess fees for additions to residential buildings, Raftelis recommends that additions to residential buildings should not be subject to additional impact fees. The two general nonresidential development categories in the proposed impact fee schedule can be used for all new construction within Meridian. Nonresidential development categories represent general groups of land uses that share similar average weekday vehicle trip generation rates and job density (i.e. jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area), as documented in Appendix A. “Commercial” includes retail development and eating/drinking places (i.e., restaurants and bars). All land uses within a shopping center will pay the impact fee for commercial development. All Other includes industrial, warehousing, offices, business services, and personal services (i.e., every type of non-residential development not considered Commercial). An applicant may submit an independent study to document unique demand indicators (i.e., service units per development unit). The independent study should be prepared by a professional engineer or certified planner and use the same type of input variables as those in Meridian’s impact fee study. For residential development, impact fees are based on average persons per Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 656 of 664 housing unit. For nonresidential development, impact fees are based on inbound average weekday vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area, and the average number of jobs per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The independent fee study will be reviewed by City staff and can be accepted as the basis for a unique fee calculation. If staff determines the independent fee study is not reasonable, the applicant may appeal the administrative decision to Meridian’s elected officials for their consideration. Credits and Reimbursements A general requirement that is common to impact fee methodologies is the evaluation of credits. A revenue credit may be necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from one-time impact fees plus on-going payment of other revenues that may also fund growth-related capital improvements. The determination of revenue credits is dependent upon the impact fee methodology used in the cost analysis. Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits should be addressed in the ordinance that establishes the impact fees. Project-level improvements, required as part of the development approval process, are not eligible for credits against impact fees. If a developer constructs a system improvement included in the fee calculations, it will be necessary to either reimburse the developer or provide a credit against the fees. The latter option is more difficult to administer because it creates unique fees for specific geographic areas. Based on national experience, Raftelis recommends a jurisdiction establish a reimbursement agreement with the developer that constructs a system improvement. The reimbursement agreement should be limited to a payback period of no more than ten years and the City should not pay interest on the outstanding balance. The developer must provide documentation of the actual cost incurred for the system improvement. The City should only agree to pay the lesser of the actual construction cost or the estimated cost used in the impact fee analysis. If the City pays more than the cost used in the fee analysis, there will be insufficient fee revenue. Reimbursement agreements should only obligate the City to reimburse developers annually according to actual fee collections from the benefiting area. The supporting documentation for each type of impact fee describes the types of infrastructure considered to be system improvements. Site specific credits or developer reimbursements for one type of system improvement does not negate an impact fee for other system improvements. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 657 of 664 Appendix A: Land Use Assumptions Appendix A contains the land use assumptions for Meridian’s 2019 DIF update. The CFP must be developed in coordination with the Advisory Committee and utilize land use assumptions most recently adopted by the appropriate land planning agency [see Idaho Code 67-8206(2)]. Idaho’s enabling legislation defines land use assumptions as: “a description of the service area and projections of land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a 20-year period.” Service Areas To ensure a substantial benefit to new development paying impact fees, the City of Meridian has evaluated collection and expenditure zones for public facilities that may have distinct benefit or service areas. In the City of Meridian, impact fees for parks/recreation, police and fire facilities will benefit new development throughout the entire incorporated area. Raftelis recommends one citywide service area for Meridian impact fees. Idaho Code 67-8203(26) defines “service area” as: “Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity, or by intergovernmental agreement, in which specific public facilities provide service to development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles, or both.” The City’s adopted Future Land Use Map indicates land uses, densities, and intensities of development, as required by Idaho Code 67-8203(16). The service area is defined as all land within the city limits of Meridian, as modified over time. Summary of Growth Indicators Population, housing unit, jobs and nonresidential floor area are the “service units” or demand indicators that will be used to evaluate the need for growth-related infrastructure. The demographic data and development projections discussed below will also be used to demonstrate proportionality. All land use assumptions are consistent with Meridian’s Comprehensive Plan. In contrast to the Comprehensive Plan, which is more general and has a long-range horizon, development impact fees require more specific quantitative analysis and have a short-range focus. Typically, impact fee studies look out five to ten years, with the expectation that fees will be periodically updated (e.g. every 5 years). Infrastructure standards will be calibrated using fiscal year 2018-19 data. In Meridian, the fiscal year begins on October 1 st . Key development projections for the City of Meridian are housing units and nonresidential floor area, as shown in Figure A1. These projections will be used to estimate development fee revenue and to indicate the anticipated need for growth-related infrastructure. The goal is to have reasonable projections without being overly concerned with precision. Because impact fee methods are designed to reduce sensitivity to development projections in the determination of the proportionate-share fee amounts, if actual development is slower than projected, fee revenue will decline, but so will the need for growth-related infrastructure. In contrast, if development is faster than anticipated, the City will receive an increase in fee revenue, but will also need to accelerate infrastructure improvements to keep pace with the actual rate of development. Population and housing unit projections were provided by City staff. During the next ten years, the impact fee study assumes Meridian’s population increase at a growth rate of approximately 2.7% per year. Over the next ten years, jobs are expected to increase at a growth rate of approximately 2.6% per year, which is from the Communities in Motion employment forecast from 2010 to 2040. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 658 of 664 Figure A1: Annual Development Projections Proportionate Share The term “proportionate” is found throughout Idaho’s Development Impact Fee Act. For example, Idaho Code 67-8202(2) states the intent to, “Promote orderly growth and development by establishing uniform standards by which local governments may require that those who benefit from new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new public facilities needed to serve new growth and development;” Because DIFS must be proportionate, jurisdictions derive fees for various land uses per unit of development, as stated in Idaho Code 67-8404(17). “A development impact fee ordinance shall include a schedule of development impact fees for various land uses per unit of development. The ordinance shall provide that a developer shall have the right to elect to pay a project's proportionate share of system improvement costs by payment of development impact fees according to the fee schedule as full and complete payment of the development project's proportionate share of system improvement costs…” Meridian, Idaho FY18-19 FY19-20 FY20-21 FY21-22 FY23-24 FY28-29 FY38-39 Fiscal Year Begins Oct 1st 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024 2029 2039 Base Yr 1 2 3 5 10 20 Total Population City of Meridian 114,102 121,126 126,812 132,163 140,190 149,248 164,187 Annual Increase 7.2% 6.2% 4.7% 4.2% 2.4% 1.0% 1.0% Housing Units Single Family 35,911 37,649 39,056 40,381 42,367 46,229 54,516 Annual Increase 5.6% 4.8% 3.7% 3.4% 2.0% 1.7% 1.7% Multi-Family 6,434 6,796 7,089 7,365 7,778 8,582 10,322 Annual Increase 6.6% 5.6% 4.3% 3.9% 2.3% 1.9% 1.9% Total Housing Units 42,345 44,445 46,145 47,746 50,145 54,811 64,838 Annual Increase 5.7% 5.0% 3.8% 3.5% 2.0% 1.7% 1.7% Persons per Hsg Unit 2.69 2.73 2.75 2.77 2.80 2.72 2.53 Jobs (by place of work) Industrial 7,501 7,693 7,890 8,092 8,511 9,656 12,430 Commercial 11,455 11,748 12,048 12,356 12,996 14,746 18,982 Institutional 4,133 4,238 4,347 4,458 4,689 5,320 6,848 Office & Other Services 17,486 17,933 18,392 18,862 19,839 22,509 28,976 Total Jobs 40,575 41,612 42,677 43,768 46,035 52,231 67,236 Annual Increase 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% Jobs to Housing Ratio 0.96 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.04 Nonresidential Floor Area (square feet in thousands) Industrial 9,070 9,300 9,540 9,780 10,290 11,670 15,030 Commercial 4,890 5,010 5,140 5,270 5,550 6,290 8,100 Institutional 4,450 4,560 4,680 4,800 5,040 5,720 7,370 Office & Other Services 5,890 6,040 6,190 6,350 6,680 7,580 9,760 Total KSF 24,300 24,910 25,550 26,200 27,560 31,260 40,260 Avg Sq Ft Per Job 599 599 599 599 599 598 599 Avg Jobs per KSF 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 659 of 664 Even though formulas and methods are not specified in Idaho’s Development Impact Fee Act, DIFs must be reasonable and fair, as stated in section 67-8201(1). “All development impact fees shall be based on a reasonable and fair formula or method under which the development impact fee imposed does not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the governmental entity in the provision of system improvements to serve the new development. In the following sections, Raftelis describes reasonable and fair formulas and methods that can be used in the City of Meridian to make DIFs proportionate by size of residential development and type of nonresidential development. Residential Development and Persons per Housing Unit The 2010 census did not obtain detailed information using a “long-form” questionnaire. Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau has switched to a continuous monthly mailing of surveys, known as the American Community Survey (ACS), which is limited by sample-size constraints. For example, data on detached housing units are now combined with attached single units (commonly known as townhouses). Part of the rationale for imposing fees by size threshold, as discussed further below, is to address this ACS data limitation. Because townhouses and apartments generally have fewer bedrooms and less floor area than detached units, size thresholds makes fees more proportionate and facilitates construction of affordable units. As shown Figure A2, dwellings with a single unit per structure (detached and attached) average 2.85 persons per housing unit. Dwellings in structures with two or more units average 2.00 year-round residents per unit. This category includes duplexes, which have two dwellings on a single land parcel. According to the latest available data, the overall average is 2.76 year-round residents per housing unit and 2.82 persons per household. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a household is a housing unit that is occupied by year-round residents. Development fees often use per capita standards and persons per housing unit, or persons per household, to derive proportionate-share fee amounts. Raftelis recommends that fees for residential development in the City of Meridian be imposed according to the number of year-round residents per housing unit. Figure A2: Year-Round Persons per Unit by Type of Housing Demand Indicators by Dwelling Size Impact fees must be proportionate to the demand for infrastructure. Because the average number of persons per housing unit has a strong, positive correlation to the number of bedrooms, Raftelis recommends residential fee schedules that increase by dwelling size. Custom tabulations of Meridian Population and Housing Characteristics Units in Structure Persons House- Persons per Housing Persons per Housing Vacancy holds Household Units Housing Unit Mix Rate Single Unit * 81,202 27,793 2.92 28,448 2.85 89% 2% All Other ** 6,765 3,379 2.00 3,378 2.00 11% 0% Subtotal 87,967 31,172 2.82 31,826 2.76 2% Group Quarters 4,864 TOTAL 92,831 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, Tables B25024, B25032, B25033, and B26001. *Single unit includes attached and detached. ** All other includes multifamily and mobile homes. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 660 of 664 demographic data by bedroom range can be created from individual survey responses provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, in files known as Public Use Micro-Data Samples (PUMS). PUMS files are only available for areas of at least 100,000 persons, with the City of Meridian included in Public Use Micro-Data Area (PUMA) 701. As shown in Figure A3, Raftelis derived average persons per housing unit by bedroom range, from un-weighted PUMS data. The recommended multipliers by bedroom range (shown below) are for all types of housing units, adjusted to the control totals for Meridian. As shown above, the U.S. Census Bureau indicates that Meridian averages 2.76 persons per housing unit. Figure A3: Persons by Bedroom Range DIFs based on size of dwelling are generally easier to administer when expressed in square feet of finished living space for all types of housing. Basing fees on floor area rather than the number of bedrooms eliminates the need for criteria to make administrative decisions on whether a room qualifies as a bedroom. To translate dwelling size by number of bedrooms into square feet of living space, Raftelis used the 2018 Ada County Assessor’s residential database to derive average square feet by bedroom range (i.e., two, three, and four or more bedrooms). Raftelis recommends that DIFs for residential development be imposed based on finished square feet of living space, excluding garages, patios and porches that are not climate-controlled. Average floor area and number of persons by bedroom range are plotted in Figure A4, with a logarithmic trend line derived from actual averages for Meridian. Using the trend line formula shown in the chart, Raftelis derived the estimated average number of persons, by dwelling size, in size thresholds like those currently used by the City of Boise. As shown with yellow highlighting, the lowest floor area range (1000 square feet or less) has an estimated average of 1.16 persons per housing unit. At the upper end of the floor area range (3201 or more square feet of climate-controlled space), the average is 3.63 persons per housing unit. For a building with more than one residential unit, City staff will determine the average size threshold for the entire building by dividing total climate-controlled floor area by the total number of dwellings in the building. Recommended Multipliers (2) Bedrooms Persons Housing Persons per Housing (1) Units (1) Housing Unit Mix 0-1 48 39 1.30 2.8% 2 353 194 1.92 14.1% 3 1,598 678 2.48 49.2% 4+ 1,614 467 3.64 33.9% Total 3,613 1,378 2.76 100.0% (1) American Community Survey, Public Use Microdat a Sample for ID PUMA 701 (2012-2016 5-year database). (2) Recommendedpersons per housing unit are scaled to make the average derived from PUMS survey data match the control total for Meridian (i.e. 2.76 persons per housing unit). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 661 of 664 Figure A4: Persons by Square Feet of Living Space Jobs and Nonresidential Development In addition to data on residential development, the calculation of impact fees requires data on nonresidential development. Raftelis uses the term “jobs” to refer to employment by place of work. In Figure A5, color shading indicates nonresidential development prototypes the will be used by Raftelis to derive average weekday vehicle trips and nonresidential floor area. For future industrial development, Raftelis averaged Light Industrial (ITE code 110) and Warehousing (ITE 150) to derive an average of 1,209 square feet per industrial job. The prototype for future commercial development is an average-size Shopping Center (ITE code 820). Commercial development (i.e., retail and eating/drinking places) is assumed to average 427 square feet per job. For institutional development, such as schools, daycare and churches, the impact fee study assumes an average of 1,076 square feet per job. The prototype for institutional development is an Elementary School (ITE 520). For office and other services, an average-size Office (ITE 710) is the prototype for future development, averaging of 337 square feet per job. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 662 of 664 Figure A5: Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends Figure A6 indicates 2015 estimates of jobs and nonresidential floor area within Meridian. Job estimates, by type of nonresidential, are from Meridian’s Work Area Profile, available through the U.S. Census Bureau’s online web application known as OnTheMap. The number of jobs in Meridian is based on quarterly workforce reports supplied by employers. Floor area estimates are derived from the number of jobs by type of nonresidential development and average square feet per job ratios, as discussed on the previous page. Total floor area of nonresidential development in Meridian is consistent with property tax parcel information obtained from Ada County. ITE Land Use / Size Demand Wkdy Trip Ends Wkdy Trip Ends Emp Per Sq Ft Code Unit Per Dmd Unit* Per Employee* Dmd Unit Per Emp 110 Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 4.96 3.05 1.63 615 140 Manufacturing 1,000 Sq Ft 3.93 2.47 1.59 628 150 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 1.74 5.05 0.34 2,902 520 Elementary School 1,000 Sq Ft 19.52 21.00 0.93 1,076 530 High School 1,000 Sq Ft 14.07 22.25 0.63 1,581 610 Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 10.72 3.79 2.83 354 620 Nursing Home 1,000 Sq Ft 6.64 2.91 2.28 438 710 General Office 1,000 Sq Ft 9.74 3.28 2.97 337 760 Research & Dev Center 1,000 Sq Ft 11.26 3.29 3.42 292 770 Business Park 1,000 Sq Ft 12.44 4.04 3.08 325 820 Shopping Center (avg size) 1,000 Sq Ft 37.75 16.11 2.34 427 857 Discount Club 1,000 Sq Ft 41.80 32.21 1.30 771 Industrial in Meridian 1,000 Sq Ft 3.35 4.05 0.83 1,209 * Trip Generation , Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 663 of 664 Figure A6: Jobs and Floor Area Estimates Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 28, 2019 – Page 664 of 664 LjQ/rE IDIZ IAN,+-- �J CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 28, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 13 Project File Name/Number: Item Title: Future Meeting Topics Meeting Notes: