The URL can be used to link to this page

2011-04-12~~E IDIAN~-~- IDAHO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 6:00 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird XMayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance By Ryan Price of Scout Troop #140 3. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 4. Consent Agenda Approved A. Development Agreement for Approval: AZ 08-007 The Shops at Victory by DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Eagle Road: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT Ada County) to C-C Zoning District B. Approval of New Beer License for Meridian BBQ LLC, dba Dickey's BBQ Pit; located at 2845 E. Overland Rd. Beer License Expiration Date: 4130111 C. Approval of 2012 Beer, Wine, Liquor License Renewals as follows: Firehouse Pub & Grill 1767 W. Franklin Rd. BIWIL 127 Club 127 E. Idaho BIWIL The New Frontier 116 E Broadway BIWIL Famous Daves 3510 Eagle Rd. BIW1L Schooners 499 S. Main BIUVIL Epi's A Basque Restaurant 1115 N. Main St. BIVII Pinnacle Sports Grill 2902 Eagle Rd. BIVIIIL Corona Village 21 E. Fairview Ave. BIW1L St. Lukes Regional Med. Ctr. 520 S. Eagle Rd. BIW Piehole 726 Main St. B The Griddle 2310 E. Overland Rd. # 132 BIW Harry's Meridian Grill 2032 E. Overland Rd. #125 BIV111L Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill 980 E. Fairview Ave. BIW Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 12, 2011 Page 1 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents andlor hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. D. A proval of Award of Bid for Grit Classifier Equipment to WesTech p . Engineering and Authorizing Purchasing Manager to Issue and Sign a Purchase OrderlContract in the Amount Not-to-Exceed $48,008.00 E. Task Order No.10232 (Master Agreement Dated April 13, 2010) with Murray, Smith and Associates, Inc. for Water Supply Planning for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $128,340.00 5. Community ItemslPresentations A. Ada County Highway District (ACRD) Project Priority Process Presentation 6. Items Moved From Consent Agenda 7. Action Items A. Public Hearing: Proposed SpringlSummer 2011 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department B. Resolution No. 11_-78_0: A Resolution Adopting the SpringlSummer 2011 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Approved 8. Department Reports A. Finance Department: Strategic Plan Update Including Discussion on the Budget and Investment Policy B. Continued from April 5, 2011 -Planning Department: Cost Share and License Agreements with Ada County Highway District (ACRD) for the Landscaping and Maintenance Associated with the Ustick, Duane to Campton and the Franklin, Ten Mile to Linder Roadway Projects Continued to April 19, 2011 C. Public Works: Surety Presentation D. Public Works: New Street Lights for School Walk Routes E. Public Works: Discussion on Proposed Master License Agreement with Ada County Highway District for Regulation of Downtown Sidewalk Areas F. Mayor's Office: Budget Amendment for Mayor's Office Internship for aNot- to-Exceed Amount of $2,775.00 Approved Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 12, 2011 Page 2 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents andlor hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 9. Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 11-1480: AZ 08-007 The Shops at Victory by DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Eagle Road: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.19 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business) Zoning District Approved 10. Future Meeting Topics Adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, April 12, 2011 Page 3 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council Meeting April 12, 2011 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 1:04 p.m., Tuesday, April 12, 2011, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Brad Hoaglun, David Zaremba, Keith Bird and Charlie Rountree. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Warren Stewart, Pete Friedman, John Overton, Stacy Kilchenmann, Allison Kaptein, Robert Simison, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba _ X __Brad Hoaglun =Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Well, good evening. I'd like to welcome you all to tonight's City Council meeting. For the record it is Tuesday, April 2nd. It's 6:00 o'clock. We will start with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance by Ryan Price Scout Troop #140 De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight we are honored to be led by Ryan Price of Scout Troop No. 140. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) De Weerd: Ryan, I would like to present you a City of Meridian pin and thank you for being with us tonight. Item 3: Adoption of the Agenda • De Weerd: Item No. 3 is adoption of the agenda. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just a couple items to note on tonight's agenda. Under Action Items, 7-B, that resolution number is 11-780. And under Ordinances, 9-A, that ordinance number is 11-1480. And with those two, Madam Mayor, I move adoption of the agenda. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 2 of 61 De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as stated. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Consent Agenda A. Development Agreement for Approval: AZ 08-007 The Shops at Victory by DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Eagle Road: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C Zoning District B. Approval of New Beer License for Meridian BBQ LLC, dba Dickey's BBQ Pit; located at 2845 E. Overland Rd. Beer License Expiration Date: 4130111 C. Approval of 2012 Beer, Wine, Liquor License Renewals as follows: Firehouse Pub & Grill 1767 W. Franklin Rd. BIWIL 127 Club 127 E. Idaho BIWIL The New Frontier 116 E Broadway BIWIL Famous Daves 3510 Eagle Rd. BIWI L Schooners 499 S. Main BNVIL Epi's A Basque Restaurant 1115 N. Main St. BMI Pinnacle Sports Grill 2902 Eagle Rd. BNVIL Corona Village 21 E. Fairview Ave. BIW1L St. Lukes Regional Med. Ctr. 520 S. Eagle Rd. BMI Piehole 726 Main St. B The Griddle 2310 E. Overland Rd. # 132 BIVU Harry's Meridian Grill 2032 E. Overland Rd. #125 BIVIIIL Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill 980 E. Fairview Ave. BIW D. Approval of Award of Bid for Grit Classifier Equipment to WesTech Engineering and Authorizing Purchasing Manager to Issue and Sign a Purchase OrderlContract in the Amount Not- to-Exceed $48,008.00 E. Task Order No.10232 (Master Agreement Dated April 13, 2010) with Murray, Smith and Associates, Inc. for Water Supply Planning for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $128,340.00 De Weerd: Item 4, our Consent Agenda. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 3 of 61 Hoaglun: There were no changes to the Consent Agenda, so I move approval of the Consent Agenda and the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no discussion by Council, Madam Clerk, roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Community ItemslPresentations A. Ada County Highway District (ACRD) Project Priority Process Presentation De Weerd: Item 5 is our Community Presentations. Tonight we have on our agenda Sabrina Anderson with ACRD to present the project priority process. Pass the thumb drive. Welcome, Sabrina. Anderson: Thank you. I took the freeway and I am glad now that it's not ourfacility. Rountree: It's a nice parking lot, isn't it? Anderson: It was. Sabrina Anderson, manager of the planning and programming department, ACRD. I don't usually drive the freeway home. I do live in Meridian and am forever grateful right now. But I was headed to my presentation, so that's lucky. De Weerd: Well, thank you for joining us this evening. Anderson: Thank you for having us. I do have some presents. You have a hard copy until they get that up. All right. Now, we are moving. We have got the -- passed the thumb drive. Thank you very much. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. So, now we are ready to go. I appreciate this chance to come and tell you a little bit about our five year work plan and our programming and prioritization processes. I know some of you know more about this than others, so I will kind of just gauge on how much you know and the questions if you have it. We already just adopted our last five year work plan in the end of February and that's what I just passed out. I know many of you are familiar with the projects that we have in Meridian, so I won't dwell as much on that, but I did pass you out your very own five year work plan, so if constituents have questions you will be able to know the status of the projects or you can ask Caleb, because he probably has them memorized. The biggest change from the last probably 18 months is Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 4 of 61 the addition of our community -- citizen's advisory community group and that really is by nature designed around the Citizen's Investment Corporation, CI CIC. Works with our CIP, which his our acronym. You're familiar with the CIP as our long-term plan, a 20 year plan. The five year work plan is really ourfive year plan. So, what I'm going to do today is walk you through the different plans and how projects come to be. So, prioritization process. You have probably gotten bits and pieces of that over time, but I wanted to lay out for you how they will flow together and where the city's process is in that and where you can give input. And, then, questions at the end. If I can work the fancy screen. Okay. So, we are going to talk about a short meeting and long-term planning document. The five year work plan that we just adopted. And, then, go to any questions we might have. So, where do projects come from. I'm going to pass you a little handout here. This is something I'm just going to leave with you. I do have one for the clerk as well. What I just passed out and we .can put up on the website afterwards, is how those projects enter our five year work plan or our capital improvements plan, which is our 20 year project. Essentially, this is the interaction between the city's Comprehensive Plan and the transportation agencies. And up at the top this is a flow chart. Up at the top it is the city's Comprehensive Plans and your land use decisions and those go into the COMPASS regional transportation demand model. And I know many of you who are are involved with COMPASS know that we are going to be going through a major update now for our 2014 COMPASS plan and that is where your land use decisions feed into that plan. Those land use decisions, then, get adopted by the COMPASS board, which elected officials from all the jurisdictions sit on and that establishes what is needed for a transportation system. And that -- that's how projects are identified in the ACRD CIP and our five year work plan comes out of our CIP is that at the regional view. So, of course, the city involvement happens both at what happens at COMPASS, but, then, also what happens in our CIP and we are going to talk a little bit more about that here in a second. But that is where the land use feeds into the Comprehensive Plans, feeds into the COMPASS regional document. And right in the middle in the yellow is how the transportation agencies take that original plan and make it into transportation projects. As that goes down further you can see how our five year work plan becomes updated yearly and feeds back into the actual projects. So, down about three-fourths the way down you can see that out of the five year work plan becomes the new design, the right of way and the construction phases. So, it, then, loops back around to being accepted in the CIP and the next update of our COMPASS plan. So, a lot of times people ask, well, does land use start or does transportation start and it's more of actually a cycle that .goes through the COMPASS board and the COMPASS long range plan. So, this is just something that we use and I just wanted you to see, especially as we were going into our COMPASS update, that you can see how land use and transportation have to be linked into that cycle to be able to establish our deficiencies list. Any questions with that? Okay. I think you guys are involved with that more deeply than others. So, this is just an example of how our CIP is a 20 year plan. And to go into a five year work plan was actually seven years. I find that a little bit ironic. But the last two years is actually what we call PD or preliminary development. Kind of a holding pattern of projects where if they have design or right of way in funded years, will have the construction or PD or preliminary development so that it can feed into the funded years of the plan. And, then, we have our budget. Our budget is Meridian City Council April 12, 2011. Page 5 of 61 actually a two year budget and it's where the first year of the five year work plan becomes the -- I'm sorry. The first year of the five year work plan becomes the first year of our budget. And so what we do is we will take 2012, for example, is the first year of the five year work plan. We will take that, update it for any cost estimates or any schedule updates, and it will become the first year of our budget. And I will show you in a second where the cities have the opportunities to comment on those and that's reall . Y important to when you understand that when you're commenting outside your work plan it becomes the budget the very next year. So, I wanted to stop here and just tell a bit about what the guiding principles are. The projects historically through the last prioritization processes -- I would say before Sabrina, before there was a real prioritization process and that was prior to me even working there, projects were historically more based on the Commission -- commissioner advocacy or staff just being aware of problems. And that still can happen to a certain degree. But that's how projects come into the process, rather than how projects get funded. Prioritization was intended to de-politicize some of that and to really give more of methods that could be documented. The recent methods were developed with partner jurisdiction. I think most of you were aware that we now have our CI CIC and you have two members on that, you have a planning director -- in this case it's Caleb, the planning manager, and you have a citizen that has been appointed. I know you have two newer member of your CI CIC and the new prioritization is both technical and community factors and we are actually going to be just revisiting this next Monday to see how the CI CIC liked the first round -- this is the first year we actually used the new one. So, going back to our long, medium, and short arranged, the CIP is for 20 years. It sets our impact fees. It's really not a complete CIP in the way the city would think about this. I worked at a city for seven years and so when I first came into it I thought a CIP was more of a complete what are all your needs and you lay it out and it's fiscally constrained. The CIP is really only the capital increase to serve new development. It doesn't take all of our funding sources into account. There are a variety of issues that are being looked at right now and you do have an active -- two active members on the CI CIC, with Caleb actually chairing that group. So, a lot of issues are being looked at from, you know, areas to what are the CIP is going to be used for. There is a lot of issues that you can now be commenting on before we develop the new CIP that's going to come into effect in October of 2012. So, I just mention this and if there is questions, you know, Gary is your liaison, is always available to ask questions -- answer questions and he's more in detail than I am. But I just bring this up, because the CI CIC is looking at all sorts of issues and this is the time to be involved with that. So, the five year work plan is actually the seven years or the new -- the closest years to us where projects get developed and we are working this year, as part of our CIP the next year, there is a closer linkage to, you know, the CIP. CIP works in five year increments developing when projects are needed -- of pulling closer years out of the CIP that fall into the five year work plan. In our five year work plan it is fiscally constrained and it does include roads, intersections, bridges -- and you can read there of all the things it includes. It includes more than just impact fee eligibility. So, it includes our General Fund, it includes community programs, it includes our vehicle registration fees, it includes all of our funding sources. So, it's different in that sense. And, again, what I have done is I have put in blue along here ways that cities and our partner jurisdictions can comment Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 6 of 61 on it through the CI CIC or through your request~list. So, the budget -- that's our two year cycle. The first year being the five year work plan. That's our starting point. We revise it as we get revenue estimates and cost updates. The CI CIC does review and recommend on our budget and, then, we have public hearings and input from our partner agencies in August. The staff we are starting to prepare our budgets now and it will go to the CI CIC this summer. So, I have a couple maps for you. I believe they are in your five year work plans and I will just leave them here and you guys can pass them around. But these are the maps that are our five year work plan. One is a community programs map, since these are quite a change over the last couple of years. If you remember maybe even three or four years ago we really didn't have much in the way of community programs, now we spend about four million dollars a year on community programs and the other are the five year work plan projects. I made these really big for you and they have been labeled -- De Weerd: Thank you. Anderson: I have learned from our commission. So, I'll leave them over here with Councilman Zaremba and he can pass them out. De Weerd: See, Todd, take note. Really big. Anderson: I think I have worked for government long enough to know to make everything 11 by 17. So, a couple things on the annual calendar. I gave you copies of these. But the key points .here are what's in blue. We significantly reconfigured our citizen's advisory group of 2010 to make sure that we were taking seriously and giving the cities all the input and chances they could have. This really is the key group. It has all the planning directors from the cities and the county, as well as a citizen rep and we have received some awesome input from this group. And when I say that, they really did help us redo our entire prioritization. I'm going to give you just some snippets of that here in a second. They also gave us some really good input that I also passed to you, was that before we ask of saying what are your priorities, we needed to give our partner jurisdictions enough technical input to be able for them to answer that question. So, a couple of things we have done is we have moved that calendar back where, actually, in June or July this year you will be getting some information through your citizen's group to be able to say this is where we see the technical issues. Here is where the accidents are and also here is where we have had issues with level of service. Here is where your congestion is. Because you're going to know that anecdotally, but if we as an agency can give you better input we will get better output back from you. So, that was one of the things we heard from the agency and I just gave you kind of a handout. One of the things you will hear is will this area still congest. So, I gave you some pictures to help you as elected officials know what we talk about by level of service and level of service asks for level of service A or B. Well, A and B is usually good. Level of service F is bad. We will also hear how bad is it. That's usually what level of F is it. So, what I have given you is pictures that when you're out and around you can see what -- what level of congestion usually means by those and so we have actually picked up some pictures of, you know, how congested is it for each of those things. What we provide to Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 7 of 61 the CI CIC -- and we can get you some copies of the udated -- is a count -wide ma p Y p that tells by intersections and roadways what level of service we see across the valle Y and we would provide that in June before we ask you all to give us a recommendation. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, question forSabrina. De Weerd: Yes. Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just help me out on this. Is that level of service at its eak or -- p Anderson: Uh-huh. Hoaglun: -- is that how they determine that? Anderson: Yes, Madam Mayor and Councilman. We do do level of service p.m. peak for our level of service is how we take care of it. Hoaglun: Okay. Thanks. Anderson: Sure. So, I just wanted to give you an example of the type of information that we are providing earlier in the process to be able to ask for recommendations back. So, you just have a little more educated information, so you can be able to provide recommendations. So, just down about the end of this slide here is to say -- then we ask for the cities and counties and if you have transportation task forces -- which I know Meridian does and it's a very active one -- what your recommendations are for your rate class. And, then, we are able to do some more technical analysis and some prioritization. One note here is we just have to remember our prioritization, both technically and community, is about which -- it's not about which projects we do, it's about the order in which we do them. They have already came to us as important projects, so now it's about how do we together decide what is the order in which we do them. So, I'm just going to touch on this, because it was a lot of numbers, so we can answer questions if you have it. But, essentially, the citizens' advisory group helped us determine that the way we should be looking at prioritization is a combination of technical and community factors. With the technical it was about safety and congestion. Those were the two things that we started to measure. Safety we looked and annual cost of accidents and, then, we looked at how can we improve those accidents. What were the improvements we were doing and what could we expect to be able to reduce. We also, then, looked at congestion and we looked travel time reduction was the main factorwe were looking at there and, then, we divided it by project cost. What we tried to do was monetize these so we had a way to look at everything at the same level. And community factors, which is about 30 percent of the score, and these are factors the citizens advisory group helped us determine. We did look at a few things. We looked at percentage inside the present city limits. They were looking at serving the existing population. The bike network in a project was important to them. Again, agency support, which is coming right off your project list. Importance to the system. And these were some of the categories that they came up with. Previous investments. This was Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 8 of 61 related to us that have already been program in a project in a ro ram ear to wan J p g y t to be able to continue that. Specific area plans. I know you have been involved with som e of these with us. In request to the name in a sub area Ian, we have alread don .. p y e some joint plannings together. And, then, this last one I really want to mention here. This actually ends up being about ten percent of the overall score. This is that the community group, the CI CIC, actually can write anarrative --any member can -- once we have done a preliminary prioritization and they can account for factors that we 'ust . J can't technically measure. If there are things such as economic develo ment there is a p , land use issue, a comprehensive plan issue, they can write a narrative. It's actual) Y scored by the group. We don t score it. And they can actually factor up to ten ercent . p of the project score. We did have issues with projects this year that actual) did move . Y up and down a few points and we take their scores. I am anxious to hear next week what the group thought about this process. My anticipation is they are actual) oin to Yg g want it to have more points. But it actually works very well. A lot of groups -- a lot of the cities and the county waited until they saw the initial prioritization, so they decided if it was worth doing a narrative on and, then, they could really put projects -- you know, narratives behind projects they thought that had these qualities to them. So, I really did just kind of want to give you kind of an overview of the new prioritization, because it was different. Projects that really already had these safety and congestion factors sta ed . .. ~ y high in our prioritization. There were some projects that hadnt been on our radar that did move up in the prioritization. One commitment that our commission did make was that projects we had already been working on stayed in the hopper. We did not drop any projects that they had been working onto move up additional projects. But as there is room in the out years of the five year work plan, these new projects that have prioritization scores started coming up. The last thing I really wanted to say about the programming -- and I think the City of Meridian has been a very good partner on these projects -- was when there is other programming considerations, such as utilities to the project that we want to work on together, irrigation issues, that we have to deal with construction phasing into our second phase of the Cloverdale -- Franklin-Cloverdale project where you have a water line and we are working together on a utility agreement, those types of things, sometimes those are going to supersede a programming score. They may need to move up a year or wait a year, just depending on, you know, our joint schedules. Same thing with irrigation. If we have to do irrigation in a dry season, it ma v make a difference when we can program something. This is what I call the common sense factor. You know, we can run prioritize -- you know, programming all we want, but we still need to be -- you know, have some reality when we are working with other agencies. The last few series --this is just when the rubber meets the road. This is just -- excuse me -- reminding the cities that we do reach out to you and want you to continue being partners as we move into our design right of way and construction phases. It's very important to us that the partner jurisdictions are part on project teams and that the city councils and the county commissioners review concepts, especially when we have large projects and we want to make sure that our concepts are coordinated and that our public involvement is scaled. You know, many times we will have a large public involvement meeting, sometimes we will just have neighborhood newsletters. It really depends on what the size is. And here is his questions. I know I went through that relatively quickly. Many of you are familiar with -- I think we have Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 9 of 61 done a good job of working with staff through the citizens' adviso commi ry ttee process. We appreciate their input. Caleb works on a lot of our subcommittees and r ead a lot of our materials, so we appreciate his items. He's made comments on our check oints p many times. We need cubicles back and forth. De Weerd: Sometimes we think so, too. Councilman Zaremba did ou have ? y a question . ' Zaremba: I must have looked like I had a question. De Weerd: You did. Zaremba: Actually, it's not so much a question as a comment. Thank ou for the Y presentation. As you re aware, I was on CI CIC before there was a prioritization process and, then, through the development of prioritization version one. I think this prioritization version two is a great improvement and I appreciate all the work that's done on it and just in general appreciate the relationship that the Cit of Meridian has Y with ACRD, our staffs, and our management -- work very well together and I a reciate pp that. And your presentation tonight was very helpful. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, it was. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Question on the technical criteria. I see the formula and I'm t in to .. . , rY g envision the numbers and and its an interesting number you came up with a congestion benefit. What's the basis of the 24 dollars per hour? Anderson: Madam Mayor and Councilman, I am so glad you asked. That number actually came from the lieutenant governor's work on taking the 24 dollars an hour. They looked at -- there was the task force the lieutenant governor worked on and the Y went through many factors. It doesn t -- it includes not only a person's time, but also transport time in terms of some --the delay time in terms of like trucking time. So, it's all worked in there. We have heard input back that, you know, it's low, we have heard that it's high. Our .concern was that there was just some continuity with what was being used at the sidewide level, so that's why we didn't go with that number. We did do some analysis of things that other states were using and that -- and we landed on that, because there had been so much work done at that -- at that level of the task force, that that was probably the best that could be used by any. Rountree: Thank you. Similar question on the safety benefit Anderson: Sure. Rountree: The definition is annual cost of accidents by type, times the reduction in accidents expected from the improvement. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 10 of 61 Anderson: Sure. Rountree: Do you have a table or an avers a of what that annual ' ~ 9 cost by accident is. And -- and also how do you accumulate the accident data? Is tha ' t strictly by police records or is that kept by ACRD? Anderson: Sure. Madam Mayor and Chairman -- I'm sor -- Councilman ' ry , I can provide you all the details. The short version is the annual cost of accidents are d one by classification of accidents. We did reduce our facilities, because the skew th . y e number so loudly, so we did a -- we did kind of a half mark between fatalities and cla ss A accidents. So, thats how we came to the cost of the accidents, which is ve common that ITD ~ uses as well. The cost and the reduction of accidents in terms of ex ected b p y the improvement is a standard formula used nationwide that our en ineers use. So w . g e find out what is actual -- what improvement can be ex ected b what we are. actual) p y Y doing, whether we are adding through lanes, right turn lanes, widenin -- there is a g. formula for each that s allowed. And so it gets incredibly com licated. I didn't have all p of that here. And, then, we can monetize that. So, that's how we et to that -- that . 9 portion. Did I answerthe details? Rountree: Everything but where you get the accident data. Anderson: Oh. I'm sorry. Yes. We get it from Web Cars throu h ITD. So the take g y the police reports, they process all that and, then, it comes out to us usual) sometime . Y in May or June and so we have to wait for that information before we can rovide that p back to the city. Rountree: And they do it by corridor or by segment or by -- Anderson: By segment of roadway. Rountree: Okay. Anderson: So, the only time we have a little bit of a challenge is what do we attribute to the intersection versus what we attribute to the roadway. And so our en ineers actual) g Y go back over the data and separate it out. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other questions? Anderson: Hopefully not that technical. De Weerd: Well, we appreciate you being here and at least speaking En lish on this -- . g this kind of process. It was very helpful and very informative. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 11 of 61 Anderson: So, if you have any other questions, lease let us kno ' p wand we can send it through Caleb or you re always welcome to come visit at a CI CIC m ' eeting. There are working laws and impact fees and talking prioritization a ain. It's not al ' g ways English, but it's close, so we really appreciate gettin this information and an ' 9 ytime you have questions we'd rather give you more information than have ou wonder so -- Y , De Weerd: Well, I can tell you that when we do have uestions staff is ve r ' q ry esponsive and we appreciate that. Anderson: Well, thank you for letting us come and speak with ou. Y De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Thank you. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Did I see Bruce, the director in the back. Thank you for bein here as well g , Bruce. Item 6: Items Moved From Consent Agenda De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 7: Action Items A. Public Hearing: Proposed SpringlSummer 2011 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department De Weerd: So, Item 7 under Action Items. We start with the public hearin on Item. 7-A . g with the proposed spring-summer fee schedule for the Parks and Recreation Department. Hi, Allison. Kaptein: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. I have before ou Y on your screens a condensed version of the fee schedule. Those are highlighting just the changes that we are making for spring and summer, although I do think that in our . Y packets you received the entire fee schedule. Although there is no changes, other than these that you see in front of you. So, I can answer any questions that you may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions regarding the fee schedule for Parks and Recreation? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 12 of 61 De Weerd: Okay. None at this time. We will see if there is an mem ' y bers of the public to testify on this. I would like to ask if there is any members of the ublic who ' . p would like to provide testimony or comments on this item. Oka .Council an additional ' . Y y business you need with Allison? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you, Allison. Kaptein: Thank you. De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bird: So move. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing to Item 7-A. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Resolution No. 11-780: A Resolution Adopting the SpringlSummer 2011 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date De Weerd: Item 7-B is a resolution supporting the fee schedule you just heard. That number is 11-180. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the resolution in Item 7-B, 11-780. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the resolution 11-780. If there is no discussion from Council, Madam Clerk, roll call attendance. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 13 of 61 De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Department Reports A. Finance Department: Strategic Plan Update Includin g Discussion on the Budget and Investment Policy De Weerd: Item 8 under Department Reports, tonight we have our Finance De artment p thats in attendance to present their strategic plan for Finance. Thank ou for bein Y g here, Stacy, and your team. Kilchenmann: Thank you. Good evening. It's April and in April you -- DeWeerd: You need to move your -- Kilchenmann: -- it's finance month. And this year for a change I brought some friends with me to do the presentation. Or I dragged the friends with me to do the presentation. Actually, they came willingly. And I have a great staff. I'm not -- this is a sur rise for . p them. I m not going to make them do this every year, but I wanted them to have a chance to be in front of you. I tried to get them to talk about their accomplishments and they really won't do it, but I'm happy to have them here tonight. So, the first erson . p thats going to talk will be Todd, our accounting manager. De Weerd: Hi, Todd. Lavoie: It's been awhile. De Weerd: It has. A week. Lavoie: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's good to see you guys. I'm going to talk about the -- some of the things that we have been doing in the Finance Department. First I'm just going to do a quick overview what we are doing. The Finance Department is built on the accounting staff and also the utility billing staff that we have in that department. So, we do the payroll, we do accounts payable for the entire city, we conduct all the purchasing needs that the city has. We also manage the budget for you. And, then, we also have the utility billing system and, then, we also try to provide you the best financial analysis and reporting that we can. I think that's supposed to be me; is that right, Reta? All right. Here is the -- the professional accounting staff. Reta did a great job with a little bit of paint. She did the best she could. We got Stacy at the top as our CFO. We got Keith as the purchasing manager. I think that's pink hair, possibly. We got Reta as the controller. We got me as the accounting manager. We got Karie as the utility manager and wild hair. And, then, we got Jenny Ma down at the bottom. She's our new accountant that I'm going to introduce you guys to a little bit later. So, that is your finance staff right there. Then we also have Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 14 of 61 the nontechnical -- the other parts of the staff, which I think make up 11 of us. So, you have the payroll administrator, she conducts the entire a roll for ' p y the entire city by herself. We have -- so, thats Barb Hohler. We have Jenn Lusk she's ' . our accounting specialist for accounts payable. she does the payroll for the entire cit . We hav y e Kathy Wanner down at the bottom. She does the --she assists Keith Watts in o ' ur purchasing. We have two building administrators within the utilit billin de artment. A Y g p nd we have four billing accounting clerks within the utility billin de artment. I think tha' ' g p is going to be Ev. That s going to be Peter. That's going to be Cod U son and that's of Y p g ng to be Barbara Davidson. And the two billing administrators, that's oin to be Maria Edw r g g ads and Leslie. So, thats the utility staff and that's the -- I think there is 17 of us in finance so that's the accounting and utility billing team. They look just like that too• ri ht? I'm g going to go over some of the completed projects that we have been workin on over the 9 past 12 months. The payroll department, as some of you heard, we have been workin 9 with the IT department, McKay Greybill, Mike Tanner specificall . We have been Y working on a new time card system. The time card system. The time card s stem that ,, ,~ Y we have currently in house -- its a little outdated, its not dynamic enou h to handle the 9 different time processes that we have, so starting I think in June we are oin to be . g g implementing the new time card system, which we think is going to be fantastic. With that we are going to be integrating a new human resources database called ABRA. The HR team will be managing that for us. It's going to contain all the human resources data benefits, wages, for all the -- all the employees within the city. And that's, actual) , Y going to now automatically integrate with our finance system, which is going to be fantastic. So, no more double input, so that's going to be a great efficiency for us. And, then, within the accounting department we continue to look for efficiencies. We have built a few databases over the last 12 months. One particular database we were able to shave off 16 hours a month just the one process. Now it takes two minutes. So, it used to take 16, not it takes two. We are continuing to look at technology to help our systems. Within the accounts payable system we are looking to get more paperless, so we are asking our vendors to maybe sign up to our automatic clearing house EFT payment system, which is a paperless check and that's the ultimate goal is issue less manual checks. To go along with the paperless thing, let me just jump back to payroll. With the new time card system we are going to be able to implement a paperless check stub by the end of the calendar year. So, now everybody will be able to see their check stubs online instead of us issuing 300 check stubs every single month. So, again, just another efficiency there. This is the first year we did paperless filings for all of our income and taxes within the payroll and the accounts payable department. And you see the improved efficiencies. One offhand was the credit card process. We have I think 18 credit cards without -- within the city and that's 18 credit statements, as we all have a statement. It's pretty daunting. We will just put 18 of them in one bundle. It's a lot of work. We have made some efficiencies we think that are going to shave off probably eight hours a month on this process and we will continue to look at it, see if we can make things better. The budget, as you have been presented in the past, Stacy has been working with all the directors and the Mayor to build the CIP plan. The CIP plan is now assisting the budget process by driving the capital enhancements. So, now the two talk together, so now we know where we are going a little bit better, which is going to be fantastic and you will see that this year when I present the 2012 budget to you. And, Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 15 of 61 then, we are also going to start implementin a few more erfor 9 p mance measurements to help make sure that we are doing the right thin , makin the ri ht d ' ' ' g g g ec~sions within the budgetary system. And, then, the general accountin we have im g, plemented a new grants committee. What this is -- this committee was formed with the ur ose -- p p of was to make sure that we are accepting grants that we can handle that we ca n manage. Some grants are a little bit more demanding than we have the abilit to con ' y trot. There is some purchasing requirements that we can't meet. So, the committee 'ust looks over the re ui ~ q rements and makes sure that it's where the Council and the Ma or want us to Y go and make sure we can meet those requirements. And, then, we are also workin with IT and an o g utside vendor to provide a new shopping cart function on our Internet that's going to be coming down the pipe here within the next ei ht months. So now .. 9 , citizens can now go into our website and make payments forma be a do fee a license Y g , for police or some sort. Right now we don't have that service and we believe that service is going to be pretty helpful for the citizens. With that, it's Ion overdue we g , hired her 14 months ago -- 15 months ago and we have failed to introduce ou to our . Y new accountant, officially. She is back here somewhere I think. Jenny Ma. Most of ou y have met her or seen her. But thats Jenny. She has taken on the dauntin task of . ~ 9 being our grants financial manager. She s done awesome with it. It's a bi challen e 9 9 with all the grants that we are taking on and learning all the different rules b the federal Y government and changing every day. She also helps with our general ledger analysis. She's helping us develop SOPs and operating manuals for a lot of our functions, so we can have backups. She helped with the budget development and, then, she assists Stacy and Reta with financial reporting and other items of such. De Weerd: Well, Jenny, we are glad that we finally got you in here. Welcome. Lavoie: And with that, that is my part of the presentation. I stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions forTodd? Bird: Not at this time. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Todd, you mentioned under the completed and ongoing projects budgeting a performance measure development. What -- what kinds of things are you looking at there? Lavoie: Well, that would be working with the Mayor to work with each department to establish some measurements that we can help with -- like hiring a new employee, maybe we can establish, okay, there is every 20,000 citizens equals what we have determined that's a good time to hire an employee if we can find that performance measurement analysis. That's just one example. Or if we hire -- if we have 20,000 -- 5,000 new utility accounts.. What's the threshold when we need to add that next Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 16 of 61 employee based on customer counts or citizen counts, those kind of erf p ormances that we will be looking at. We will be looking at other .cities and see how th ' ey do it. But that's kind of what we are going to do in the future. None have been ' implemented at this time to a level, but that's where we are kind of lookin at t in to im . g ry g plement more of that into our budgetary process. De Weerd: Well, I think it's fair to note also over the last several ears with . y the trend analysis that Todd walks each of our departments throu h on a line-b -line ' g y basis looking at performance measurements in terms of the bud et line items and looki . g ng at setting realistic budgets and getting out the C&P and all of those different words in there. Lavoie: Very much so. I will, then, hand it over to the next person, which is Reta. De Weerd: Thank you, Todd. Welcome, Reta. Cunningham: Good evening, Mayor and Council. We can get rid of that icture. Oka . p Y I m here to talk to you about the financial reporting and the latest GASB ronouncement . p , which is the new fund balance designation, and GASB has decided this ear we are . Y going to implement these new designations and they are going to provide clarit and . Y consistency for readers. I actually think they are going to help. To implement we are going to need your help. We are going to create a policy which we have in draft form we will come back to you with that. It's going to classify the fund balances and, then, granted authority to assign reserve. What we are hoping for. This is the -- we went from two classifications, which is basically restricted and unrestricted and, then, we are going to have five. The first one nonspendable, which is the noncash assets, such as -- right now we only have 4,000 for those fire trust funds and, then, we also have pre- aid .p expenses. The restricted hasn t changed. Its actually for external constraint in the state -- in the impact funds. Then we have committed funds and that's goin to be g . internal constraints, so thats what you can set, such as like debt, the capital projects fund. And, then, also we have assigned funds, they can either be -- you can decide if they are going to be committed, then, you will set those numbers or you can actual) . Y give authority for someone else to assign the amount and this is just like at the end of that fiscal year for the financial statements and say if you get it to Stacy, she could set what the carry forward amount is, they are reserved for emergencies, for depreciation, operating. And, then, the last one is going to be the unassigned. So, they just physically went from an unreserved or unrestricted funds to now they are going to call it unassigned funds. De Weerd: Well, the exciting part is that first bullet underthree is dropping off. Cunningham: That's right. So, then, this -- this first slide right here, this shows you 2010 fund balance and, then, statement of net assets. It shows you we just have restricted fund balance and .unrestricted fund balance. We never had the ability to actually show what reserves were. And now with the new designations this is what it's going to look like. So, you can see we are going to have the nonspendable, restricted, Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 17 of 61 committed, assigned, which is all of our different reserves, and, then, ou're oin to Y 9 g come down and you're going to see on our unrestricted up there in General Fund it was 21 million, now it's going to be 7.2 million. So, it's -- I think it's a more real look at what our unreserved fund balance is. The next thing I was just going to go over real quick is last -- last July we actually met with the impact fund committee and went throu h the . g model and they decided they would like to see the census numbers come in, update the model, and, then, meet again. So, the census numbers come in and it is 6.29 percent less than what COMPASS projected. So, now we are waiting for COMPASS to pro'ect . ~ the next ten years, we will update the model again, and, then, the committee will meet. So, that's where we are at with that. And that's it. I'll take any questions. De Weerd: Questions for Reta? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Very good, Reta. De Weerd: Thank you, Reta. Cunningham: We will be coming back to you with policy. Okay. Next I'm going to bring up Karie Glenn. De Weerd: Karie, I like your new hair style. Bird: I do. I love that. Glenn: I thought about it. I could have taken my beret out and made it really more realistic. Madam Mayor and Council, thank you. The billing staff continues to make improvements to meet the needs of the city, as well as providing the best customer service that we can to meet our individual customer situations. Unfortunately, the number of turn offs that you will -- that you will see here has actually increased six percent in the last two years. Basically what we are hearing is due to the economy and the job loss. We are taking into consideration, you know, different things that we can do to ease that with payment arrangements and things like that. We are trying to improve the information that's available online and through the billing inserts and tag lines to reduce phone contacts, but we are not seeing that go down either. It's coming to our attention rather quickly the people would just as soon talk to you verbally. We have found ourselves in many situations where we are talking to somebody, answering their questions while they are literally reading the document in their hand. They just want to talk to somebody to get the verbal scoop, not just to read it on a piece of paper. The rental roll overs continue to be steady. Since the implementation of the cart we are seeing an average of about 444 exchanges every month right now, so --our completed projects -- the bulk of those changed policies and practices are in the effort to reduce our required shutoffs. We have extended the payment deadline. It used to be 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, now if you make a payment in person you have got until close of business on Tuesday. If you make it online or over the phone I can literally take those payments Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 18 of 61 up to 6:30 in the morning. Unlimited payment arrangements. We used to allow only once a year you could make a payment arrangement. Now as long as the customer does comply with the payment arrangements that they make we will let them make them over and over again. Unlimited after hours service. What that would mean is a customer on shutoff day calls in and makes payments between 5:00 and 1:00. It's after business hours, but we have still got somebody here, we can register the payment and we can send somebody out -- we can dispatch water guys out to make that. At one time it was you were limited to one occurrence and that was it. You had one shot at that and that was it. Now, as long as they pay we will get them back on. You know, if they pay the bill we will get them back on. We have updated the billing directives and renters addendum forms. What we were finding is not all the information was on the form itself, so we have attached an informational sheet to both the billing directive and the renters addendum just so that both parties know exactly what that form means before they sign it. The pay by phone has been in use since December of 2009. We are getting more and more people to use it. We are, however, again, going back to the shutoff day. The highest of the phone payment system is on Wednesday shutoffs, just as a quick way for people to pay their past due and get their balance -- get their services restored. The online payment system was updated in October. That update allows property managers to manage multiple properties with one registration, whereas. before you had to have a registration for every property. The residents and the homeowners and the renters -- it gives them more flexibility, they can now request electronic e-statements -- electronic statements, as well as electronic delinquent reminders, so that they will get those notifications faster. There is also an express pay. If say somebody's parent or relative -- you know, some other relative wanted to make a payment on your behalf, they can go online, make a payment for you, and they don't need access to your full account. So, the express pay will let you do that. The Meridian Cares program, updated in March of 2010, went up to 125 dollars per assistance, if you were eligible forthat assistance. It is still governed by EI-Ada and they have -- or we have modified the eligibility year. It used to be a year from~date of assistance granted, so if you got it in March you weren't eligible until the next March. Now it's based on calendar year. So, January to December. What the future holds for us, we are currently in testing mode for a near realtime turnoff process. Right now our current practice is --the shutoff list is generated and it's hard copied, everybody goes out -- if your name is on the list you get shut off regardless of when you make your payment. If --once you make it on that list there is no turning back. We are, like I said, in testing mode right now with the field personnel to do a near realtime. So, it would be electronic. If the guys are headed to your house to turn the water off and you make a payment before they get there, we can get your name highlighted to where they can essentially skip you. So, it will buy some people a little bit of time. It's alittle -- it's a chasing game. But we are going to -- we are sure going to try to give it a shot, do what we can. Evaluating the feasibility of automated phone calls prior to shutoff day, similar to what Idaho Power and Intermountain Gas does. What I am finding, though, is based on the red flag rules and the Fair Trade is I'm not sure how those other agencies are able to pull it off, because according to the rules that I'm finding, the way our timing goes on our notices I can't get the timing down. By the rules if you make a phone call you have to follow it up with a hard copy within five days. Well, if you call on Monday and shut it off on Wednesday, I don't have time to get a hard copy Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 19 of 61 out there. So, I'm still working on the timing and additional costs, because automated phone calls --for every call there would bean additional cost. Continue to evaluate and modify the rental process to safeguard all parties. The rental process that we currently have is the one that has been established. It is cumbersome, it is hard to explain at times, we are constantly looking at how to improve that. What can we do to make this better for everybody involved. So, that one is not -- is not going to go away anytime soon. I'd like to research the feasibility and impacts of offering level program to our citizens. That one is going to be a little more slow going, because it impacts a lot of things. Level pay is going to move us from -- because we are letting people extend it out. Conceivably their account balances are going to get higher and with the rental process and keeping the bills with the property, that could, essentially, impact what a homeowner is looking at should a renter skip. So, that one is going to be -- I want to look at it, but it is going to take me a little bit longer to review. And, then,. update our billing system. It is my understanding that the City of Meridian actually owns Clarity, is the upgrade to our current billing software to sell. It's also my understanding that in the past it had been reviewed and the testing was. deemed --didn't quite meet. our needs. I'd like another opportunity to look at that. Since we do own the software that purchase wouldn't be in play, but I would assume that there would be some fees associated with any actual implementation should we move that direction. I stand before you for questions. De Weerd: Well -- and, Council, I would like to note Karie has been so responsive to our customers and their suggestions and just recently -- I think just this weekend we received an a-mail from one of our online -- or auto bill payers and he questioned why he got an envelope in his statement and Karie responded to him first thing Monday morning -- had already called the vendor and found out we can separate that out and eliminate the duplicative process and wrote him back and offered -- he could even get his statement via electronic means. So, it's -- it's just great to see the level of customer service in that department and, Karie, I just really appreciate that care that you and your staff show those that walk into your office very angry and you give them a lot of respect and attend to their needs in the most customer friendly way you can. So, I would hope that you can pass that onto your staff. We know that they are under fire a lot and tomorrow's the day, so kudos to you and your staff. Glenn: Well, thank you. I appreciate that and I will pass it on. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: And I'll second that, Madam Mayor. It's a tough job. I appreciate what you do. And you have done a great job in not only customer service, but making the service more convenient I believe foryourstaffas well. Glenn: Uh-huh. Thank you. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, quick question -- Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 20 of 61 De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: -- for Karie. The Meridian Cares program, you know, we tweaked it -- it's been in place now a year with the change. Do you see anymore tweaks we need to be making from this level to the program? Glenn: Not at this time. I know the eligibility requirements that Meridian Cares has it is actually different than the energy assistance program when you look at the requirements. It is a different scale. I'm not sure how they -- how EI-Ada arrived at that, but they are receptive to information, you know, when they are talking to us about needing to make payment arrangements and. things like that, we will kind of throw it out there. Most of the time we even offer -- you know, I hope you're not offended, but here is an option, because you never know if people really want that kind of assistance, but to date I know I had that on there. Since October 1st we have actually helped 91 families and there is still -- I want to say about eight grand left. Hoaglun: Thanks. De Weerd: And I think staff also spends a lot of time on keeping information to these families on resources that are available through nonprofits, faith organizations, for profits, just to help in that time of need. Glenn: And I have on our website I have tried to put some various resource links that they could go to as well. De Weerd: Yeah. Well, thank you. Glenn: Thank you. And the purchasing department will speak to you next. De Weerd: The one with the pink hair. Watts: Well, my hair actually -- my hair was a lot redder when I started. As exciting as purchasing is, I'll try and keep this brief. I just wanted to point out a couple things we have seen in the --one of the things that we tend to do is -- actually, we started this last year -- is doing our How To Do Business With The City event, which went over really well. We are currently planning another one for the first part of May of this year and trying to make this a twice a year event. The vendors -- even the ones that come the first time want to come back again and any information that we can give them to help them do business with the city, they are all very excited about it and we actually have another event that we are planning that I'll talk about in just a few minutes. One of the things that we have done is we have worked extensively with the Public Works and the Parks Department, which are our two main customers, to come up with standard operating procedures. These processes are -- are ongoing -- to be an ongoing, always changing,- always improving event. It's not something that ever gets put in stone, because we can always improve our processes and we will continue to meet with both Public Works and Parks, as well as all the other departments to see if there is any Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 21 of 61 needs that they have that we can improve on. One of the things we did is we -- Kathy and I go to each of our departments and meet with them on a -- at least a biannual basis to see if there is anything that they know of that we are not doing to meet their needs and they are -- they have been very -- very positive and very complimentary meetings. We understand each other's needs better when we do this and we improve our processes as the bottom line that comes out of that. One of the things that I'm pretty proud of as I have -- I was certified this year from the NIGP, which is the National Institute for Government Purchasing, that's something that I have wanted to do for many many years and finally accomplished that this year and it was quite an ordeal, but I'm glad to have that behind me and finally accomplish that. One of the things that I think I'm most excited about is we have -- we have kind of had our processes in place now -- it's been five years that we have been doing things as they are and I want to go through and completely revamp my bid documents that I've been making notes over the past years of ways to improve things -- issues that come up during different procurements, we have learned a lot since we have started doing the things that we are doing and we have a lot of information that we can implement to actually improve it, streamline it, and actually simplify it so it's easier for the vendors, easier for us, the departments, all the way around and probably looking at a six month period to have that completed as well and --which goes along with that as well is -- I'm way ahead. Where am I at? Well, one of the things that I want to do also is revamp our contracts and I have met with Ted and talked with Ted several times from our legal department on ways of improving our contracts and I have actually scheduled to meet with Ted and we have been postponing this for several months that we can take a lessons learned approach with the issues that we have had in the past and we will plan on starting that probably in the next couple of weeks going through this and revamping our contracts, tighten them up and making them a little more bulletproof. One of the things we have done is we implemented a bid solicitation service, which vendors are extremely happy about. They -- they can go in just like you do for anything else and subscribe to it from the main web page of the city's website and when we posted bids online they automatically get a notification. The only issue we have with that is they get all our notifications, so if you're a road contractor you're going to get office supplies or whatever else we may have in solicitation and the vendors don't seem to mind that at all, they like getting the notifications, which is another thing that we offer to the -- to the public. One thing that we are proud of that we have had no successful bid protests in the last five years. Not that we haven't been challenged and the clerk's office can attest that we get multiple public records request every week and it's almost afull-time. job I think for Jaycee now as dealing with the public records request, but we have had no public -- or no successful bid protests, which actually shows that our processes are fair and they are transparent. The future thing that we want to do in the future -- I'm a part of a larger team, which is a citywide team and we are trying to find some project management software that we can use citywide, multiple departments. We have looked at quite a few of them and are still looking at several of them. I am actually going to try to implement one. I started this week working with one and I'm going to at least implement it in the purchasing department just to see what our needs would be and what would actually work for us and anything that can help that group, but we are in need of that quite -- quite a bit. Okay. I talked about my forms. I got ahead of myself. I'm on the Idaho Public Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 22 of 61 Purchasing Association board as well and one of the -- like our Doing Business With The City, we are planning on having a much broader, larger scale event, which is a reverse vendor trade show and we have ITD on board, DEQ, city of Boise and I think at least one of the military branches that is interested in coming here for a reverse vendor trade show and we are hoping to have it the first week of March in 2012. March is purchasing month and so we have the room available, the space available here on that day and we have been trying to plan this. We tried to get something set up this year. It was quite an --quite an ordeal and the state actually backed off it at the last minute, so we did not go through with it this year, but so far we have a recommendation for next year and we are hoping to have that here. Well, back to Stacy. De Weerd: Any questions for Keith? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Just what is a reverse vendor -- Rountree: It's essentially -- you have probably been to a vendor trade fair before. The reverse trade fair is, basically, when you have the purchasing organizations set up their own tables and booths and the vendors come around and offer their services to everyone. They get the -- so, a contractor or a business can actually come in and meet with maybe a dozen different public agencies and everybody does have their own little way and so they can explain it, get to know each other, introduce face to face, rather than trying to make an appointment with a specific buyer or something from an organization, now they can come and meet with multiple organizations in one location in one day. So, it saves them time, money, and it's typically apretty -- pretty welcomed event by the public. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Great. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: When you were listing who you expected to I didn't hear you say ACRD. They might be --they might like to be involved. Watts: We will invite everybody. Whether or not they all decide to attend, that is -- we will try and hit up every organization in the valley, basically. Every public organization. De Weerd: Thank you. Zaremba: Cool. De Weerd: Well, congratulations on your certification. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 23 of 61 Watts: Thanks, Mayor. De Weerd: Anything else, Council? Thank you, Keith. Watts: Thank you. Kilchenmann: Okay. To wrap up, you know, the evening wouldn't be complete without some graphs. So, what I want to do briefly -- and a lot of this is information that you are free to take and kind of absorb as we go into this year's budget process. So, I have -- the major thing that I do is financial analysis and planning. So, I'm just going to take a look back and, then, a look forward as we enter into the. budget process. So, if we go back and look over the last -- going back from 2003 to 2011 and one correlation that is very well established that is used as a measurement is the correlation between population and government growth and so as you can see we had a tremendous population growth, we also had a growth in our FTEs in the city. This is a look at our personnel budget. This is done before transfers, so you can kind of see the cost of each department or each major function before we do transfers to the Enterprise Fund and so forth. You can look at -- the black is where it was in 2003 and you can compare it to where we are -- we were in 2010. This is our final budget. This is the same graph, only done with operating -- with operating costs. So, it's the same comparison period from 2003 to 2010, again, final budget. Another way to look at it is the percent changes. We have had in our final budgets, again, before transfers. So, if you look at personnel you can see admin -- I did the average increase for eight years, so that's the annual average increase. And, then, I did just the change from 2010 to 2011. So, again, I did that for each function.. And these -- these changes, these percent changes are -- are going to be -- well, you can -- it will be apparent why they are important when we go to the next stage where we look ahead. So, then, we look at the budgets and we look at our fund balances. So, the top one -- I just compared the Enterprise unrestricted fund balance -- or the total fund balance to the total General Fund balance and, then, the bottom one is a General Fund balance and you can just see how the General Fund -- how, actually, we have done -- consistently been able to build our balance, except for that little blip is when we built the City Hall. And it's kind of interesting that the Enterprise Fund and the General Fund are almost meeting now, because for years the Enterprise Fund was -- was our big cash fund balance, but as the infrastructure has gone in those balances are almost meeting. So, this is just a look at the -- we have looked at the unrestricted fund balances. These are all the reserves and restricted fund balances we have had over the years. When Reta talked she went through that policy, that fund balance policy, and this is just kind of an interesting look at the way the balances have gone up and down, the different ones we have had. We have had the reserve for the police when we had the Locust Grove overpass. Our capital improvement fund, exchanged, et cetera. So, now the important thing is we are looking forward. So, if we -- I'm trying to look ahead for five years. We talked a lot about the Enterprise Fund when we did the fee balance, so I just did the General Fund. So, this is looking at -- what our fund balances look at five years in the future and where -- where those growth numbers I showed you are important is the assumptions that this particular model is based on. One is the annual growth in property taxes, five percent, which is Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 24 of 61 small compared to our historical balances. Two, the annual expense growth in 2012 and 2013 is only three percent and if you look back at those averages we -- as population and our service demands grow -- and we haven't come close to being only three percent. And, then, in 14 and 15 I jumped the growth to five percent and I'm using the capital improvement plan that we -- we adopted this winter. So, it just kind of gives you a look at if -- if we do our capital improvement plan and we stay at this moderate growth level what will our fund balance look like. And that's just what it looks like. So, obviously, the operating reserve is slightly increasing as we slightly grow and that fund balance is slightly -- it's shrinking as we start developing the capital improvement plan. So, that's good, that's doable, but the key to that particular model I used is only five percent growth in property tax, but very moderate growth on our expense side. So, here is -- here is kind of the assumption that we are making as we go into the 2012 budget. We know -- we have a pretty good idea that our taxable value has dropped another ten percent, so that has big ramifications as far as what the levy rate will be. We know -- we have an estimate that are new construction taxable value that will be applicable to the income we will get in 2012 has dropped 30 percent -- 30 percent of over last year. One good thing is I -- I don't know if you remember last year there was new legislation that allowed property owners to go retroactively back and change tax classifications as development was halted. It looks like that's stabilized. For example, new construction last year we lost 19 million and it's looking like only about 600,000 this year. It looks like annexation value is going to be insignificant this year. We are thinking General Fund revenue sources. We haven't -- I haven't done the complete revenue manual, but sources other than property tax will probably be about at the ten and 11 levels that we have seen. Levels of residential construction, we will budget to be about the same as they are this year and as they were last year. Commercial construction we think will be better, but we don't want to be very optimistic with that forecast, because it's hard to predict dollars, because projects vary, time periods vary, so we will probably be pretty conservative with that forecast. And population increases, we don't expect a lot of population increase. If you we look at the Idaho economic forecast they used they are saying the economy is still weak, still a housing crisis, they don't expect a lot of in migration. And just some stats. The highest annual population increase in Idaho was 2.6 in 2007 and two-thirds of that was from migration. In 2010 population increased only 1.3 percent and only a quarter of this increase was from migration. Okay. We are not moving. Tom, are you over there screwing me up? Barry: Well, not lately. Kilchenmann: Okay. So, finally, the last thing we are going to talk about is taxable value and levy rate. So, we already know that taxable value is going to go down again. Just mathematically, when taxable value goes down, if nothing else changes, the levy rate automatically goes up. So, this is an historical look at that relationship. I don't know why this -- so, another way to look at it is just by kind of looking at, well, if we kept the property tax the same, base tax, didn't change it and taxable value changed, how does that change the levy rate. So, you can see how wildly that can vary the levy rate. So, if we looked this year, we are at .004. If we decrease that ten percent we go .0045. If we increase it -- if we increase the taxable value, levy rate drops, so forth. So, those Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 25 of 61 percentage rates might seem out of the ordinary or widely varying, but if we look historically the highest percentage increase in Meridian's taxable value was actually 34 percent between 2005 and 2006. I mean that is -- that's huge. The biggest decrease so far was 12 percent from 2008 to 2009. In two years from 2008 to 2010 taxable value dropped 23 percent. So, what does our property tax calculation look like this year? Now, you have to keep in mind this is an estimate, because I don't have the taxable value for Ada county, I just know it's predicted to drop about ten percent, but I haven't factored new construction in here, so all I did was take last year's taxable value and subtract ten percent. So, this, again, is an estimate and as we get updated numbers I'll send those out to you. So, this would be our normal calculation with the -- adding the three percent and adding the new construction annexation we can expect this year. So, you can see that moves our property tax from 18 -- to 18.9, except this year it's at 19.8 percent, with our levy rate going to .0047. So, here is -- here is some scenarios. So, what happens if -- and we have several choices. One, we can just take the standard property tax like I just showed you, which means our revenue increases five percent. Number two, we can forego taking the three percent, which means our revenue increases from new construction and it increases two percent. Number three, we can try to get the levy rate to stay as it is this year, which means our revenue increases ten percent. And, then, four, we can add our foregone amount back and do a standard tax calculation, which increases our levy rate eight percent. So -- then we took those four scenarios and we looked at some things. We -- what we estimate the base will be, which Todd will have completed probably next week, so we are just going to use -- we will kind of look at an estimate. But, then, we know some of the -- we know we have to replace -- or generally replace -- replace vehicles, parks replacements -- if we move the police step raise, if we do a three percent merit, if we do a computer replacement, et cetera, et cetera, those just give you kind of a look at what our discretionary revenue might turn out to be under any of those scenarios. Always keeping in mind that in a couple years the COPS grant funding will stop, so we need to pick that number up. So -- so, just some things to think about, some considerations as we go into this budget season. We do need to look at what we are going to do about the three percent allowable property tax in the future, because unless we are willing to make the commitment that we are only going to grow our budget by three percent -- or, actually, less than three percent, because we would be living on new construction increases, we need to have kind of a plan of how we are going to -- how we are going to approach that. Do we want to develop a trigger for when we take the three percent, so, obviously, you can see we can handle this year without taking atwo --the three percent. We have kept our base low enough that we will have money for some discretionary revenue and we have some new construction. Personally, I don't think it's likely that we would ever go back and reclaim our foregone amounts, just because when you do that it just shoots the levy rate up. So, those are just some things to think about in the next few months as we firm figures and we get ready to go into the next budget process. Todd, could you advance it manually forme? So, in conclusion, I want to thank the Mayor for driving our collaborative budget process. You have already been hard at work this year meeting with us and all the departments. I want to thank the Council for being educated participants in all stages of the budget development. We have already had Council in our sessions kind of getting out the line items and, then, I want to thank the department Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 26 of 61 directors who have the attitude that they are working on a city budget, not just their department budget. So, finally the end. Are there any questions at end of that? Still have to do the policy. De weerd: Council, any questions? Rountree: No. Good info. De weerd: Thank you. Kilchenmann: Okay. The very last thing -- I know you're weary, so we will do this quickly. we have two policies that I would like to pass. One of them is an investment policy and this is the investment policy we already have, but I would like to use it to replace the kind of banking I guess it is -- ordinance that we have, which refers to a bank that no longer exists and some outdated terms that I don'tthink they are applicable anymore. So, I gave you the investment policy. I did make two changes in it, since I first sent it out to you, and that I changed that the city will try to minimize custodial credit risk, which is the risk of an institution failing, to the highest reasonable degree. I had previously put we will insure everything, but, then, I realize for our checking account we are dependent on the government program that insures those and should that government program go away, you know, that's something we can do. So, that's the only change I made in the investment policy. So, I wasn't going to go through the whole agonizing detail of it tonight, unless anybody has any questions on it. De weerd:. Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have no questions and I think the direction you're requesting is the right way to go. Kilchenmann: Thank you. Rountree: I thought it was a good policy that needs to be brought forward and put in our ordinance. Kilchenmann: Okay. The second policy I had is the budget policy and we -- we do have a budget policy, it's fairly brief, it was written in 1998. And one note. Bill is going to help me turn this into a resolution ordinances, they -- you know, into the right format, but basically for the budget policy I took all the things that we do in the practice we have followed and I just memorialized them and wrote them down, so that we would have a policy for those who follow us, for the public, et cetera. So, are there any questions on the budget policy? And I added the CIP plan to it. De weerd: Council? Rountree: No questions. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 27 of 61 De Weerd: Okay. Hoa lun: No, Madam Mayor. I'd just comment, Stacy, again, as Councilman Rountree g . said on the other one, I'm glad to see this and it looks very thorough and it certainly doesn't leave things up to someone's imagination or -- we have got it there now, so that's a good thing. De Weerd: Okay. Kilchenmann: I have a question. So, then, we take these and make -- you make these into resolutions; right? Na Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we will work with Finance to create ry .. resolutions to, then, bring this back in front of you -- I would anticipate probably the 26th rather than the 19th, just because it's the caseload we have. We will bring it back with a resolution. Kilchenmann: All right. Thank you. B. Continued from April 5, 2011- Planning Department: Cost Share and License Agreements with Ada County Highway District (ACRD) for the Landscaping and Maintenance Associated with the Ustick, Duane to Campton and the Franklin, Ten Mile to Linder Roadway Projects De Weerd: Thank you. And thank you to Finance staff and utility billing. Appreciate ou bein here. Okay. Item 8-B is continued from April 5th. This is -- turn over to Mr. Y g Nary? Na :Yes. Thank ou, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You continued this ry Y item from last Tuesday's agenda. These are the cost share agreements of the Ada Count Hi hwa District for both landscaping and maintenance with the Ustick, Duane Y g Y to Cam ton Drive, and Franklin, Ten Mile to Linder, roadway projects. We continued p them for a week, because we had made a request to the ACRD commission to reconsider their decision. They did grant that reconsideration last Wednesday, the 6th, and set the matter over to their commission meeting tomorrow at noon. I did provide their counsel with alternative language that we had been discussing between our a encies and so that is on their agenda for tomorrow at noon for a review by the 9 .. I commission. So, I'm going to ask if you would set this matter over for one additiona week. I'm ho eful if the commission will approve the alternative language next Tuesday p we will be able to brin back to you finalized agreements for approval and, then, get this g project moving forward. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any questions from Council? Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 28 of 61 Rountree: Madam Mayor, do you need a motion or do we just need to agree to move this to -- De Weerd: Just agree. Na : A motion to continue would probably be appropriate, Council Member Rountree. ry Rountree: Oka . Madam Mayor, I move that we continue Item 8-B until our last Y meeting of the month. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. We will --until the 26th or to the 19th? Rountree: To the 19th I guess. Yeah. De Weerd: Okay. And second agrees? Hoaglun: Yes. De Weerd: Oka .This has been moved to continue to April 19th. All those in favor say Y aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoa lun: Question, Madam Mayor. Will we continue that to the 26th or the 19th? 9 Rountree: 19th. De Weerd: Did I say the 26th? I said the 19th. Hoa lun: Yes, you said 19th. I just wanted to be sure we weren't -- g De Weerd: Yeah. Just one week. Rountree: Just one week. Hoaglun: Okay. Yes, I'm an aye. C. Public Works: Surety Presentation De Weerd: Oka . All a es. Item 8-C is our Public Works. I will turn this over to Mr. Y Y Barry. Bar :Thank ou, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Good evening. Last week rY Y . late I ut a co of this roposal in your mailboxes and I also e-mailed it to you as well p pY p Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 29 of 61 in the event ou didn't frequent your mailbox. In any event, I'm here to provide Y relimina recommendations and get your thoughts on those recommendations as it p rY relates to our work centered around the warranty and performance surety issues in Public Works. We have quite a bit of information to share tonight, so I will try to get throu hit efficiently here. I do at the start of our presentation want to recognize several g of the staff who have been on the committee, Mr. Nary, several of my staff -- I won t go throu h eve body. I will have the list here for you in just a moment. And, then, also 9 rY certain) Ste hanie Barnes from All American Insurance, who has been -- her and her Y p collea ues, who I will also introduce later in the presentation, have been instrumental in g hel in us as sub'ect matter experts onthis -- on this complicated matter. So, certainly pg J we do not have developers in the room, but there were several developers and com anies that were also part of a focus group that we held several meetings with, who p also rovided input with regard to this proposal. So, without further adieu we will go p . ahead and et started. The agenda for this evening is give a brief situational analysis, g .. what are we dealing with here, whats the issues, some additional background information framing those issues. There will be a brief bonding presentation that Ms. Barnes will provide for the Council, since part of our recommendation involves a bondin com onent we thought it would be useful to have her provide information about g p bonds as a t e of surety, since the city has not general use of, and, then, a formal Yp recommendation, along with next steps should that recommendation be considered. So a little bit of background getting us to where we are in this -- with regard to this articular redicament is that historically the Public Works Department had not p p conducted warrant inspections up until about 18 months ago. There is a number of Y . different reasons for that. Regardless, one of the things we noticed in trying to improve overall erformance in our department and track a variety of different types of matrix p and information is that we had noticed that fairly new infrastructure had been subJect to uite a bit of maintenance and operational costs that we felt were out of the ordinary for q new infrastructure. We looked into that and realized low and behold, even though nd develo ers are su osed to supply us a one year warranty, under contractors a p pp ordinance and in theory have been, the Public Works Department staff had not gone back and ins ected infrastructure during that one year warranty period to make sure it p was still functioning. So, as I mentioned the process improvement to conduct warranty ins ections was made. We now conduct -- or have been conducting warranty p ins ections for about 18 months and we have performed this inspection at around the p ,, tenth month, ma be the 11th month, of simply -- it s a compressed schedule, you will y see art of our recommendation deals with that compressed schedule. It s not a whole p , lot of time to put a contractor or developer on notice to try to improve a fix, but it doesn t ive us a lot of time either to get the systems up and tested either. You may recall last g ear sort of mid spring or so, into the summertime, we had -- actually, six months into Y . our warranty inspection a change and we had our first project come to our attention, which was a 278 lot residential subdivision that had several failures that were detected Burin the warranty inspection. This project was a quality project done by quality g . en ineering and developers, as well as a quality contractor. The project was g com leted. U on completion the city accepted the project and, then, the warranty had p p commenced on that project. We conducted a warranty inspection around the 11th month eriod, there were several deficiencies, we notified the contractor, which is p Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 30 of 61 rocedure for us. The contractor, essentially, because of the economic times, was p distressed and unable to or erhaps unwilling, depending upon how you want to look at p .. it but essential) ,defaulted on their commitment to improve the deficiencies, so the city v .. ended u being responsible in the long run for correcting these deficiencies, since we p ~ ' ~ ma owned the infrastructure and the initial cost estimate was about 325,000. You y recall when we first started down this road. I'm happy to report that so far it looks like we will be able to kee the cost around 100,000 dollars. It hasn't been closed out just p , et but most of the work has been completed. We have another problem project thats y ~ ~ ~ ion and found headed our way. This is a project where we have done a warranty inspect almost the same case -- this is a 73 lot residential subdivision. The project was com leted and acce ted by the city, the warranty commenced, a warranty inspection p p .. .. occurred about the tenth or 11th month. There were deficiencies identified, the ontractor defaulted because they actually went bankrupt and so the city got stuck c , ain with the ro'ect and it looks like preliminary cost estimates are going to be around ag p 1 the 100 000 dollar mark on that particular case, too. So, as you know I briefed you last ear on the -- at least the first one and the Council directed us to -- the Public Works Y De artment to look at sort of our surety program and try to minimize the risk and make p recommendation on how to best minimize that risk and so we have done just that. So, a here is sort of the situation we find ourselves in, just to frame where we are. The develo er builds -- we are talking about the private construction world here, so a private p veto er has a contractor that they typically hire to build .improvements, water and de p rim rovements is what we are limiting the scope of this work to, and at the end of sewe p that construction period the contractor is, then, required to give the .city a one year warrant but there is no contractual relationship there between the contractor and the Y~ cit . The contract relationship really only exists between the contractor and the Y . develo er rovided that they entered a contract. So, there is really no nexus between p ' p ~ er's the cit and the contractor, except through ordinance, which requires the develop Y contractor to ive us a warranty. So, really, we have no teeth. So, there is no current g . ostin or re uired ostin of a surety or bond -- either in bond format or cash or letter p 9 q p g dit or an hin that's re uired to cover this warranty period. So, we are kind of of cre yt g q han in out there financial) , as well as potentially legally and, really, the only way that 99 y . e have ex erienced tot to recoup our costs associated with making the w p rY im rovements ourselves to the deficiencies founder and the warranty inspection is to p enerall o after some sort of legal mechanism, which we have found has not been g y g ' nificant successful to date. Those costs certainly are unpredictable, complicated, sig , 'ect to escalation. This creates a couple of impacts that we have experienced subj , , firsthand. First of all, it complicates the building permitting and certificate of occupancy rocess when ou have the developer, whose contractor has defaulted on their ability to p Y . im rove the deficiencies or rectify the deficiencies, and, of course, the city is put in a p h s of because we are not supposed to be issuing certificates of occupancy for toug p . , sewer or water s stems that either do not function or are below specifications, so we Y .. . would -- as we had tried -- attempted to prevent the issuance of additional building ermits and certificates of occupancy, found ourselves in a tough spot when the p develo er claims that we are interfering with their ability to develop and their purchase p a reement -- urchase and sale agreements and certainly occupancy of their new g p , homeowners are t in to move in, yet we find ourselves saying, well, we can t have rY 9 Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 31 of 61 eo le move into these types of situations where there is not a functioning sewer p p , stem or water s stem. So, it's created an enormous challenge for us. Its possible sy Y . . this challen a has existed for many many years for the City of Meridian, but the fact that g we have not ins ected during the warranty period, we do not know how many of these p ... ro'ects in the ast have just become the responsibility of the city. So, in any event, as pJ p . art of our work we have focused predominately on the warranty surety issues, but we p oked also as art of our scope, at performance, because we currently do require to p erfiormance sureties to be issued to the city in the event that a developer does not p want to build the im rovements. So, in orderforthem to get the final plat signature they p uld have to ost a surety -- a performance surety guaranteeing that the wo p ' rovements would be constructed. So, as part of our work we looked at whether the imp of sureties and the amounts of those sureties were applicable or made sense still types nd we have a cou le of small recommendations to shore up that area, although our a p current focus is redominately on warranty sureties. So, to begin, the performance p .. ret -- existin suret amount is 110 -- this is from the Unified Development Code. su y g Y .. The Unified Develo ment Code does allow for a higher amount, but thats the minimum p recommendations from the UDC, which we have adopted. Current surety amount, as we have determined throu h not only benchmarking and looking at other cities, but also g costin out ro'ects off real world examples, we believe is not adequate and, then, to g pJ brin in ali nment our overall recommendation with regard to warranty sureties, we are g g ~ f oin to make a recommendation later that bond be considered as a type o g g ' ' t this erformance surety. They currently are not accepted by the City of Meridian a p oint in time. So with re and to all that background, we assembled a surety team, if p g ou will, or work group, which comprised -- it was actually a pretty big work group, Y com rised of a number of different staff members throughout the Public Works p the De artment in addition to Legal, Finance, Purchasing, Planning and other areas of p ' Id as cit in addition to subject matter experts in the insurance, legal, and bonding fie Y~ well. So, this team worked for a series of months .and about weekly we would have two hour meetin s t in to et our arms around sort of how we get to where we are and g ry 9 g ou will see the recommendations are fairly straight forward and simple and don't Y .. necessaril reflect the six month project, but we were very diligent in our work in Y researchin all of the different avenues and potential pitfalls associated with the g recommendations that we have got for you. Our guiding principles were fairly straight forward. We wanted to use a simplified and streamlined approach, that would be open and trans arent in developing our processes, our methods, and our overall p recommendation. We also wanted to make sure we were fair and balanced in our overall a roach and our outcome and that we engaged the stakeholders who were pp most im acted by any type of changes that we were going to make a recommendation p on with re and to this issue. We wanted to insure that developers were offered all the g .. same o tions and no one was given favoritism, certainly as a public agency. We p ,, . wanted to address city exposure and also minimize developer requirements and burdens if we could along the way. We also thought it would be great to provide greater flexibilit if ossible, as well as options to the developing community and seek solutions Y p that would fit any economy, not just the economy that we are in today. Finally, we benchmarked a number of different jurisdictions in the pacific northwest to see what the were doing, that we could strengthen our overall proposal and ground truth it, so to Y Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 32 of 61 s eak, with regard to what was going on for -- across the board. We finally wanted to p .. ali n our outcomes with our city mission, vision, and values. So, we undertook a 9 .. number of different actions as a group. First of all, we reviewed statutes and policies to determine what kind of options were on the table for us. We wanted certain work within law and with standard practices. We evaluated a series of different development ro'ects, both past and current to address our level of exposure and we surveyed those p J .. . ractices of other regional cities, as well as highway districts, formed this cross- p .. functional team I just mentioned and we evaluated both current and future conditions. We wanted to define the surety process for construction and nonconstruction scenarios and we also put a flow chart together to describe that. We held communication sessions with Council members you may recall back in December on this issue. We also en aged the subject matter experts, as well as developing members from our g . developing community. The subject matter experts I referenced earlier are up here on the screen, includes Stephanie Barnes, who is going to speak to you in just a few minutes. The focus group participant list is this list on the screen here, represents a number of different types of developer -- developers and developing companies, includin W..H. Moore, Van Auker Companies, Coleman Homes, Brighton, Prime Land g Develo ment, Capital Development, West Park Company, and so on and so forth. So, p .. we did reach out and hold three meetings total with as many of these participants as we could get to the table. The benchmarking survey is actually noteworthy for us, because it real) did help us ground truth sort of what we thought against what was sort of . y .. Indust standard, if you will, with regard to the entities that we looked at. We looked at ry 14 Idaho locations, 13 Oregon locations, five Washington locations and three Utah locations. Most of them were cities -- 19 were cities, five were highway districts, one was a sewer district. Twenty-one of these 25 require a warranty, surety, or bond ran in an here from ten percent to 50 percent of the total cost of construction. The g g Yw re Tonal average for the warranty, surety, or bond was 34 percent. Ten of the 25 g re uire performance surety bonds in excess of 110 percent, although most did require q 110 ercent, which is the recommendation -- or at least within the UDC. And those p . amounts ranged from 120 upwards to 150 percent. The regional average, however, was about 12l percent for performance sureties, with the average regional warranty eriod bein about 1.2 years, meaning that there are a number of jurisdictions that do p 9 . re uire a two year warranty and so when you average it across the 25 we ended up q ettin about a 15 month warranty period on average. In any event, I want to turn this 9 g over, because we are going to make a recommendation for the city to consider bonds and we found it helpful as a surety group to get educated on bonds, some of us were not ve familiar with bonds, have used or worked around bonds, and so we consulted rY heavil with our friends in the insurance and bonding companies and so, Stephanie, if Y ou wouldn't mind taking it over. As shes coming up I will say that this has been a -- Y sort of an enlightening process for us to go through and I think you will find the same to be true as Stephanie updates you on this. Barnes: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this has actually been quite an interesting experience for us as well, going through all this with them. They have been ve extensive in their research and so it's been a lot of fun, actually. I don't have any of rY . , the fun graphics that the county had to make it interesting. Insurance is boring, so -- Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 33 of 61 just a little disclaimer here for legal purposes, that I didn't write this myself, I took a lot of the information from an insurance related publication. I'm going to talk a little bit about the types of guarantees. Some of these you're already using, some of them you probably are really familiar with, but I'm just going to briefly address a few of them. Of course there is corporate surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, certificates of deposit or CDs, cash, certified checks, cashier's checks, money orders, and agreements. Okay. Irrevocable letters of credit. Developer encumbers and portion of its line of credit, a fee is charged for the instrument. If the bank decides not to renew a irrevocable letter of credit or the city believes that the developer -- the city would have the right to draw down on the letter. The city, of course, is, then, responsible for taking over the improvements and finishing out the project. These are some of the pros and cons that you're going to deal with in the different types of security available. Jumping way ahead. Okay. And, of course, with their letters of credit I forgot to mention also that once you have drawn down on that the developer is usually responsible for paying back the bank immediately, so those are kind of the cons for the developer. CDs, cash deposit, that ties up the developer's capital. It requires some administrative duties of the city. 0f course, the city must confirm that the CD is in a proper assignable form, that you have the authority to draw down on the CD if required. And that you maintain the CD in a safe location. Again, you would be -- have the right to drawn down on the instrument, you would be responsible for completing the improvements yourself. Other security, such as cash, same concerns as CDs. You would also need to be sure that the cash being deposited isn't subject to possible bankruptcy preference rules and end up having to pay it back. Agreements. These are not used very often. This would put the city itself in control of funds. You would be responsible for disbursing payments monitoring, maintaining records, can create liability for the cities if not handled properly. Wouldn't suggest that you do that. The developers, of course, are concerned that funds might be delayed if you feel that anything is being done improperly. The advantage of the corporate surety bonds. Surety bonds or what you like to call performance bonds differ from the other type of security that I have mentioned. Some of the major differences are that bonds provide prequalification of the developer through an underwriting process that the company does. Not only is the surety company concerned with their financial standing, but the qualifications are examined through a rigorous assessment of the business structure, integrity, and achievements. They require multiple years of financials, as well as in-depth applications, resumes of the owners and they really make sure that the developer can do what it is they make an agreement on. The surety bond doesn't tie up the developer's source of funding or the liquid assets. The other thing is the surety company is accustomed to dealing with these types of defaults and they work with the city and the developer to remedy the situation and if that's not a possibility they go ahead and take over the performance of the agreement. And, of course, it's in the surety's best interest to handle the claim quickly and avoid additional costs, as well as affecting their rating with the treasury listing. The other thing about bonds is the full amount of the bond is available to complete the work irrespective of the amount that's spent to date or work done by the developer. So, if you have a hundred thousand dollar bond, you're 50 percent done with the job, you still have 100,000 dollars on that bond limit to finish out what needs to be done. Bonds are well suited for the allegations associated with the improvements of Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 34 of 61 subdivisions. Subdivision bonds are a t e of suret that i Yp y ncludes the performance payment of warranty all in one piece within the bonds. The guarantee -- the performance of the agreement, which if written correct rovid p es for the completion of the improvements, guarantee that all contractors and su li ' pp ers are paid and that the warranty provisions of the agreement are followed throu h. Develo er ' g p s may also obtain a separate warranty bond if they provided a different t e of sec ' erfor ~ ~ Yp urity for the p mance portion up until the fob is accepted. So, as ou can see I believ bonds c Y e surety an be a beneficial alternative to other forms of securit that ' acce tin . Y you re currently p g And that's my presentation. So, if you have an uestions I w Y q ould be happy to answer them. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Bird? Bird: Stephanie, I'm definitely in favor of bonds and stuff but in the c ase bankruptcy on a surety bond, it is different than a performance bond. Does a bankru tc elimi p y Hate the bond or the bond bought upfront by the develo er orthe contractor? p Barnes: That's -- they are looking -- and they will address that here in a li ' the bit, but they are looking at both options, taking a performance bond u front whi . p ch would contain the performance payment and warranty piece or takin securities CDs cash 9 , for the performance portion, once the job's accepted, then takin a warrant g y bond for the remaining warranty, so -- Bird: But warranty bonds would be subject to being lost in a bankru tc wouldn't it? p Y~ Barnes: No. Once the bond is written the insurance com an -- p Y Bird: It has to be paid. They are obligated -- Barnes: Yes. Bird: -- even asurety-- I knowthey are in performance, but in suret the are too. Y Y Barnes: That's correct. Bird: Thank you. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I had a question for Stephanie. Kind of similar lines. I 'ust wanted to be sure 1 -- in the proposal for performance bonds, increase the amount from 110 to 125 ercent p and, then, if we have performance bonds -- it was written here to automaticall include Y the warranty coverage and under warranty coverage it talked about the recommendations require warranty surety in the amount of 20 percent. So, I was 'ust 1 Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 35 of 61 wondering if they get a performance surety 125 ercent do the a ' ' p y p y an additional 20 percent for the warranty or is that all one package for erformance and w ? p arranty . Can you explain that to me a little better? Barnes: Yes. The bond itself covers the uidelines of the a ree g g ment, so you would need to have an agreement written that would s ecif exact) what is r ' . , p Y Y equired and, of course, then, its underwritten based on -- the performance iece would p be the 125 percent up until that job is accepted. Once the warrant oes into I a re Y g pace your g ement is going to say that you're only requiring 20 percent, so that the bond drops down to that 20 percent and follows that agreement. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just to follow up. Ste hanie the could e p y g t one bond, the performance one, that says if we approve 125 percent and then that can ' . just roll over, basically -- I don t know if that s the term, but into a warrant bond at a reduc Y ed amount, that money goes back to them and coverage continues for the rest of it. Barnes: There is no money that actually goes back to them, the a a remium for Y p Y p the bond. Hoaglun: Premium. That's right. That's right. Barnes: But yes. Yes. Hoaglun: I'm sorry. Barnes: No. That's okay. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: My question is more in terms of the performance of the contractor and with the bond or the lack of performance from the contractor and the rocess and the p documentation that would be required from this case from the city in order to initiate the action and, basically, collect on the bond. It's certainly probably not 'ust sa in the . J Y 9 Y didnt perform their work, so -- Barnes: Right. The bond itself is actually given. to the city by the develo er. The . p contractor is not involved, since there is no agreement between the contractor and the city. The developer may turn around and require bonding from his contractors on it whether the contractors perform or not. It's his duty to make sure that the erformance p is done and to make sure that his contractors pay their contractors -- subcontractors and such. So, whether they perform or not, the develo er has to come u with the p p money or find somebody else to do it and if they don't within the time period, ou can Y Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 36 of 61 place a claim against the bond and have the bondin c ' g ompany step in. Does that answer your question? Rountree: Somewhat. I understand the relationshi with ' . p the bond, but in our case, probably working directly with whoever rovided the bond ~ ' p ,even though either the developer or the city held the bond, what -- what rocess h p as to be invoked in order to make that --the terms in the bond come true? Barnes: It's placing a claim with the suret com an . The sure ' . Y p Y ty company assigns a claims adjuster that steps right in -- like I said, tried to remed betty ' y een the two parties. If they are not able to do that, they actual) have the ex ertise -- Y p they have other contractors that can bring on board immediately and take over that so that ' you dont have to manage that project. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other questions from Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Stephanie, just your expert opinion. are 20 percent now? On the surety warranty bond, you said we Barnes: That's what they are proposing. Bird: Do you think that's enough? I don't. I don't. I mean it's harder to redo somethin than ' ' g it is to do it new. It costs more to redo it than it does to do it new. Barnes: Right. I think that's probably something that you u s will be able to show 9Y through their facts and figures that they come up with and make a decision on that probably betterthan (could answerthat question. Bird: Thank you. Barnes: Yeah. De Weerd: Good political answer. Thank you. Barry: So, Stephanie will be around to answer additional questions as we 'ust finish off . J the presentation. Really, dust one or two other slides here with re and to the formal g recommendation. Under the warranty surety, as you folks have already alluded -- it sounds like you have gone through the paperwork here. We did want to re uire the a developers of secure warranty surety for 20 percent of the actual cost of construction that we extend the warranty period from one to two years in length. That's to cover the Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 37 of 61 full four seasons and to allow time for build up of the homes or whatever it is to utilize the infrastructure for that four season period and, then, also. time at the end to reconcile any problems or differences. We want to add an inspection at the 20 month eriod of p that time frame, so that we do have four months to reconcile any additional issues or whatnot with the warranty period. We currently, just so you know, for the last 18 months have been subsidizing private development off of consulting fees to insure that we are protected with regard the inspection. So, what we would like to do is reconcile that and put that cost back where we believe it belongs and that's on a developin communit g Y, so that the inspection fee for the warranty inspection is covered by the develo er. To . p do that we are recommending that, essentially, we would have a seconds ins ection rY p fee at the front end when they pull their permit, essentially. Pretty strai ht forward but 9 , we would need to get your concurrence on that. And, then, allow the followin suret . g Y options for the warranty. That warranty bonds, a letter of credit, cash, or cash equivalent. So, from a warranty perspective we feel that those recommendations would shore up both legal and financial liability that we currently have experienced and would likely experience going forward. With regard to performance sureties, we believe there is two small changes that should be considered. The first is to increase the performance surety amount from the UDC amount of 110 percent to the 1.25 ercent p , kind of, Mr. Bird, stemming off of what you just said is this actually goin to cover costs. . g We want to be reasonable. Again, insurance, as you know, is one of those thin s g where you could pay -- overpay for a ton of insurance that you don't need, or real) Y underpay for insurance that you end up finding out you really need. So, how do ou . Y strike the balance. We have tried to use as much data as we could on our ro'ects to . pJ come up with these recommendations. Certainly to be more conservative you would want, you know, to have a higher percentage amount. It's just that simple. But there are impacts, of course, associated with the costs of acquiring those sureties. I think in your packet I also put a spreadsheet with the help of Ms. Barnes, that described premium rates and you will see they are not -- they are not outrageous, particular) if . Y you re looking at a warranty situation. And I have those here in the presentation as well. If you would like to see them we can go through them. Lastly, if we -- we felt if we were making a recommendation on the warranty side to allow a bond, we thou ht it would be g nice to make -- make the bond as a possible vehicle for performance as well. So, we are just saying allow us to entertain the acceptance of bonds. We think that rovides ... p greater flexibility for contractors who don't have to tie up credit, which is real) a ve Y rY very lucrative component of their overall strategy here, because it's difficult to et credit . g these days. And so, essentially, that s it with regard to our recommendation. If the recommendations are supported there is a number of things we would have to do as a staff. First of all, we would need to revise andlor create ordinances and fee schedules enabling these recommendations. We'd have to update our development a reement 9 template to reflect the numbers that we have discussed. We need to revise the Meridian supplemental specifications under which Public Works construction ro'ects p1 are constructed, whether they be private or public. Update our contract documents, as well as modify our bid specifications and other applicable documents, so that we reflect a two year warranty period for both public and private projects. And then, final) , y develop a surety agreement template, which would be used for private develo ment p projects and, essentially, allow for the contract to be set up between the city and the Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 38 of 61 developer for the acceptance of bond. Now, a ain, we are not re uirin ' g q g bonds in any of these cases, we are making available a number of different suret o tions y p ,bonds, cash, letter of credit, that the developer can choose on their own to utilize which v ' ehicle they want. So, essentially, that's it for our presentation and I, Ms. Barnes and the s ' tall wi I I stand for any questions might have. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, I got a couple. First of all, reasonin for 20 on warrant and -- . g y well, I really agree with your 125 on performance. Reasoning on 20 onl on warrant . Y Y Barry: It's a fantastic question, Mr. Bird, and I threw u this Exhibit C here in p the event you --one of you had the question. If you look on the left column here ou will see sort Y of what -- what our mode of thinking was with regard to how we came u with th p at 20 percent. The basis is based upon a formula, if you will, and that formula is what percentage of the project needs to generally be redone and what we did is we looked at several projects that we had problems with in the past and we said of the overall ro'ect . p1 how much of it would generally need to be redone and we of estimates down from , g four, five, six percent of the project needs to be redone to 30, 40 ercent of the ro'ect p p1 needs to be redone. When we looked and we averaged we said, look 20 ercent . ~ p , probably makes sense to start out of the gate with. We didn t want to be over) hi h be " Y 9 ' cause we were trying to be sensitive as we try to shore up the concerns that we have, but we also didn't want to be grossly low either. It's really tou h to sa on an articular g Y Yp project what the amount's going to be, because our projects are so different. If ou take . Y the first case study, for example, that project had huge sewer mains that were 18 to 20 feet deep. Now, that's a very different cost structure to replace that bell over ten feet in . Y that situation versus to replace a ten foot belly in a four or five foot dee sewer s stem. p Y So, you know, you got to consider a number of different factors. We tried to be moderately conservative, but not overly aggressive in the recommendation. In an . Y event, so we came up with this sort of rework amount of -- excuse me. It's 15 percent of the total construction cost, plus any add-ons and we said, okay, well, there are oin to . g g be add-ons. There is an economic inflation add-on, which is, you know, etroleum p prices go up and go down, that impacts the pipe prices, it impacts asphalt prices, it impacts a number of different things. If you go to get an asphalt bid ri ht now the will 9 Y only guarantee you 15 days on that bid. Otherwise, it's subject to rebiddin .There is a g project management cost, right? We have to manage the project just like anyone else if we are going in to fix the problem. And this is based on sort of other projects that we have a lot of experience working on. It's possible that could be low, dependin u on the . gp complexity of the project. Restoration. We know that restoring the purpose, ri ht? g Whether that be curb and gutter or whether that be landscaping or whether that be asphalt and particular in new projects we are required by ACRD to do full width restoration, so you can't just go in and trench a four or five foot wide trench to et to g your sewer line, they want you to replace width to width. So, that's a cost, too, and we said that would be about 15 percent. And, then, a contingent fee. This is kind of the Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 39 of 61 wild card. How -- are we high or are we low. Don't re ' ally know. So, we threw in ten percent of a contingency and so if you use the calculation 'ust un ~ der there that you can see where we took, essentially, the -- the rework amount and th th en, we added each of ese percentages of the rework amount, you get to about 21.8 ercent. ' . p We said we would dust round it down to 20 percent and call it ood. And the g n, I also gave you an example here as well in your -- in your paperwork that showed how th ' at calculation was done. It's a little bit complex. I mean you wouldn't ex ect an hin p yt g different from Public Works I m sure. But, regardless, we have iven it a lot of thou ht an ' ' ' g g d it s quite possible, Mr. Bird, we could be low, but we also didn't want to be over) hi h. ' y g So, really, this is the process we used and its really a policy decision from here. Bird: It's -- Tom, the thing is whether you're 20 or 50 ercent it's oin to be ' p g g added into the cost of the fob right up front. The contractor is oin to add that in -- . , 9 g or the developer. So, it s not that. You know, yeah, maybe sometimes ou will onl hav Y y e to do five percent of rework or something, but how man times are ou oin to have Y Y g g do 70 or 80 percent of rework and you take a 500,000 job, which is nothin in sewer and . g water lines at times and start getting that, it dont take long. The nice thin about suret . g y bonds is you don't have to manage the rework on that, the bondin com an does it 9 p Y and the other question I had, Tom -- and I don't know if you can answer it or Ste hanie wi I I p have to, outside of the bonds, it's --any other -- a letter of credit and all that an of tha ~ y t protected from bankruptcy . I don't know how it is. Maybe Mr. Na will have to ry answer that. I don t know. Barry: Yeah. I'm not sure I can answer that, Mr. Bird. Mr. Barnes, it doesn't look like she knows the answer to that question. Bird: Can you, Bill? Nary: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess I'm not -- I'm not sure what your question is, Mr. Bird. Bird: Okay. You get a letter of credit -- Nary: Okay. Bird: -- or cash or something like that and the guytakesout bankruptcy before ou can .. Y get it swung over to the City of Meridian. That goes into the bankruptcy court, it don't come to Meridian, does it? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe the letters of credit are secured to the city. We hold the letter of credit. Bird: We hold the letter -- Nary: Right. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 40 of 61 Bird: But it's based on his cash, am I not ri ht? That cash is n ' 9 of in our name, the letter of credit is in our name. Nary: Mr. Bird -- Bird: All the time I have ever -- Nary: Yeah. The letters of credit basically are just an assurance from the bank ' that this person has adequate funding. Bird: Correct. Nary: So, we haven't run into this situation when we have had bankru tc so I couldn't p Y~ tell you if a bankruptcy court would consider that to be a part of the assets of the -- the individual. Potentially I guess that is -- that is a risk that exists. I was oin to add g g , Mayor and Council, I guess a couple of thoughts on what Mr. Bird has raised. I mean we -- and this was I guess more from the risk management side in trying to fi ure out g whats the -- whats the appropriate amount. When we have had this discussion I know everybody on the team has heard me say, you know, we are a hundred ercent p responsible for whatever is the problem once we own it. So, we are using this as a tool to offset those risks. Obviously, we can -- we can request all of you to assure a hundred percent risk coverage, so like we do a 125 percent of the original performance, we certainly could have come and requested a hundred percent warranty for two years. We felt that was probably a negative impact to the development community. I mean the bonds are cheaper, but there is still a cost and we felt I guess in the analysis that the likelihood of a hundred percent risk or a hundred percent failure is fairly small. So, in trying to, then, narrow down what's the risk that we are trying to secure, we looked at other -- other methods besides bonds. We could certainly require an a reement with g the developer -- essentially a new contract that they would bond for a portion and contract to be responsible for up to a hundred percent of failure. Again, we would have to -- as I think Mr. Barry has already stated, then, we would have to execute on that contract and a bankrupt developer is probably not going to help you much. So, again, it is trying to figure that out and it is really an estimate based on what Mr. Barry has stated, based on the historical -- or at least the data that we could locate in our general area of what other communities have experienced. But it's not to say that we may find after a two to five year process that we are consistently finding failure -- and, again, I think the desire is that we realistically aren't going to find failure to that degree, but it could come back to this Council in two to five years and say we are experiencing an average of 30 percent failures when we have a failure. We don't have a lot of failures. When we do it averages 30 percent. We think 30, 35 percent is more appropriate. But right now we felt to be fair and balanced with the development community we really need to pick something based on the best data that we had available. So, I would -- I would totally agree with you, Mr. Bird, I mean there is certainly a risk to the city to not secure a hundred percent warranty, but we didn't feel that in the balance of things that was areasonable -- a reasonable thing to put back from the development community and based on at least the best material and information we had we felt 20 percent was a Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 41 of 61 fair recommendation, but I think as Mr. Bar 's stated it's ' . rY certainly subject to the discussion of this group and what your preference is in oin forwar g g d. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: And that's what I'm getting at, Bill, is 20 percent ou're oin to a -- ou'r ' Y g g p y y e going to pay your premium anyway and the city is going to pa for it. That's added ri ht in . Y g to the bid or a lot of times in the private industry they pa our -- the will 'ust a Y Y Y 1 p y your premium for you for a bond. So, what's the difference of that whether -- it's a hundred percent, because all it takes is one of those that's 80 or 90 ercent o bad that kill p g s you. You re spending the rest of your -- it's not like we are loin 20 or 50 million dollars 9 worth of contract work every month or something. I just -- I real) -- while I could bu . Y Y 20, I would sure like to look atgoing alittle -- at least a little more than that, like 50. But I'm just afraid that our taxpayers are going to get -- well, our taxpa ers or rate a ers Y pY , whoever they are, they are all taxpayers. Barry: Mr. Bird, I very much appreciate your comments and we stru led with this for -- g9 Bird: I knowyoudid. Barry: --quite awhile. We had it as high as 30 percent atone point in time and felt ve rY good about that number, but also felt without an enormous amount of data, 30 ercent . p may be a little too high out of the gate to start. So, we are definitely supportive of anything between 20 and 30. I also would say let's look at regionally what's going on as well. We want to be competitive and we want to benchmark ourselves, we believe, against what other jurisdictions are doing as sort of a ground truthing and, you know, really, what you see -- you do see a trend of more jurisdictions going to a two year warranty period and you do see a higher warranty amount, particularly in the highway districts. Particularly in Canyon County, to be quite frank. They are requiring as much as 50 percent. Now, I did want to clarify one comment I believe you made, which was the fact that this would be added to the city's cost or whatever. What we are talking about here specifically is private development and these costs will be borne by the developer, so they are the ones who are going to have to pay the premium, not the city. This is not a public project, it's a private project where the developer is -- Bird: Whoever is paying for it is paying for that bond. Barry: Correct. Bird: Whoever had the final. When we buy it from them or to take -- if we buy it from them, then, we pay for it. If they give it to us and we take it over, then, they pay for it. But I can tell you that -- that contractor -- it's not coming out of his ocket, it's bein p g added to his bid. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 42 of 61 Barry: Yeah. My sense is that the develo er would bear ' p the cost on the private development project and the contractor, if the are re uired to h Y q ave a bond, that bond would be between the contractor and developer, we would not be a ' party to. That s a different type of bond that, yes, the contractor would ass robabl p , p y, the cost onto the developer, so the developer was covered. What we are talkin abou ' g t is covering ourselves for any actions the developer may take whether it was caused ' by their contractor or otherwise and, again, we believe that that cost would be borne b . y the developer. There is no reason the city -- for the cit to bear that cost whi ' . , . Y ch is why, again, we were trying to be cost sensitive about the recommendation, while also t in to cover wh ~ ~ ~ ~ g at we thought was the bulk of the risk. Its true, Mr. Nary, is absolute) ri ht. Weareah Y g unfired percent liable all the time, but we wanted to balance that a ain kind of th g e information we have now and we would certainly entertain a hi her amount but g , you know, that's got consequences, too, so -- Bird: I can go for the 20, but I'd sure like to just see bonds. De Weerd: Well -- and, I think we need stronger statistics on failure rates and before you get too carried away. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Tom, you talked about in your presentation that ou have Y created this surety team and you worked with options. My question is did you look at otheroptions otherthan surety? Barry: I depends on what you mean by surety. What we looked at from a suret . Y perspective was a number of different surety vehicles, cash, letters of credit, CDs, and in this case bonds. Those were the things we looked at. If you're meaning somethin g other than that, I m not sure I can answer in the affirmative. Rountree: Okay. Well, what I'm thinking -- and it's just kind of came across when you started talking about the process and the scenarios where we got ourselves in a pickle, it all boils down to what seems to me a -- a desire on the part of the city to -- to accept or gain ownership of these facilities before it's time and it seems to me that an approach -- and I can in my mind see all the disadvantages of doing this, but leave that warranty period in the hands of the developer and the city not take ownership until two ears after Y we have done a warranty inspection and, then, take it. Until that time it belongs to the developer. Work out something in the development agreement that the homeowners association owns it until that time and that they have to convey it by standards and by performance to the city within that period. The developer bears all the costs, the city has no exposure and so we don't have this one hundred percent liability all the time. I still see -- you know, I can still see disadvantages of that, but there is disadvantages in the surety and the disadvantages there, particularly in these times, is that's more cost to the developer and I have already heard comments that, you know, you had the group together, but I have heard comments that the city is looking at making development cost even more. So, I had played with those kinds of concepts in the process. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 43 of 61 Barry: Yes, sir, and I appreciate the comment and uestio q nand in that particular case that was an option we did look at. So, I'm clear now what ou -- . y what you meant behind other options other than surety. We wrestled with that o tion f ' p or quite awhile, as a matter of fact, and we thought that was our silver bullet if ou will. If ' . Y the problem is accepting ownership and now we are on the hook, wh not 'ust defer ' Y 1 accepting ownership and let them deal with it. The problem is, as it sounds like ou h y ave worked through your head a little bit, we have kind of of the same issues and ' 9 we worked with legal on this as well. One of our biggest concerns is who owns an d operates -- particularlyoperates that system and if we are issuing permits to build and certifica tes of occupancy to occupy in those areas held by private systems that are connected to our system, there seems to be a great sort of problem with the re ulato a encies . g ry 9 , particularly the EPS -- or the EPA on our NPDS permit for dischar es to our s stem. 9 Y For example, a sanitary sewer overflow in the kind of a case, as we have ex erienced i p n private lift stations, was something we were held responsible for. So, those violations in those situations are going to be things we are still responsible for, whether we acce t p the project or not once it's connected to our system. The connection itself is almost the acceptance that in many cases the regulatory agencies look at. So, we could do that if we didn't allow the connection to our water or sewer system, but, then, now ou have Y got an untested system that you can t warranty and inspect and insure that it works. So I don't know, Mr. Nary, if you had anything else to add, but we did sort of s in our . p wheels greatly on that particular issue and found that it didnt work out in our case so -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would concur with what Tom is sa in . . Yg I mean that -- that was our desire, but because of the problem -- and ou folks all Y recognize we have had this issue with private systems and we have ended up takin 9 over those lift stations around town for the exact reason that Tom is talkin about. We .. 9 have a liability to the discharge anyway. So, even if we didn't own the s stem, we are .. .. Y avoiding one level of liability to really just take on a different one that we have no control over. So, we felt that again, balancing the two we would rather have control over what comes into our system, we would rather have control over how it's maintained, how things are discharged to it, and not end up -- otherwise, we will end up with rivate p agreements, we have to execute on those -- I mean it's just a different can of worms. Again, I understand exactly where Councilman Rountree is coming from. In t in to ,. ryg assess this is a very difficult one to assess the risk on. It appears other communities have gone from 110 percent to --from warranty down to nothing, to 15 percent, and so it is a moving target. I totally understand that. But we felt that, again, after vetting all of the different options, some warranty surety was appropriate, it is a development cost that doesn't exist today. So, the criticism or the comment that any of you may have received from anyone that we are adding cost of development, part of the reason we felt comfortable in making that recommendation to you was we are also giving up a little on the other end and by making a recommendation that they can also get a warranty bond on the performance side, which they can't do today. So, they are -- they are asked to increase their performance bond by 15 percent, but the ability to bond for it, instead of writing a letter of credit, is a huge financial incentive for many, and, then, the additional cost of warranty, although it is a cost, when you offset the two and ou look at it as a Y Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 44 of 61 package, we still think it's a very com etitive develo men ' p p t environment that we are creating as we transition from where we are toda to where we th' ' . Y ink we are going to be in two to three years. I hope that answers your uestion. q Rountree: I think I answered my question m self I 'ust wanted Y 1 to ask the question did you look at it. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Question for Tom. I'm wrestling with Councilman Bird's uestion a . q bout, you know, is 20 percent enough and if you can walk throu h for me --and it's -- as A . 9 ttorney Nary said, you know, we look at risk management and what are the risks and ou u have I Y g Ys ooked at scenarios and actual cases. When a system is bein built ou u s -- g Y gY you have inspectors in the field that inspect it as it's being built; is that ri ht? 9 Barry: Correct. Hoaglun: So, although sometimes you don't -- a sleeve is put in wron ,there is a bent g pipe, it can't be spotted until it's charged, it's operational, which, then, Burin the 9 warranty inspection that s when it shows up. Normally? Barry: In many cases. Sometimes those problems show up on the initial final inspection before we accept the project and, of course, we go throu h our rocess 9 p where we have to make correction before we accept it. But once acce ted, es, there is p Y a period of use or nonuse or partial use that the systems sort of either settle in or et . g abused by say the builders who the developer sold the lots to. For exam le, we have p an enormous amount of problems with debris in the lines, okay? So, debris in the lines. Where does that come from? We can't be certain, but it looks like the debris is construction debris. We get concrete down in our manholes, we have had inches to feet of concrete in our manholes, two-by-fours, we have had rags, we have had everything you can imagine in brand new sewer systems that plug those lines up that maybe, honestly, the developer didn't or wasn't responsible for. However, a builder who they sold a lot or series of lots to came along and trashed the sewer system, so to speak. Those are still things that are covered under a warranty and the person responsible for that warranty is the developer. Well, excuse me, currently it's the developer's contractor, which we have no relationship with whatsoever, we didn't choose them, we didn't hire them, we didn't vet them, we didn't -- we don't have a contract with them and that's what's creating partially the problem. So, those -- these problems come from a variety of issues. Sometimes they are builder related, ou know Y , poor management practices or whatnot. Sometimes vandalism on the systems that are abandoned, we have a lot of that going on. Sometimes a poor compaction -- you know, what we are worried about is our utility compaction and that's what we look for. But if there is a problem from the top of our sphere that we look at with regard to the road base or anything else or, for example, in some cases we have floods, ri ht so it's an 9, Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 45 of 61 irrigation system or a water main break in the actual develo ment that su er . p p satu rates the soils and creates weakness in the soils and subsidence that can caus -- e I mean there is just a number of different things that can cause a s stem to fall out Y of spec, if you will. And we believe that's the job of the warranty and it's 'ust like this buildin 1 g or anything else that you purchase, there is a warranty that comes with it because h t ere is a period of use that should be guaranteed to insure that what ou urchased is oin Y p g gto meet the needs for a least a certain period of time that's redictable and as we h v p ae seen in some cases, the warranty length of time and the guarantee for performin under a warrant sc g y enario are lacking. Hoagtun: Madam Mayor and Tom. Then, really, it sounds like thou h there w. g , are areas ithin the whole system of that development, for exam le, had failure or would h .. p ave to be rectified. Its not necessarily the whole system that was installed but i p eces and parts that failed or didn't pass the warranty inspection that, then, would have to be fix ed at the cost of the bond -- then using the proceeds from the bond as o osed to r' pp fight now the rate payers have to pay for that. Barry: Correct. Hoagtun: Which to me I think is unfair, so -- Barry: Yeah. That's absolutely correct, Mr. Hoagtun. The -- the t ical failure . yp on a project is not widespread failure, it tends to be an isolated spots. It could be cracked T's, it could be a belly in a portion of a line, it could be a manhole connection it co I u d be grouting issues, it could be debris and that's why we don't think a hundred ercent or p even 50 percent makes sense based upon the data we have now. We think eah ~Y maybe as much as 30 percent. We have gone there, we have real) scrutinized it so Y , we are comfortable somewhere between 20 and 30 percent we thou ht out of the ate g g until we had a little bit more data that we could really true u the number we would start . p , a little bit more conservative to give benefit of the doubt, ou know to the develo er Y ps and contractors as we build more data behind substantiatin a number that mi ht be . g g higher. We didnt want to unnecessarily burden financial) the develo in communit . Y pg y We wanted to be very sensitive. We -- believe me, this has been difficult form team Y we are all very sensitive to any kind of increase in costs to any entit at this oint in . Y p time. We want to see development continue in this communit as much as an one Y Y else, so we are doing our best to balance that with the recommendation that we have. Hoagtun: Thank you, Tom. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Stephanie, what would be the premium for 100,000 on a suret bond fora ood Y g contractor? Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 46 of 61 De Weerd: I'm sorry, you will need to -- Barnes: Did you bring that up? Oka . He brou ht Y g up some sample rates here. It totally depends on the financial backin and the ex Brien . g p ce of the developer and you will see here that we have got a breakdown, we did some ' sample rating and the range is anywhere for the warranty portion one to three ercent ' p for the entire performance payment and warranty bond, it can be one to five ercent --five ercen ' p p t is very odd, we don t typically see that, that's for somebod who has had some ' Y problems in the past. Bird: That would be a pretty bad financial. Barnes: Right. Right. So, I see an average of about two ercent. p De Weerd: Does that answer your question? Bird: It sure did, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Thank you, Stephanie. Barry: And, Mr. Bird, also to add to that, we did put -- I did have staff o back and look 9 at a number of different protects and apply these premiums across the board to ro'ects pJ we had experience with in the past to determine what the cost er loss would be and p thats what you see on the very right-hand column. If you were to o after 'ust the g J warranty bond, the cost per loss is anywhere between 20 dollars to 60 dollars on a lot that has sold typically for anywhere between 30 and 75 thousand dollars in the cit . So . Y , we feel, yes, there is a cost, but that that cost is not necessarily oin to break the bank. g g Easy for us to say, I understand every penny counts at this point in time, but we also are stewards of the public's funds and that's -- we need to be sensitive to that --that cost on our citizens as well. And one last thing. On the performance bond o tion if a p , developer did choose to not build the improvements and purchase a erformance bond p , that performance bond premium that you see here would cover the erformance eriod . p p of the bond and would include the two year warranty period whenever the cit acce ted Y p the actual project. So, these are mutually exclusive costs. Does that make sense? If you're going a performance bond option, you're not going to have to a the warrant pY Y bond premiums. If you're building the improvements yourself, such that ou do not . Y need to obtain a performance bond, then, you're only talking about acquirin a warrant g Y bond and even, then, this goes back to the question of cost. You don't have to et a g bond in any of those cases. If you want to front cash or if you want to et a irrevocable g letter of credit, you can do that through your bank, the problem is you're t in u that Y g p credit for whatever period we -- you folks choose to cover the risk, whether it be a one year warranty period or a two year warranty period. So, we felt that this was a ve . rY flexible series of options that we have provided the developing communit ,while also . Y being cost conscious and sensitive to the risk and liability to our taxpa ers and rate Y payers. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 47 of 61 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: First, thank you to you and our stafffor not onl r' ' Y y b inging the subject up, but working out the recommendation. A question I uess about timin ' 9 g. I m assuming that the two year warranty period --the clock starts the da that we s . y ay accept ownership of this and we dont accept ownership unless we think it's workin cor g rectly on that day, so anything we find in the first inspection they would have to remed before ' y we said, okay, we accept and, then, that two year period starts. Where m uestion oes I uess i Yq g g , s whoever the underwriter or the bond or even the other kinds of sureties a I ' etter of credit and stuff, if we have a development before, as we have several now that st ' arted like four years ago or five years ago and, then, have to take a ause the are filin ' p y g for time extensions, so we know they are not going away, how Ion will the bondin a enc wai . g 9 g Y t until that period starts? Barry: The period of the warranty starting? Zaremba: Yeah. Barry: Yeah. I would defer to Ms. Barnes on that. Do you know? I'm not sure on that question, but -- Barnes: This is something that we did address and it can be difficult. I do have companies that have subdivision bonds that are still out there that are -- have been renewed ten years. And there is an additional remium eve time w p ry a have to renew the bond, waiting for that warranty period to begin. So, you know, it de ends on the p bonding company and the financial status of the contractor -- or the develo er as to . p whether or not they will continue renewing that is. So, that is somethin ou run into 9Y , especially with the warranty bond, you could have somebody put up a CD at the end decide they want to put up a bond and they may not be able to qualif at that oint so .. Y p , then, they would have to make a decision to do a letter of credit or -- or some other t e . Yp of surety. But the bonding company has that ability to say we are not oin to lend ou g g Y after a certain point. So, that is something you run into and that is somethin ou need gY to address in your agreements. You would need to make that decision to draw down on that bond prior to allowing that to expire. Does that answer your question? Bird: I think so. Thank you. De Weerd: Good question. Any further questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Very good presentation. De Weerd: Okay.. Thank you so much. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 48 of 61 Zaremba: Madam Mayor, not real) a comment ' Y , but I would just say I appreciate the recommendations and like others my instinct sa s, oka ma b tha Y Y~ y e it ought to be higher n 20 percent, but I am happy to accept the thou ht that w ' g ent into the -- where you got to 20 percent, knowing as Mr. Nary mentioned ou will con ' ' .. , Y time to monitor this and if in a couple of years you have to come back and sa it sh y ould have been 30 percent or something, at least we have got the system started and we are fixi ' ' ng the deficiency that has existed up until now and I appreciate that. Bird: Madam -- De Weerd: Yeah. Mr. Bird. Bird: As we move forward in the next steps, Iwould -- I would like to ' see a public hearing regarding this, whether it's required or not. I think it would be ve s ry mart for us to because I'm sure there is some developers, builders out there that mi ht have oth 9 some er views that we are not thinking about now or we are not lookin at. I think that .. 9 would be very good. But I definitely think we need to get this oin ahead and et it in 9 9 g place. De Weerd: And I guess I know Public Works has been historical) ve ood abou . Y rY g t dotting the I s and crossing the Ts and the groups you go and s eak to that robabl p p Y the developer's council, the BCA, would be a good place once ou have that draft . Y ordinance to bring it to -- and maybe even bring some of the eo le in on our p p Y committee that can help with questions, certainly Stephanie. She can o on the travel -- 9 the travel show with you. Barry: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Councilman Bird. We would be ha to take it . ppY to those groups.. We did think about doing that earlier, i.e., as art of this rocess p p leading up to where we are tonight. However, the builders council does not seem to have a vested interest in .this, because we are talking about land develo ment and not . p construction of buildings, so that group did not seem to make sense to have at the table. We are certainly open to asking them to come to the table. There ma be some nexus Y between them and the developers they purchase a lot from that ma need to be Y explored, so we are happy to do that, but that was intentional, because we didn't feel that there was -- that they really had a dog in the fight, so to speak. And I certain) Y appreciate Mr. Birds recommendation fora public hearing. I would also recommendation that. I know that the developers we spoke to are uneasy in some cases about this and -- and a couple of them are just not supportive and we -- I understand and appreciate that. They have, nevertheless, been instrumental in challenging us and helping us to refine our ro osal and make it what is to ' p p day, which we think is the best recommendation we have with everything considered. So, if there are no other questions, I would ask for some sign of support with regard to the recommendations and maybe some sort of motion or otherwise to direct staff to work on the next steps, just so we know that we are in alignment with the Council's wishes and don't necessarily bring something back that doesn't meet your expectations. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 49 of 61 De Weerd: There is no guarantees. Barry: That's true. Hoaglun: Well, Madam Mayor, I don't know if we need a m otion on that or just comments, but my thinking is this is -- a lot of work has one into it and it's be g en good work, I think it shows a need, you know, because of the econom we h y ave had some developers that have gone bankrupt and we have had some roblems p dumped in our laps and -- and that means the rate payers have covered those costs an ' d I just don t think that's fair, I think you guys have worked Ion and hard to come u with 9 p a syste m that allows some flexibility and like Councilman Bird I would like to hear fr om the developers and -- and that may change my mind on a few thins ma be '' g , y it s percentages, maybe it won t be, but I think we need to move forward with this and make sure it's publicized and let's hearfrom folks and see what needs to be done next. Rountree: I second that motion. Bird: I third it. Zaremba: Fourth. De Weerd: I think you have good direction. Barry: We have what we need. Thank you all for your time. This has not been the easiest of topics to get your arms around as seems almost every Public Works to is is p that way, but we do appreciate your engagement and certainly our insi hts and .. Y g definitely your support. So, thank you again. D. Public Works: New Street Lights for School Walk Routes De Weerd: Thank you, Tom. And team. Okay. Item 8-D is also Public Works. I see Tim walking up. I don't -- Watts: One of the things that I also wanted to ask is it makes sense for us to -- if we are asking the development community to go through the same process that we should ask our own contractors that we hire for our own sewer and water lines to meet those same standards, so I would like you -- I'd like to make it part of the recommendation that we also do the same with our own public projects as well as far as the two year warrant Y and the warranty bond. Bird: Why would you be different? Watts: Exactly. That's what -- Bird: And we make them have a performance bond, don't we? Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 50 of 61 Watts: Correct. We do not have a warrant bond -- Y Bird: We don't have a warranty bond. Watts: Yes. Bird: How can you do it to a developer and not do it to somebod else? Y De Weerd: I think it's worth making a parallel process to make those similar. Watts: Great. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Tim. Curns: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I wanted to come before ou this . Y evening and ask for a little bit of guidance and input on something that I have been working on. Back almost a year ago now we had discussions about the ossibilit of p Y doing new streetlight installations at some point in the future and so at that time what we had just discussed was kind of high level looking at the whole city, lookin at whole 9 corridors and that sort of thing and it seemed like there was a desire that if we were going to go the way of installing new lights we would want to be much more focused and look at specific problem areas, so I have delved into that -- De Weerd: Hey, Tim, can I interrupt you fora moment? Curns: Sure. De Weerd: Mr. Barry, just when you give Council packages prior to City Council meetings, make sure you get it to the city clerk, too, so we can have it part of the public record going into the meeting. Barry: Absolutely, Madam Mayor. I apologize for that. Unfortunately, I took matters into my own hands this time, as I'm without an administrative assistant and wasn't aware of that, so I hand delivered those myself and overlooked giving the city clerk a copy. I apologize. We will get you a copy if you don't have one already. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And I apologize for interrupting. Curns: Not a problem. Anyhow, I kind of delved into looking at more specific areas -- problem areas and a possible plan and I just wanted to bring that back to Council and see if you think that maybe I'm going in the right direction or the wrong direction or advise me of any other things to look into. So, in looking at -- at specific locations and kind of what is .the worst scenario in a -- on a dark street, it's probably your pedestrian, cyclist, versus vehicle interactions which are the nasty ones. So, really the busiest locations in the city for pedestrian, bicyclist activity tends to be school zones and school walk routes. So, that's what I have really been focusing on gathering information about Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 51 of 61 and a lot of the schools in -- we have got a cou le different thins ' p g going on that elementary schools tend to be a little bit later in the mornin so it's littl ' g, a bit lighter out, so -- and they also tend to be embedded a little bit more into the nei hborhood ' g ,which have slower speed streets and better sidewalk facilities and whatnot. N . ow, when you look at middle schools and high schools, we are seein that there is a lot f ' g o kids walking during morning commute, it's dark out, it's general) somewhere in th ~ ' Y e 7.00 o clock range, you know, almost 7:00 o'clock, beyond that hour. And so the corridor I u that kind of o e ~ g, ess, p pp d up in looking at whats going on is Linder Road and its an interesting road to begin with, just because it has so man schools alon i Y g t and school walk routes that go down it or across it. It also has all the bus barn traff' is that gets dispatched up -- transfer trucks from SSC headed to the -- the landfill th e commute -- it's aheavy commuter route, so it's got a lot of interestin -- it's 'ust a ve ' . g j ry busy corridor and it has a lot of schools on it and I don't know how man of ou are fami ' ' .. Y Y liar with driving up and down that in the morning, but it can be interestin the -- es eci . g p ally down at the high school with all of the student drivers and the hu a amount of eo le th g p p at a re walking up and down Linder and crossing. So -- De Weerd: My kids walked that for years. Curns: Yes. De Weerd: Uphill both ways. Curns: In the snow. So, school zones I was focusing on and as I mentioned that kind of pops up as the -- that's the hot spot for schools. I also looked at a cou le other . p school walk routes, including Lewis & Clark out along Pine, which is actual) rett dark . Yp Y , it doesnt have a huge -- it borders on industrial, so it doesn't have a hu a walk route. . g When I say walk routes I -- I dont mean just whats within the flashin beacons of the g school zone, but where the kids are actually funneling down to et to the school. So 9 , that's -- that's what I have been looking at and we have actual) had some com taints Y p about a couple of those areas, one of them being Rocky Mountain Hi h School and the . .. g fact that thats a five lane facility, there is no crosswalk, which is somethin that's one g g back and forth at the traffic safety committee, as Mr. Nary can attest to and a particularly dark stretch, higher speed, doesn't have a school zone, because -- or school zone speed reduction, because it's a high school. And,then, also the location -- or the stretch down from kind of the Chateau towards Pine area is also seein a lot of 9 accidents as well. So, anyhow, thats kind of been my focus and I have looked at some kind of high level what could be done about it, but I haven't really gotten into too much detail yet, because I wanted to see if the Council thought this was a ood direction to 9 head. Should we go that direction at some point in the future. So, I uess with that if . g there is any questions about what I have have been up to? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just to comment. I had a chance to talk to Tim about this when we were -- we sat down to go over his budget. The budget was onl , ou know a YY Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 52 of 61 ten minute discussion. I think we spent more on this to ' pic than the budget, but to me I thought Tim made a very good case on focusin on tho g se -- referred to as safety zones where those kids are walking and bikin to middle school. g 8th Street was the one we talked about, that that work is movin forward. So that w ' g as a big need thats being addressed. And, then, so where do you o from there. That ' g Linder corridor -- he made a very good case when you look at the map of the schools of Meridian ' . High School to Linder to Sawtooth, to Rocky Mountain, there is a lot of stude ' nts in that -- in that corridor and lighting -- you know, the standards that have been in lace hav . p e changed over the years and there is older areas and there is new areas and it's kind of her e, there, and somewhere nowhere. So, to me I thought he made a rett ood case for ' p Y g that Linder area to focus on and we don t have a big budget for street li htin but to m g g, e I thought he made a compelling case forthat. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would also agree that -- especially around the middle schools because th kids -- I thin ~ ose k they come the earliest and you re talking about 11 and 12 ear old sixth Y graders, seventh and eighth graders, and most of them need to ride bikes or walk. I think anything we can do within ourbudgetto light it is definite) a hel . Y p Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Thank you. I think you're answering the question that we asked when ou be ' ' Y gan this is what are the priorities, what are the specific things that need to be looked at first. It doesn't mean there might be a -- not be a second level or riorities after we .. p address these, but you re providing the information that we were lookin for, but the one . g thing (might -- suggestion or question as we look at funding, since ACRD has their community programs going now, I might at some point ask ACHD whether some of these might be projects that they could fund. I notice that Mr. lnselman has been sittin . 9 through our meeting, I dont know if thats something he would want to attem t to p answer at the moment, but thank you for being here. But I was just going to su est . gg that part of the purpose is safe routes to schools and I think they have focused that on sidewalks, but lighting might also be an issue that --that they might consider under that program. De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Tim, I -- we have talked about li htin and I g g agree you re kind of focusing on the -- the right things first and that's the unsafe areas and I agree with Councilman Bird, I think the middle schools seem to be the tou hones. . g You do, however, bring up a sideline in your comments that I think I would like to see you work with ACHD with, not only with the safe routes to school and the lightin ,but g Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 53 of 61 you brought up school zones and the identification of school zones and I'm ' going to give you two examples. I'm going to do two elementary schools and I'm oin to do two h' g g igh schools. One is Rocky Mountain. No speed zone. I think there is a crossw alk. No reduced speed limits. No flashing lights. Meridian Hi h School two s eed zon 9 p es that go through an intersection, with bouncing flashin li hts on both those stre . 9 9 ets. Chaparral -- I believe it's Chaparral. Is that the one at Ten Mile and -- De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Yeah. Chaparral. No fewer than eight roadwa se ments with reduced Y g speed zones and school zone signing, complete with pedestrian actuated si nal that . g has the bouncing school crossing lights. Prospect Elementary on McMillan. No school zone signing on McMillan, but a pedestrian and vehicle actuated light that connects the subdivision to the north, which -- to the subdivision in the south where Pros ect resides . p and I do not believe there is even a speed zone demarcation on the entrance into that subdivision where the school sits. So, to me there is a real disparity in the wa it's Y signed and, Gary, I dust don't understand -- I don't -- I'm not complaining, I just don't understand, it doesn't make sense to me when I see these things and -- have we 'ust 1 forgot some or are there some particular cases that have a peculiar need? I don't know. Curns: Councilman Rountree, that's a perfect discussion topic for our traffic safet Y committee and something that we -- we have the ACRD folks there who can help us understand how those are laid out. Rountree: I had asked a question about Chaparral as to why so many and why so much. It still doesn't make sense to me, but I appreciate the safety and the need for safety, but, boy, it's confusing to the motoring public, particularly headed north on Ten Mile, you go through a school zone and, then, for about 400 feet you're out of the school zone, then, you're in a school zone again. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Tim and I think can effect getting more of this on our traffic safety and it has kind of sort of been a school safety zone commission on a lot of discussions and I can tell we have worked real well with ACRD and some of it is actually the fact that -- and I agree with Councilman Rountree, it doesn't seem like that's the time to discuss it, but we had a great deal of after-the-fact discussion in the Paramount Subdivision regarding Paramount Elementary, because of school zone concerns. ACRD did step up and they put up a number of school zone signs in Paramount now. I can't remember, Tim, there has to be at least 20. Curns: A surprising amount. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 54 of 61 Nary: Yeah. At least 20 that were added into Paramount after the fact. We have had discussions about Rocky and Linder and I, honestly, I think you could make a traffic engineering case that you could make a school zone from Cayuse Creek all the wa to Y Peregrine Elementary and logically make it fit, but no one would ever -- no one would ever observe it, because they would forget they are in a school zone. But to answer your other question, we will -- I just sent an a-mail to Tim to -- that we could robabl . p Y add some of this discussion to our traffic safety meeting next week. As we et to the ., g end of the school year it s a good time to have that discussion now as we et started g into the next school year, so they are on ACHD's .radar for their safe routes to school program that they have and for the funding that's available for it. It does seem like overkill sometimes as I drop my grandson at Chaparral that there is a lot of school zone in that area, but some of it was at the request of the school, some of it was at the request of the police. I will tell you, we kicked it around in traffic safety a Ion time, g especially the Cherry Lane ones, but, yeah, I think we have found it to be successful. ACRD has been another -- a good partner in stepping up on those hoc si nals and . g putting them in locations that can be an asset to students being able to cross. So, we will continue to work on that and bring back -- and I think Tim has got the ri ht idea, ou g Y know, we need -- we talk about a lot of traffic safety and making this reall a lobal Y g discussion and, then, we dont dust want to talk about the next school that ets built . 9 , since we are not building a lot of schools right now, we should be able to start addressing these in a more systematic way, so that Prospect and Rock and all these . Y various schools really have safe routes, which include lighting, include signals, include signalization, includes school zones, include all of those things that we can then brin 9 back to the Council for recommendation and that ACHD can, then, take to their board as well. Rountree: And, Madam Mayor, for Bill and Gary's sake, I didn't make my comments to complain, it's just -- it's a bit confusing. Nary: No. I totally didn't take it that way at all. Rountree: It's hard to explain to somebody when they ask you the question and ou hit Y on the only response that I could come up with and that's because ACRD has been really responsive and when asked they have been providing these things, but ma be we Y need to take a look at it. De Weerd: And, again, it goes back to when we stepped back, took a look at standardizing speed limits in the city. Take that comprehensive look and, then, let's figure out how we can learn from it, apply it to any standards as we look at school placements and as new roads are coming in that those different measures are taken into account as well. So, we are not having to go back. But appreciate ou brin in Y 9g that up and certainly traffic safety is the appropriate home for that discussion, as ou Y have all the key players at the table. Curns: Absolutely. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 55 of 61 De Weerd: Any other comments orfeedback you're lookin for? g E. Public Works: Discussion on Proposed Master License Agreement with Ada County Highway District for Re ulation of g Downtown Sidewalk Areas Curns: I think that's good for now, actually. I can 'um ri ht into the next to is if J p 9 p that works. De Weerd: Okay. Curns: So, the next item here -- do you need to announce that or are we ood? 9 De Weerd: You're good to go. Curns: Okay. And do you all have copies of what was rovided hereon this next ite p m. I hope. Okay. So, this -- this agreement that you have before ou here is actual) on . Y y e that the city of Boise did with Ada County Highway District last summer and this i s something that came up in a working group that Public Works and Plannin have to kind of g work through a couple streetscapes -- streetscapes group, it's kind of -- we do a lot of topics in there, but one of them was we were trying to kind of sim lif develo ment pY p processes with -- related to some of the standards that the city enforces and the -- for the downtown area of Meridian, Meridian Development Cor oration has s ecifi p p c streetscape standards that whoever develops has to, you know, ut in the ark benches p p and the streetlights and the street trees and all that sort of thin . So that's somethin g g that the city enforces MDC and we realize that there was a -- there was a little bit mor e complicated process maybe than there could be with that. Now we asked the developer to put in the specific treatments, they tend to be within the ri ht of wa . g Y downtown. A lot of times the right of way goes right u to the doors of the buildin s p g and, then, after we ask them to do that, then, they need -- have to o to the hi hwa . g g Y district to make sure that they can get approval to put those thin s in the ri ht of wa g g Y that we are asking them to put there, which it's just one more ste in the rocess and . ., p p especially if it s something like a street cafe, somebody comes in, the want to do a Y street cafe, we were to -- you know, they want tables out on the sidewalk that's in the right of way, it has to go through ACRD for a license agreement rocess and then . p , thats something we are working on them with. So, what this a reement did with the cit . .. g y of Boise is it Just kind of sliced off this little bit of responsibilit from the hi hwa district Y g Y and gave it to the city of Boise, whereabouts they have the abilit to -- it's kind of like Y one stop shop for that, where they have the ability to regulate the lacement of these p things within the right of way. It doesn't transfer any responsibilities, other than what we already have for like sidewalks, for example, it's not -- it's not causin the cit to inherit .... g Y responsibilities with the sidewalk that normally would be between ACHD and the property owner, that's simply regulating those things that might be within the ri ht of wa . 9 Y and that sidewalk area. So, we looked at this. We also gave it to -- I think we had Ted Baird in legal -- was it Ted or -- it was Ted. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 56 of 61 Nary: It was Ted. Curns: Okay. Run through this. He took a look at it and, really, the next thing was we wanted to see if the Council was interested in pursuing something like that before we went any fartherwith it, so -- if there are any questions about this or concern? De Weerd: Certainly like the one stop shop and where you can do all your business and it's coordinated communication, basically, is certainly an advantage. Any comments or questions from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Question on assignment of liability, I guess, on a decision that the city might make in that particular portion of the right of way that's actually owned and -- by statute ACHD's. Do we need to develop standards that provide safety guidelines for what we might approve on the sidewalks and in doing so do we accept any potential liability situation that might arise or do we share that with ACHD or does ACHD stand back? That's the situation? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if my recollection is correct -- and I don't have the agreement. in front of me. I think Ted sent it to me in a-mail, but I don't have it right here. I think in working through those agreements with ACRD -- when ACRD allows someone, essentially, a license to use the sidewalk for that purpose, they --they don't accept the liability for either, because we are not talking -- I don't think we are talking about just the streetscape improvement, I think we are talking also about -- like I think Tim said, cafes and those other things that they have out there. My recollection of those agreements -- the property owner maintains the liability responsibility for that -- those items that are out there. They simply are getting a license to put it there. The streetscape stuff -- again, I don't recall in the agreement if -- if ACHD has the liability for those items and Tim might recall better than I do right now, since I don't have it in front of me, as to how they divided that. Do you recall, Tim? Curns: I don't offhand. I know that what -- like the items you're discussing, those are generally inherited by the city, the trees, the park benches, the streetscape. Nary: Right. Hoaglun: So, Madam Mayor, what I'm hearing is I -- if you put in benches and planters and a car runs into, we replace the planter, it's not ACHD, it's whoever we deal with -- I'm unsure who that is. If there is a cafe out there we okay a cafe to -- similar to Generations Plaza I would think where we allow permission, because ACHD has granted us that license to do so, they still retain the liability for the actions that occur within that fenced of area, not the city. But I think we would have to make sure that is Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 57 of 61 spelled out in any agreements with them, but certain) that would be s ' Y omething we would place upon them. Is that how you see it? Curns: Correct. Yeah. We would -- we are kind of ste in in --ACHD pp g would normally go through that license agreement process with the business owners to mak e sure that the business owner assumes liability for what the are loin in the ri ht Y g g of way and so since we are stepping into that process and we are asking the same thin of the -- of the business g owner. Hoaglun: And Madam Mayor and Tim or Ga ,Bill -- and Iwould -- if rY we have the agreement -- if ACRD -- we have this master license a reement I don't know if w 9 e would require them to indemnify ACRD as well as art of that or -- I'm ' p sure that s something the legal folks will work out if this is the route we o. But som ' g ething to consider if it's just indemnifying the city, because under this master license a r g Bement we now control that process or since ACRD is still .tied to that the would also have to be ' Y .included. Curns: And ACRD does still -- I believe when I read throu h this last time h ' g , t ey still reserve the right, of course, to remove something if they realize somethin is in a si ht trig ~ g g ngle, whatever, they are going to come out and remove that, so -- De Weerd: It looks like the city holds harmless ACRD and as ou su ested re uir . Y g9 q es any of its subleases -- sub licenses to carry general liabilit insurance. So there is an . .. Y , indemnification clause and a liability insurance portion to this. Pa a three. 9 Rountree: Yeah. I have got it. Thank you. De Weerd: Any other comments? Questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a comment. This works forme. Sounds good. De Weerd: Okay. So, is it Council's desire to have, then, staff come back with a document that -- we will want to start working with ACHD on an a reement. 9 Rountree: Does it contain the infamous paragraph that the other ones we have been looking at -- Nary: Not yet. Rountree: Not yet? Okay. I think it's a good deal for the city and saves a lot of hassle and process forfolks who want to utilize that area. So, I'm in favor of movin it forward. g Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 58 of 61 De Weerd: Okay. Hoaglun: I agree, Madam Mayor, it's a good wa to streamline the rocess Y p and make it easierfor everyone involved. De Weerd: Okay. It looks like you have general a reement. g Curns: All right. Thank you very much. F. Mayor's Office: Budget Amendmentfor Ma or's Office y Internship for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $2,775.00 De Weerd: Thank you, Tim. Okay. Item 8-F is the Ma or's office. I will turn Y this over to Robert. Simison: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What ou h y ave before you tonight is a budget amendment for the creation of an internshi for the next six p months in the Mayor s office. Really what we have tried to do is model off the su ccess of IT, that they have had with their relationship with the technical charter sch ool with those internships -- is we are looking to use some of our rofessional services p money and transfer that to an internship for the next six months tot it out and see how i rY t might work for some of the additional videos that we have been loin in the Ma or's g Y Office. We are talking about this week in Meridian to celebrate Meridian and even perhaps doing some of the uploading of the videos that are created for Cit Council Y meetings right now to go into our website. Some of this is our technical skills that students have that we have the capabilities of doing in our office, but this rovides us a p --another resource to do it, but at the same time if we ever don't have those resources and look to hire those out those can be up to 75 dollars an hour to do some of these basic functions. So, I felt that this would be a way for awin-win for us to use som . e of our existing resources to see if we can do an internship in our office to rovide some of p these services and, you know, find something that more and more eo le are . p p gravitating towards. For example, the This Week In Meridian we are seein an here fr g ~ om 250 to 400 people viewing that either on the city's website or on the Facebook webpage each week. And so that's what this amendment is and I'm ha to stand for . ppY any questions. De Weerd: Council, I also might point out is that we are findin those --are the called g y B logs? Simison: Yes. De Weerd: But they tell the story a lot better than printed brochures or statements -- take, for example, the back flow tests, we put one of the water de artment's em to ees p pY on there, they showed the device, they explained it, it really is a three to four minute cli p of trying to share a message that is much easier and much more understandable to understand in the video form than in printed text that eo le are stru lin to p p g9 9 Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 59 of 61 understand. So, as this has increased in popularity and its use, it certain) has been . Y taxing on staffs time, but also the internship, they have the technical ex ertise and it's p much less than using our professional services and hiring it out, so -- an uestions? Yq Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Robert or Madam Mayor, either one, I'm ve su ortive of use of interns. rY pp They do a lot of things that you don't associate with value, but one of the thin s the do . g Y is they bring you new ideas and they bring -- they bring our em to ees new ideas and pY fresh ways to look at things, having a great amount of ex erience with an internshi . p p program, their value is -- far exceeds their cost. My question, thou h, is the re uire . g Y q direction and supervision and if you're going to have interns that are oin to be workin g g g in the technological IT arena, will they be supervised by IT and folks in IT even thou h g they would be assigned to activities within the Mayor's Office? De Weerd: I think at this point we were -- Luke is loin all of that and also unloadin . g g the -- the City Council meetings onto the website and so it would be under Luke's supervision. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Any further questions? Well, I'm looking for direction there. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we approve the budget amendment for Ma or's internshi for a not to Y p exceed amount of 2,775 dollars. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk will ou call y roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, ea. Y De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you, Robert. Simison: Thank you. Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 60 of 61 Item 9: Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 11-1480: AZ 08-007 The Sho s ' p at Victory by DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Ea le g Road. Request for Annexation and Zonin of 4.79 Acres fro g m RUT Ada County) to C-C (Communit Business . Y ) Zoning District De Weerd: Okay. Under Item 9-A is Ordinance 11-148 0. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this ordinance by title only. Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Cit of Meridian Ordi Y Hance No. 11-1480, an ordinance AZ 08-007, Shops at Victory, for annexation of a orti p on of land situated in a portion of the northwest one quarter of the northwest one uart ' q er of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian Ada count ' y, Idaho, as described in attachment A and annexing certain Lands and territo situated in A rY da county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to corporate limits of the Cit of Meridi th ~ ~ ~ ~ Y an, as requested by e City of Meridian, establishing and determinin the land use zoni ' ' ' g ng classification of said lands from RUT in Ada county to C-C, Communit Busine ' .. , , Y ss District, in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall ' be filed with the Ada county assessor, the Ada county recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Com ' mission, as required by law, .and providing for a summary of the ordinance and r ' ' p oviding for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Thank you. Ralph, you have heard this b title onl . Woul ' . Y y d you like to hear it read in its entirety? Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve Ordinance No. 11-1480 with sus ension of rules. p Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to a rove Item 9-A. If ther ' pp a is no discussion, Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoa lun, ea. g Y De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10: Future Meeting Topics Meridian City Council April 12, 2011 Page 61 of 61 Is there an to is forfuture agendas that you would like to bring to De Weerd. Item 10. y p this topic -- or discussion item? Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. ieutenant Overton from the Meridian Police Department if Hoaglun. I did want to ask L he had anything for a future topic. rton: Madam Ma or, Members of Council, I don't know if that was to check and see Ove y if I was still awake, but I have nothing. Hoaglun: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you for your response. Rountree: He's alert. Bird: I was going to say, he perked right up. De Weerd: It a pears we have none. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. p Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:08 P.M. AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ~ ~. ~~~ ~..~, `'Z`'4 ?° y .. 1 ` 1 ~ ~ ~ .~ w ~ Od i , ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ DAVE APPROVED MAYOR:T MMY De WEE 'w ~ ~. ~, .~ [x. 7'~`r$~ .ra +r r~; `~a 4. ATTEST': P., ~'~J ~ ~ ~; CITY CLERK { ~ ~ ~ ~P~ g1 ~ ; ^ 43 1~' Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4A PROJECT NUMBER: AZ O8-007 ITEM TITLE: Development Agreement: The Shops at Victory by DMG-Eagle 8~ Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Eagle Road: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C Zoning District MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFI CE FI NAL A CTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS /~ 3 r'f'o ~.~ reco~rderS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian DMG-Ea le & Victory, LLC, Owner/Developerl 2. g PMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is made and entered into THIS DEVELO 2011 b and between City of Meridian, a municipal corporation this day of Y . Idaho hereafter called CITY, and DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC, whose address is of the State of , 350 N. 9th Ste 201, Boise, ID 83702, hereinafter called OWNER/DEVELOPER. > > 1. RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS Owner/Developer is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of in tract of land in the Count of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit A attached that certa Y hereto and b this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, herein after referred to as Y the Property; and 1.2 WHEREAS, I.C. § 67-651 lA, Idaho Code, provides that cities may, by ordinance re uire or ermit as a condition of re-zoning that the Owner/Developer make a q p written commitment concerning the use or development of the Property; and 1.3 WHEREAS, City has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment of ridian Unified Develo ment Code, which authorizes development agreements upon the the Me p annexation and/or re-zoning of land; and 1.4 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer has submitted an application for annexation and re-zonin of the Property described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation g ~~ . of C-C Community Business District), Municipal Code of the City of Mendian, and ( 1.5 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer made representations at the public hearin s both before the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission and before the Meridian City g Council, as to how the Property will be developed and what improvements will be made; and 1.6 WHEREAS, record of the proceedings for the requested annexation and zonin desi ation of the subject Property held before the Planning & Zoning Commission, and g ~ subse uentl before the City Council, include responses of government subdivisions providing q Y services within the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, and received further testimony and comment; and 1 OwnerlDeveloper is the successor in interest to both the former Owner, Axelrod Living Trust, and the former Developer, LDR-II/DMG, LLC. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 42795.0007.2251201.2 AS the Cit Council, on the 11th day of September, 2008, 1.7 WHERE y , . ' f Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, set forth in approved certain Findings o ~ full ' ' hereto and b this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in , Exhibit B attached y hereinafter referred to as (the Findings); and WHEREAS the Findin s require Owner/Developer to enter into a 1.8 ~ g . t with relation to the C-C (Commercial Business District) before the City development agreemen Council takes final action on annexation and zoning designation; and WHEREAS Owner/Developer deems it to be in its best interest to be 1.9 'nto this A reement and acknowledges that this Agreement was entered into able to enter 1 g voluntarily and at its urging and requests; and 1.10 WHEREAS Cit re uires Owner/Developer to enter into a development y q ent for the u ose of ensurin that the Property is developed and the subsequent use of agreem p rp g the Pro ert is in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, herein being p y stablished as a result of evidence received by the City in the proceedings for zoning designation e from overnment subdivisions roviding services within the planning jurisdiction and from g p affected ro ert owners and to ensure re-zoning designation is ~n accordance with the amended P P y Com rehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382, p and the Zonin and Development Ordinances codified in Meridian City Code Title 11. g NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 2. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 3. DEFINITIONS: For all purposes of this Agreement the following words, terms, and hrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided p for, unless the clear context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise: 3.1 CITY: means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party to this A reement which is a municipal Corporation and government subdivision of the State of Idaho, g or anized and existin by virtue of law of the State of Idaho, whose address is 33 East Broadway g g Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 3.2 OWNER/DEVELOPER: means and refers to DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC whose address is 350 N. 9th, Ste. 201, Boise, Idaho 83702, the party developing the Property and shall include any subsequent owner(s) or developer(s) of the Property. 3.3 PROPERTY: means and refers to that certain parcel(s) of Property located in the Count of Ada, Cit of Meridian as described in Exhibit A describing the parcels Y Y to be re-zoned C-C (Commercial Business District) attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 2 42795.0007.2251201.2 4, USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: s allowed ursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed 4.1 The use p ' ~ nce codified at Meridian City Code Section 11-2-B which are herein under Clty s Zoning Ordina specified as follows: Construction o 3 commercial building lots in the proposed f C-C zoning district on 3.68 acres, and the pertinent rovisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan are P , applicable to this AZ 08-0007 application. 4.2 No Chan e in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed g without modification of this Agreement. 5, CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: S.l Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension as set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and by this reference inco orated herein as if set forth in full. Said costs shall be paid prior to commencement of any building construction. 2. An and all existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within y this ro'ect will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7- pJ 517 when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3 . No signs are approved with the subject annexation approval. All business signs will require a separate sign permit incompliance with UDC 11-3D. 4. The request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas ad' acent to the residential property to the south, is approved per the landscape lan attached in Exhibit A of the staff report and in accordance with the DA provisions and p conditions of approval noted in the Shops at Victory staff report. 5. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall verb-crete wall adjacent to the residential ro erty to the south in the areas where the buffer width is below the required 25-feet, pp as shown on the fencing plan in Exhibit A. S, as approved through Alternative Compliance with this a lication. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing in all other areas along the Pp erimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. All fencing shall be constructed in accordance p with the standards listed in UDC 1 1-3A-7C. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 3 42795.0007.2251201.2 vide a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both 6. Pro d Road be and the ultimate right-of way of the reconstructed an Eagle Road and Victory Y le Road tion. Said sidewalk shall extend across the Aldridge property along Eag widened intersec to Falcon Drive and be located within a public pedestrian easement. Access to this site shall only be provided from one full-access and 7. - t access to/from Ea le Road and one full-access and one right-in/right-out one right-in/right ou g Road as ro osed b the applicant, as shown on the City approved site access to/from Victory p p Y s Exhibit D and b this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full. plan attached hereto a y An other vehicular access points to/from the site are prohibited. y 8. Across-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded to/from Ea le Road and Victory Road benefitting all lots within the subdivision. g 9. Provide a edestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) p from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. 10. A minimum of 2 buildings shall be constructed on the site and the maximum buildin footprint of any one building shall not exceed 20,000 square feet. g 11. Hours of o eration for the businesses within this development shall p be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. 12. The Applicant shall comply with the tree preservation standards listed in UDC 1 1-3B-10 for rotection of existing trees that are proposed to be retained and p existin trees 4-inch caliper and greater that are proposed to be removed. The applicant s g . ro osal to /ant trees along the southern and eastern property boundaries as mitigation for trees pp p removed from the site is a proved per the landscape plan included in Exhibit A of the staff P report. 13. The detailed site plan and building elevations submitted with any future CUP and/or CZC a placation for this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual . P, site lan and building elevations submitted to the City as shown in Exhibit A of the staff report. p 14. The Applicant shall submit a letter of final approval from Ada Count Develo ment Services for the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the y p Record of Surve , prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council and publication y of the ordinance in the newspaper. 15. Intentionally omitted.2 2 Intersection improvements previously set forth as a condition have been completed, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 4 42795.0007.2251201.2 RIODICONSENT TO REZONE: This Agreement and the 6. COMPLIANCE PE ' ein shall be terminated, and the zoning designation reversed, upon a commitments contained her ~ coon 5 velo er or its heirs, successors, assigns, to comply with Se default of the Owner/De p ~~ within ' 'ions Governin Development of Subs ect Property of this Agreement entitled Condit g lied with the ars of the date this A eement is effective, and after the City has comp seven (7) ye ~' ocedures as outlined in Idaho Code § 67-6509, or any subsequent notice and heanng pr amendments or recodifications thereof. T TO DE-ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF ZONING 7. CONSEN • Owner/Develo er consents upon default to the reversal of the zoning DESIGNATION. p ' ert sub' ect to and conditioned upon the following conditions precedent designation of the Prop y ~ to-wit: hat the Cit rovide written notice of any failure to comply with this 7.1 T y p . Develo er and if Owner/Developer fails to cure such failure within six (6) Agreement to Owner/ p months of such notice. NSPECTION: Owner/Developer shall, immediately upon completion of any 8. I ntiret of said develo ment of the Property as required by this Agreement or by portion or the e y p ' r finance or olic notif the City Engineer and request the City Engineer's inspections City o d p Y~ y ' h the written a royal of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance wit and pp itions of this A eement and all other ordinances of the City that apply to said terms and cond gr development. 9. DEFAULT: 9.1 In the event Owner/Developer or its heirs, successors, assigns, or ners of the Pro ert or an other person acquiring an interest in the Property, fail subsequent ow p y Y ' com 1 with all of the terms and conditions included in this Agreement in to faithfully p y ection with the Pro ert ,this Agreement may be modified or terminated by the City upon Conn p y compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 9.2 A waiver by City of any default by Owner/Developer of any one or more nants or conditions hereof shall a ply solely to the breach and breaches waived and of the cove p r an other ri hts or remedies of City or apply to any subsequent breach of any such shall not ba y g or other covenants and conditions. 10. RE UIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: City shall record .either a Q . memorandum of this A reement or this Agreement, including all of the Exhibits, at g ~ r rior to the Owner/Develo er s cost, and submit proof of such recording to Owner/Develope , p p third readin of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the re-zoning of the Property g he Cit Council. If for an reason after such recordation, the City Council fails to adopt the by t y y he ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property contemplated hereby, t Cit shall execute and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Agreement. y DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 5 42795.0007.2251201.2 NG: Cit shall following recordation of the duly approved Agreement, 11. ZONI y ct a valid and bindin ordinance zoning the Property as specified herein. ena g MEDIES: This A Bement shall be enforceable in any court of competent 12. RE ~' ' wner/Develo er orb any successor or successors in title or by the ~unsdiction by the City or 0 p ~ Y ' ies hereto. Enforcement maybe sought by an appropriate action at law or in assigns of the part if1C erformance of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and equity to secure the spec p obligations contained herein. the event of a material breach of this Agreement, the parties agree that 12.1 In ' to er shall have thirt 30 days after delivery of notice of said breach to Cit and Owner/Deve p Y ( ) Y rior to the non-breachin arty's seeking of any remedy provided for herein; correct the same p g p tin the case of an such default which cannot with diligence be cured provided, however, tha Y . ' da eriod if the defaulting party shall commence to cure the same within within such thirty (30) y p . . ' iod and thereafter shall rosecute the curing of same with diligence and such thirty (30) day per p ' e allowed to cure such failure maybe extended for such penod as maybe continuity, then the tim , necessar to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity. Y In the event the erformance of any covenant to be performed hereunder 12.2 p 1 ' wner/Develo er or Cit is delayed for causes which are beyond the reasonable contro by either 0 p y cts of f the art res onsible for such performance, which shall include, without limitation, a o p y p ' nce strikes or similar causes, the time for such performance shall be extended by civil disobedie , the amount of time of such delay. RETY OF PERFORMANCE: The City may also require, at .the time of 13. SU ment of installation of im rovements to the Property, surety bonds, irrevocable letters commence p . sh de osits certified check or negotiable bonds, as allowed under Meridian City of credit, ca p , ' ure that installation of the im rovements, which OwnerlDeveloper agrees to provide, Code, to ins p if required by the City. 14. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The Owner/Developer agrees that no s of Occu anc will be issued until all improvements are completed, unless the City Certificate p y and Owner/Develo er have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements p om leted in a based develo ed; and in any event, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be will be c p p p ' in an base in which the im rovements have not been installed, completed, and accepted issued y p p by the City. 15. ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES: OwnerlDeveloper agrees to abide by ' nces of the Cit of Meridian and the Property shall be subject to de-annexation if all ordina y . , ner/Develo er or its assi s, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in Ow p ~ ~ of the Findin s of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Agreement, and the Ordinances of the City g Meridian. 16. NOTICES: Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement hall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the s DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 6 42795.0007.2251201.2 United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt re uested, q addressed as follows: CITY: c/o City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave. Meridian, ID 83642 with copy to: OWNER/DEVELOPER: DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC 350 N. 9TH, Ste. 201 Boise, ID 83702 with copy to: City Attorney's Office HAWLEY TROXELL ENNIS &HAWLEY LLP City of Meridian 877 W. Main Street, Ste. 1000 33 E. Broadway Avenue P.0. Box 1617 Meridian, ID 83642 Boise, ID 83701-1617 Attn: Brian L. Ballard 16.1 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. 17. ATTORNEY FEES: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to an other Y relief as maybe granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney's fees as determined b a Court Y 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. 18. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and rovision p hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to erform. p 19. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs, successors, assi sand ersonal . ~ p representatives, including City s corporate authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding on Owner/Developer, each subsequent owner and/or develo er and oth P any er person acquiring an interest in the Property. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the Property, or portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor owner or developer shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. City agrees, upon written re nest q of Owner/Developer, to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if City, in its sole and reasonable discretion, has determined that Owner/Develo er p has fully performed its obligations under this Agreement. 20. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision of this Agreement is held not valid b y a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 7 42795.0007,2251201.2 Agreement and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. 21. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition and understandings between Owner/Developer and City relative to the subj ect matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between Owner/Developer and City, other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with res ect to Cit p Y~ to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of City. 21.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing re-zoning of the subject Property herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the City has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 22. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall be effective on the date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. OWNER/DEVELOPER DMG-EAGLE & VICTORY, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company By: LDM Real Estate Services, LLC, an Idaho limited liabilit com an ~ Y p Y Manager and Member B : ~. Y L. David McKinney, Memb DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 8 42795.0007.2251201.2 By: Goins Development Co., LLC, an Idaho limited liability company Member By. C~`- R. Greg Goins, ember CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~,e~` any de erd, Mayor Attest. ~ ~,~ ~~~ ~ b~ r ~ ~ a r- ~' ... ,- "- Ja cee olman, City Clerk ~ ~~~ ~~' { r~ y +, ~a a ~ , A ,~' EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit A -- Legal Description Exhibit B -- Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Exhibit C -- Sewer and Water Costs Exhibit D -- Site Plan DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 9 42795.0007.2251201.2 STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) ' 2011, before me, On this da of ~i~' y ~ rsonall ~, ~ a Notary Public m and for said State, pe y d L. David McKinne known or identified to me to be a member of LDM Real Estate appeare y~ s LLC and R. Gre Goins, known or identified to me to be a member of Golns Service , g who Develo ment Co. LLC, the companies that executed the within instrument or the person p d the instrument on behalf of DMG-EAGLE & VICTORY, LLC, and acknowledged to execute me that DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC 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. STATE OF IDAHO County of Ada ~~~~f111!//~~~~ ~ti .r ~, r ~`' Q'~' ~~ ;~ ~, '~ ,~ .. .~ ~ .. ' •'' ~ i,~,~, rE OF ~~~~ ss. z Notary Public for Idaho Residing at bid , ~Ci~CJI..~(LC> My commission expires 1111 l ~ -1, a'U1'~ On this ~~ day of 2011, before me, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally a eared Tamm de Weerd and Jaycee L. Holman, known or identified to me to be the Mayor pp Y and Cit Clerk, res ectively, of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, who executed the instrument or the Y p erson that executed the instrument on behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such p City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the da and ear in this certificate first above written. y y ~•~~••~. .•'~~: ~~~y'•. ~~, ~ .,~ • ~ ~ • ~ - p i M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~~ •s.nr ~ ~` or ~• ~f ~ ~~ • ~ ~NQ~ ~ • DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -10 f Not ry Public r Idah Residing at /'~~t r~{„ t a.r~ l n My commission expires ~.)a~ ~f col 9 42795.0007.2251201.2 ~Z /~••: ~,- ,~• ,~,J rHe c~~D cxour, Ytvc. January 3, 2011 Project No. 07167 legal Description lot line Adjustment Parcel "A" 3.68 Acres Exhibit "A" A tract of Land situated in the Northwest One Quarter of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap monumenting the Northwest Corner of said Section 18, thence following the northerly line ofthe Northwest One Quarter of said Section 18, South 89°35'51" East a distance of 530.00 feet to a point, which bears North 89°35'51" West a distance of 2,117.27 feet from a found brass cap monumenting the North One Quarter Corner of said Section 28; Thence leaving said northerly line, South QO°31'02" West a distance of 48.00 feet to a set 5/8- inchsteel pin on the southerly right•of-way tine of East Victory Road and the POJNT OE BEGINNING. Thence leaving said southerly right-of-way line, South o0°31'07" West a distance of i5Z.00 feet to a found 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence South 18°19'52" West a distance of 138.72 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel in; p Thence North 89'35'51" West a distance of 245.57 feet to a set 5/8-Inch steel pin; Thence South 06°26'06u West a distance of 103.83 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence North 89°31'13' West a distance of 90.01 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence South 00°31'02" West a distance of 73.75 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence North 89°31'13" West a distance of 91.85 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin on the easterly right-of-way line of South Eagle Road; Thence following said easterly right-of•way line, North 00°28'11" East a distance of 443.45 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence leaving said easterly right-of-way line, North 45°31'41" East a distance of 14.53 feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin on the southerly right-of way line of Fast Victory Road; Thence following said southerly right-of-way line, South 89°35'51" East a distance of 464.60 feet to the POJNT OF BEGINNING. ~nr~rci~he .-Inhilertun + Srte 1~l~rr,~~fi~ • Clvi! ~n~~ntmng • Gol~Corfl'1r I r17~1~ioA ~r ~d~t~rlM-r~ + Graphir Commr~~rcu~raa fib? F;, tihcsre• ()rive, tire, { (}t), r~n~;le, ~ciah~~ $3G1 G + 1~ ?08.939 ~lfl~l 1~ ?~8.939.~5 + ~~ rr,,,n~ , r, Ci;~2U07~07j{,7~,~eimin\i,ekai:~~l,_U71fi7_11g1U3~1'arce~:t_(.1.,1,~icx. *~ /x.~ ri ~~'~•~ ~~ THE LAND GROUP, INC. The above-described tract of land contains 3.68 acres, more or less, subject to all existing easements and rights-of-way. Prepared By: THE LAND GROUP, INC. 462 E. SHORE DRIVE, SUITE 100 EAG lE, ! DAHO 83616 208-939-4041 208-939-4445 (FAX} 1 L.rndra~pe . finhilrrtkn • S1te Pl~rnnirr~ • Ci~7! Er,,gi~rerrr,r$ • Golf COa17l l mgn~toa ~~ Cn~inrtRn~ I Grrrphi~ Conrml/n![o11on !G? I :. tihc~r~~ I)nvc. ticc. 11X}, I :~Ic, idahn 83G1G • I' ?(}8.93.-i0~ 1 I' ?08.939.-4.~y • ~nv.ch~~lan~l~c.~~,~nc c~~m ~ ~~1?IN}'\0't G?1.1~min11.~~~al.~1l _0'1b7_1 l~i~l3_I~arcrl.l_1.I..1.clcx /. 3.sol 1 l (~ EXHIBIT "B''' ~~~ ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~E IDIAN~ FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND • c, ;, ~.s n DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4,79 Acres from RUT ~A,da County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat for 3 Canunercial Building Lots on 3.68 Acres; Conditional Use Permit for aDrive-Through Pharmacy in a proposed C-C Zoning District within 340 Feet of an ExisBng Residence; and Alternative Compliance is Requested far a Reduced Buffer Width i~ Certain Areas Adjacent to the Existing Residential Use along the Southern Property Boundary, by LDR-IUDMG, LLC. Case No(s}. AZ-48-007; PP-0$-OOb; CUP-Q8-411; ALT-08-012 For the City Council Bearing Date of August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agendA) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Au st 2b, 2008 8~ Y `~ incorporated by reference} 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 2b, 2008, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 2b, 2008, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached S#aff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2408, 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 b7, Idaho Code {I.C. §~7-X503). 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 August ~, 2002, Resolution No. 02-3 82 and Maps. .. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S}. AZ-08.047; PP-48-006; CC]P-08-011; ALT-08-012 .1. ~~-0. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council ursuant to Meridian Ci Code ~.~ ~~ ~ p tY § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. S. 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. b. 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 Planning Department, the Public 'Forks Department and any affected party requesting notice, ?. That this approval is subject to the i,egal Description, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008,incorporated byreference. 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 Drder ' 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 Annexation and Zoning request as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated March 1?, 2008 by Aaron Ballard, PLS, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. A Development Agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, Za08, incorporated by reference. 3 . The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the ~ Preliminary Plat, dated 4124108, is hereby conditionally approved; 4, The applicant's Conditional Use Permit as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, dated 4124/08, is hereby conditionally approved; S. The applicant's request for Alternative Compliance is hereb oved~ and Y ~1~ 6. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference, CITY CF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S), AZ-08007; PP-08.046; CUP-08-0 ~ 1; ALT-48-012 -2- <:~ ~ C. fi~A x`;. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits ~. ,~;~ Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-bB-7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of tithe to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen {18}months, Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and. the applicant does not receive a time ex#ension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. Notice of Eighteen (1$) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration ~, ~k, Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, sal7isfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on ar in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen X18}month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (1$) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1}year from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one ~ 1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void: Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the ternnination of the period in accord with 11-SB-b.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the us a not to exceed one { 1 } eighteen t 18}month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen ~l8) months as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Conunission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and.Right to Regulatory 'Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 61-8003, a denial of a plat l ~ or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to re uest a re ato talon anal sis, q S~ rY g Y CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE Na(S), AZ-48-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-O1 l;ALT-08-012 .3. r Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than ;~ ~ t ~~~, twenty-eight X28}days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request ~~, for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for ]udicial Review may be Bled. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may withintwenty-eigh# (2$}days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter S2, Title b7, Idaho Code. F. Attached; Staff Report for the hearing date of August 2~, 200$. ~~~ ~t ~`~"~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CC}NCLUSIONS OF I.AW AND DECISION & QRDER CASE NO(S}. AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-01 l; ALT•08-012 -4- ~ :, ~, ~: ~~~ I _- ~`~ B , ction of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of ;. 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED o~-.- COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED .~.-- MAYORTAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER} Mayor Tammy ~ Weerd ~,,, Attest: ;,~``~1 O~ ~~~0 ~.; C~ ~' ~ ti -: ., a -~:- ; ~ ~:, r. M M • ~ ~~~~ Y. Jaycee loran, City Clerk r 7 '. %d P, Co served u on A licant The F~ ~~ `~~'ublic'V~orks D artmnent and Cit pY ~ Pp ~ ~, ~ ,~ ~ Y ~f ~~~rrr~tit ~~t~~~~~~ Attorney. ~ ~ r' By' Dated; ' City Clerk Office ,- I~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAVV AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOBS}. AZ-08-007; PP-0$-006; CUP-0$-O1 l; ALT-0$-012 -5- i~~.. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DA T`E OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ^tl. STAFF REPQRT Hearing Date: Au st 2d 200 ~ ~ 8 TO: Mayor & City Council '~.,. FROM: Sonya Natters, Associate City Planner` '~j 3' `~~` ~~+' 208-884-SS33 SCJBJECT; Shops at Victory ~ AZ-D8-007 Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Con~tunity Business District) • PP-0$-o06 Preliminary Plat for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres ~ CUP~08-011 Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 344 feet of an existing residence • ALT-08-412 Alternative Compliance is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the existing residential use along the southern property boundary 1. 5 Y DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQYJEST The applicant, LDR-~UDMG, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zonin AZ a royal of g ( ) pP 4.79 acres of land from. the RUT zoning district in Ada Count to the C-C Commu ' ' Y ~ mty Busuicss District) ``' zonin district. Preli ' F~' g manary Plat (PP) approval is also requested for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land. Alternative Compliance (ALT} is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. Lastly, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is requested far approval of adrive-throw pharmacy in a pro osed C-C zonin district within 300 feet of an existin residence. P g g See Sectron 1 p of the staff report for more informan'on. The proposed development is planned to include neighborhood conunercial retail .uses such as a drug store, complimentary retail shops, services, office, and restaurant com onents. The final mix of these uses will be de ndant o P pe n market conditions at the time of development. The site is located at 32IO S, Eagle Road on the southeast corner of E. Victo Road and S. Ea le Road, Currend there is a sin le-f ~ g Y~ g amily borne with a pasture on this site. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area and is contiguous to the current Cit limits. Y 2. SUIV.C~dARY ItECONJ1r~NDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, ALT, and CUP) were submitted to the Plann' De artrr~ent for concurrent review. Below staff has ~ P provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit and Alternative Compliance applications. Staff is recommending approval of the ro posed development (AZ-OS-Q07, pp-08.OOb and C p p UP-U&01I) with the Developmen# Agreement provisions listed in Section lo, and the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Re rt. Note: Per UDC I1-SA-2, Alternative Com Hance a lic ~ °` p pp atrons are approved at administrative level by the Planning Director, I~owever, because ALT is re nested concurre ' q ntly with the AZ, PP, and CUP, Staff' Shops ar Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 1 /~ .< t •.. ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 ~~~ has included anarysis on the ALT request in this staf~'report; the ALT applicatr'on does not require s~ ~`'~`~~~ Commission/Counciiiction, The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission beard these heats ort June 19 and July 17, 2008. At the public hearing on July 17, 2008 then moved to recommend approval of the sub' ect AZ, PP, and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara Thompson; Bob Aldridge; Bob Carpenter; Greg Owens ii. In opposition: Nine ~w~~w~ iii. Commenting: None iv. Written tesitmony: Charles Axelrod v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff commenting on application: Scott Steckline; Caleb Hood b. Kev ~ssueis) of Discussioa by Commission: i. Eligibility of this site for a reimbursement agreement with the City for a mainline extension to the site; ii. 'The extent of the verti-crate wall fencing aiong the south uroaerty boundary; iii. The number, type (right-in/right-out, full access), and location of access paints fa the site from Eagle & Victory Roads; and iv. The proxinuty of the southera access point far the site to/from Eagle Road ~n relation to E. Falcon Drive. c. Kev Commission Change(s) to Staff Recaa~teadation: i, Modify DA provision #g, page 10, to restrict access tolfrom the site to one full-access point to Eagle Road, located as far north as possible in compliance with ACHD distance re uirements for intersections. Allow both access ints tolfrom Victo Rog as ~~- ~~~ proposed by the applicant. ~, ~f d. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: i. Access points tolfrom the site Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 2 f ~ls~. • ~> ','. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-00b, and CUP-OS-011, as presented in the staffreport for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 with the following modif cations: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-OU6, and CUP-0$-411, as presented during the hearing an August 2b, 2008, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons fox denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat,) Contwuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-08-407, PP-08-0~, and CUP-08-011 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reasons} ~sL, for continuance.} x, ,, ,_. ~,;, ''.> ,,.. 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site AddresslLocation~: ,The site is located on the southeast corner of S, Eagle Road and E. ~ictony Road, in Section 32, Township 3 North, Range l East. b. Owner(s): Axelrod Living Trust, Charles Axelrod 211 S. Spalding Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 c. Applicant: LDR-IUDMG, LLC 3S0 N. 9~, Ste. 2Q1 Boise, D~ 83102 d. Representative: Tamara Thompson, Landmark Development Group 2462 Sunshine Drive Boise, ID 83112 '~ e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 3 ~. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFp ttEPORT F4R THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST Zb, Z008 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation; Mixed Use - Communi .:~ a tY p g. Description of Applicant's Request: The a licant is r uestin concurrent pP eq g approval for. Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County} to C-C (Community Business District}; Pre ' 'nary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.b8 acres; Alternative Compliance of a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to an existing residence; and a Conditional Use Permit far adrive-through pharmacy within 300 feet of an existing residence. The proposed development is planned and designed to include neighborhood commercial retail uses. 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (attached in Exhibit A}; 4118/08 2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A}: 4/18/08 3. Date of Conceptual Plan (attached in Exhibit A}; 4118/08 h. Applicant's Staternent/Justit"ication: "The site is in the City ofMeridian's impact area and its Comprehensive plan designation is Mixed Use -Community. Our proposed zoning and development comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is intended to ~fi11 a need for neighborhood services on the southern boundary of the City. Due to its proximity in the surrounding trade area, the proposed project will reduce trips out of the area for daily consumer needs and services." See applicant's narrative submitted with application far more Information. S. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Qrdinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is -~. required before the Planning ~ Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. ~,~ b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. ~~~ By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter, c. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use permit as de#ermined by City Ordinance. $y reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. d. Newspaper notifications published on: June 2, and 1 b, 2008 (Commission}; August 4, and 18, 2008 (City Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 23, 2008 (Commission); A, u~t 1 2008 ~CitY Councill f, Applicant posted notice an site by; June 4, 2008 (Commission); August 12, 20Q8 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Uses}: There is currently a single-family residence, associated outbuildings and a , pasture on this property. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property is currently surrounded by rural residential properties, c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning; 1. North; Single-family home on a large rural parcel, zoned RUT {Ada County) 2. East: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-4 ~~'he R-4 r'J = (. -~r zoned property has received preliminary plat Harcourt Subdivision) approval for 60 single- Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 4 J ' r t Cl'T'Y pF MERaD1AN PLAINNING DEPARTMENT STAPF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 family residential building lots on Z2 acres.J. 3. South: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RtJT (Ada County} and R-8 4. West: Single-family homes, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: • ~ 2005, the South Eagle Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-oS-OOl) application approved a change to the future land use map for this property from "Low Density Residential" to "Mixed Use -Community." e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: This property wilt sewer to an existing manhole located approximately 7b0 feet east of the intersection of S Eagle Road and E Victory Road. The manhole is located in E Victory Road. Location of water: E Victory Road and S Eagle Road. Issues or concerns: a.}Providing services to 3250 E Victory Road, 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: NA 3. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 4. Proposed Zoning: C-C {Community Business District) S. Size of Property: 4.79 acres (3.68 acres included in the preliminary plat) f. Subdivision plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: o 2. Non-residential Lots: 3 3. Total Building Lots; 3 4. Common Lots: ~ 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots; 3 7. Gross Density: NA 8. Minimum House Size: NA g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet adjacent to S. Eagle Road, a principal arterial street; and 25 feet adj scent to E. Victory Road, a minor arterial street 2, Width of buffers}between land uses: 25 feet (Applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas.) 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Tree Preservation: Mitigation is required far alt existing healthy trees 4-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 104% replacement. The application states that there are S existing trees of value Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 5 -- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNYNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 totaling S4 caliper inches on the site. Fifty-four caliper inches are planned for mitigation onsite along the eastern and southern boundaries in addit~'on to the 1 tree per 3S' required by the UDC. Tie result is Z7 mitigated trees at 2" caliper ~ S4 caliper inches. h. Off-Street Parking: tJDC 11-3C-~ requires one off-street vehicle parking space for every 500 square feet of gross floor area in commercial districts. The total building square footage depicted on the site plan is 29,910. Based on this amount, 60 parking stalls would be required;133 are proposed, which complies with this requirement. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright-inlrigbt-out only access, 250+1- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+1-feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+1- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+1- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all three parcels. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. See Analysis, Section 10, below for Staff s analysis of the proposed access to the site. ~. coMMENTs MEE~IN~ On May 30, 200$ a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. These agencies submitted comments on this application, which are included in Exhibit B of this report. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GQALS ~: This site is designated as "Mixed Use -Community" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Y~ Map. Per Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, the Mixed Use land use category contains five sub- categories. "Generally, the mixed-use designation will provide for a combination of compatible land uses that are typically developed under a master ar conceptual site plan, The purpose of this designation is to identify key areas which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning areas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The intent of this designation is to offer the developer a greater degree of design and use flexibility." The following standards apply to the MU-C category; 1 } Up to 25 acres may be nonwresidential uses; 2~ Up to 200,000 square feet ofnon-residential building area is allowed; and 3}Residential densities of 3 to $ units/acre. Staff finds that the development request generally conforms to the stated purpose, intent, and standards of the MU-C land use category within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Flan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics}: Beyond what has been discussed above, the following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): ~ Chapter VII, Goal iII, Objective A, Action 1-Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. ?'he City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the Lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 6 \ 'r, CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the Lands will be under the jurisdict~'on of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department, - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MI'D~, - The roadways adjacent to the subject Lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACED). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District No. 2. ?'his service will not change. - 7'he subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian .library District should suf,~er no revenue loss as a result of the subject anneacation, Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Ut~'Iity Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company, • Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adj scent parcels. The applicant is proposing a commercial zoning district. In the proposed C-C dYStrict, a ZS•foot wide buf far is required to be constructed adjacent to residenn'al uses, per UDC Table 1,I -18.3 to protect residential properties from the impacts of commercial development. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance f or a reduced buffer width in certain areas with this application. As an alternative means of meeting the intent of the ordinance, the applicant is {~4 ro osin additional landsca in within the bu er, a verb crate wail ad scent to areas with a ,~ pp g Pg' .ff I ~~ reduced bujfer width, and afoot tall vinyl fencing on the remainder of the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. Sta, f f 'believes that the proposed combination of landscaping and fencing should adequately protect the adjacent residentia! properties from the proposed commercial development. See Analysis below for more on the Applicant's alternative compliance request. , ~ Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 5 -Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping. Street buffer Landscaping and internal parking lot landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan far the proposed project. All landscaping shall be installed and maintained on the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC I1-38. • Chapter VII, Goal T, Obj active B -Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the ImpactArea, The proposed development, which consists of neighborhood commercial uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, of,~ce and restaurant uses, will provide a variety of commercial opportunities in this area of the City. • Chapter VII, Goal X, Objective B, Action 3 -Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. fine site is located on the corner of two arterial streets, E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. fine site is surrounded by rural and urban density residential propertr'es. Staff`' believes the proposed - commercial development should complement the surrounding resident~'al uses by providing needed services in this area of the City. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE ? ~~.. ,`~, (~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPAR'T`MEN'T' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ~~ s • Cha ter VII Goal I, Objective B, Action 6 -- Require neighborhood commercial areas to create a P ~ ~ . ~~ site design compatible with surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, fences, etc.) Six foot tall vinyl fencing, a vent-crete wall, and added landscaping are proposed around the perimeter boundary of the commercial development to assist in providing a bu~J`er between the existing residences to the south and east. The applicant is requesting alternative compliance with this application to reduce the buffer width adjacent to residential uses frarn 25 feet to as low as 10 feet in one area (the majority of the buffer is 1S feet wide as required). Staff is requesting that the applicant provide pathway connections to the east and south with this application for connectivity to the adjacent residential uses. Staff believes the proposed site design should be compatible with surrounding uses if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval and DA provisions in the sta,~report • Chaptez VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 --Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all lots in the subdivision. Staff is requesting that the two right-in/right-out only accesses proposed crosest to the intersection on Victory and Eagle be removed and only one access to/from Eagle and one access to/from Victory be approved with this application. . Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. ~A 9. UNIFIED nEVELUFMENT CDDE N. ,~ _~ a, Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (tJDC)11-2B-2 lists the permitted, accessory, and conditional uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed retail, restaurant, once, and service uses are all listed as principal permitted uses in the C~C zoning district. The proposeddrive- ; through requires conditional use permit approval inthe C-C zoning district if it lies within 300 feet of an existing residential use oranotherdrive-through facility. b. Purpose Statement of Zane; The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the xetail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Four districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed comurnercial uses, and the location of the district proximity to streets and highways. c. General Standards; All of the praposed late shall comply with the dimensianai standards listed in CTDC 11-28.3 for the proposed C-C zoning district. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Reconunendation: 1. AZ Applicatiua: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone 4.79 acres from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C zoning district in the City. The applicant proposes to develop the property with neighborhood co~nercial retail uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses, The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use 1VIap as Mixed Use - Comnnunity. The proposed use of the property and C-C zoning district are compatible with this designation. ;~ T~~~ Shops at victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 8 ~' ~, / ~ ' , _~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2Q08 The C-N zoning district would also be compatible with the MU-C designation and would rovide more of a transition in zoning between the adjacent residential uses and the proposed p commercial development, Staff compared the permitted uses in the C-C district vs. the C-N district and found that the proposed retail, restaurant, and office uses are all principal ermitted uses in both zoning districts. The major difference between the two districts is the P dimensional standards, as follows: ,~~ .r,, DIMENSIONAL S'tANDARO~ C~N C•C Front setbade ~ feet 20 4 Rear sa;tback ~ feet 25 0 interior Side setback in feet 0 Street {and buffer an #ee# local 10 Collector 20 Arterial 25 En a comdor 35 Interstate 5Q Landscape buffer to resit~ntial uses in feet's 20 25 Maxmum buildin h ht a1 feet 35 50 Maximum building size without design standard approval as set forth m 11-3A•19 ins are feet 7,500 60,040 Parking requirernen#s See Chapter 3 Article C.off-street arkin and Ioadin r uirements landscaping require~nen~ See Chapter 3 Article 8. landscaping re uirernents Ail se~aklCS shad be measured from the ultima#eright-ofway for the street cassifikation as shown on the adopted Tr~sportation Plan. "minimum setback only alkawed with reuse of e~as5ng residential struc#ure, '"'Where the adjacent property is vacant the Director shall determine the ~ scent ro deg na~on based on the Corn rehensive Play des' na~on. Staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate far this site if the applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions in this report pertaining to maximum building footprint and minimum number of buildings on the site. Based on the policies and goats contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The proposed annexation area consists of a combination of two parcels; a majority of parcel 51128223075 (Axelrod parcel) and a very small portion of 83193250410 Aldridge parcel} to the south. The applicant has submitted a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA} application with Ada County Planning to modify the Axelrod parcel so that it is consistent with the annexation legal description and proposed plat. with the BLA, the Axelrod parcel is reduced from 3.92 acres to 3.69 acres; the Aldridge parcel is enlarged to S.0? acres to conform to the Ada County requirement for RUT zoning. As a DA provision, Staff is requiring that the applicant submit a letter of final approval from Ada County hevelopment Services for ~, Shops at victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 9 1~ IJ 1 T"_ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT F4R THE HEARJNG DATE OF AUGUST 2d, 2008 the Boundary Line Adjustmen# and a recorded copy of the Record of Sarvey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council. The annexation Iega1 description submitted with the application {stamped on March 17, 2048 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the exisring corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Conceptua! Site Plan; The conceptual site plan submitted with this application [prepared by The Land Group, labeled as Sbeet C 1.03, dated 4118108 {revised 4124/08)] depicts 3 buildings pads with footprints totaling 29,910 square feet {s.f.). The largest building pad, "Pad A," where the drugstore is proposed, consists of 15,885 s.f.; "Pad B" consists of 7,065 s.f.; and "Pad C" consists of 5,9b0 s.f. Off-street parking for the site is depicted on the plan. Based on the total building square }footage proposed, 60 parking stalls are required; 133 parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds UDC requirements. Staff has reviewed the proposed concept plan and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B- 3 for the C-C zoning district, except for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses; the applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance to this requirement {see below}, Staff is requesting as a provision of the DA that a minimum of z buildings be constructed on the site and that the maximum building footprint of any one building not exceed 20,004 square feet to assist in providing a transition to more intense commercial uses adjacent to the existing and future residential uses. A detailed site plan is required to be submitted and will be reviewed with individual Certificate of honing Compliance application for future buildings/uses on the site. Building Elevations: The Applicant has submitted conceptual building elevations with this application for each of the building pads that depict how future buildings on this site nay be :~a~ constructed. Building materials depicted on the elevations included in Exhibit A.b are proposed to consist of stucco ~ with stone and split face CMU blocks accents and green metal roofing. The buildings will be painted with S different shades of brown. These elevations are included in Exhibit A.6. Staff is supportive of the proposed elevations. Buildings construucted on the site shall substantially comply with these elevations. lours of Operation: Hours of operation for the businesses within the development were not specified in the application, except for the proposed drive-through pharmacy which is proposed to operate from b am to 10 pm. Because of the adjacent residential uses, Staff is recommending a$ a provision of the DA that hours of operation for all businesses within this development be restxicted to the hours between b am and 10 pm. Development A,greee~nt: UDC 11-5B-3.D.2 and Ydaho Code ~ b5-b711A provides the City the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement {DA} with the City that may require some written commitment far all future uses. Staff believes that a DA is nece~~sary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plon and does not negatively impact nearby properties. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA} shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner {at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-550 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. The DA shall incorporate the following: a. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. ~~ b. Any and all existing domestic wells andlor septic systems within this project will 'have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section ~~.~.~ _~ Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 1 Q / '.,. `l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPURT FGR THE I~~G DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2048 ~. ~ ~5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used P. for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. c. No si s are a roved with the.. sub'ect annexation approval. All business signs will ~ PP J require a separate sign permit in compliance with U~ 1 I-3D. d, The request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential property to the south, is approved per the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and in accordance with the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in the Shops at Victory staff report. e. Construct a minimum b-foot tall verti-crete wall adjacent to the residential property to the south in the areas where the buffer width is below the required 25-feet, as shown on the fencing plan in Exhibit A.5, as approved through Alternative Compliance with this application. Construct a minimum -foot tall solid vinyl fencing in all other areas along the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. All fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC l l- 3A-?C. f. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Said sidewalk shall extend across the Aldridge uroperty along ~ ~e Road~~ off, Drive _und be loc ed yv~thir- a uublic pedestrian ~~~ g. Access to this site shall only be provided from one full-access and o r_iaht- ' ri - ~ tolfrom Eagle Road ~~ and oue full ~~~-~~~ ;~ access and one right-in/right-out access tom, Victory Road ew~ed as proposed by the applicant ' ,~ ....._ ' .Any other access points to/from the site are prohibited. h. Across-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded tolfrorn Eagle Road and 'Victory Road benefitting all lots within the subdivision. i. Provide a pedestrian connection pathway and break in the fence} from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. ' ' ' j. A minimum of 2 buildings shall be constructed on the site and the maximum building footprint of any one building shall not exceed 20,000 square feet. k. Hours of operation for the businesses within this development ,shall be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. 1. The Applicant shall cotnply with the tree preservation standards listed in UDC 11- ~B-10 for protection of existing trees that are proposed to be retained and existing trees 4-inch caliper and greater that are proposed to be removed. The applicant's proposal to plant trees along the southern and eastern property boundaries as mitigation for trees removed from the site is approved per the landscape plan included in Exhibit A. ~.~ ~F m. The detailed site plan and building elevations submitted with any future CUP and/or Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 11 /mar l ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CZC application for this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual site plan `~ ~ and building elevations submitted to the City as shown in Exhibit A of this staff ~~, report, as amended herein, and with the requirements of the subject Development Agreement. n. The Applicant shall submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council and publication of the ordinance in the newspaper. . . p, to re ease bu'tdin the site or the anolicsnt h work wi ACRD to determine a, funding mechanism for the intersection imp ovements~ .~ _ . Z. PP Application: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land in a proposed C-C 2oniag district. This property has not been previously platted. The applicant is proposing to plat this subdivision in one phase. Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in the iJDC 11-28-3 for the C-C zoning district except for the requirement of a 25-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to residential uses. The applicant has requested Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width see below}. Alternative Compliapce: The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance with this application for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south and southeast property boundaries. As mitigation for a reduced buffer width, the applicant proposes to install a max of d-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall, and added landscaping along *~ these boundaries to create more of a barrier between the proposed commercial uses and the ~` existing residence. Per 'CJDC I 1-SB-SB.2, requests for alternative compliance are allowed ~~ when a site involves space limitations or an unusually shaped lot. Staff believes that this parcel has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape. For this reason, Staff Is supportive of the request for Alternative Conspiiance provided that a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in an other areas along the perimeter boundary of the subdivision ad jacent to residential uses, See attached Findings in Exhibit D for more information. Existing Landscaping: The application states that there are 5 existing trees on site that are considered of value, totaling 54 caliper inches. Fifty-four caliper inches were mitigated on the site along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35 lineal feet required by TJDC 11.3B-9. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Departnnent, for confirmation of the aforementioned figures and approval of the tree mitigation plan. The Applicant shall provide mitigation for existing healthy trees on the site that are proposed to removed as depicted on the landscape plan in accordance with the rnitigatian standards listed in UDC l 1-3B-lOC. Additionally, all trees that are retained should be protected during construction. The Applicant should contact Elroy Huff at 888-3579 for approval of the protection fence prior to construction. Landscaping: The applicant submitted a landscape plan [prepared by The Land Group, on 4118/08 (revised 4/2410$), labeled as Sheet L1.0] for the site with the subject application. Staff has reviewed the plan and approves of it with the following modi~ications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a nalnimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire ..~, frontage of S, Eagle Road and E. Victory Road {bath arterial streets), exclusive of ~ ACHD r~ght~of-way required for the ultimate street section, Said buffer shall be << Shops at Victory AZ PP CtJP PAGE 12 I ~ . / } ~ .._.- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2408 designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Fer UDC 11-3B-7.2b, ~~ street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. (Note: In 2011, the lrctory/Eagle intersectioon is planned to be reconstructed and widened to 5 lanes on all legs, including curb, gutter, sidewall~ and bike lanes, per ACHD's 1009-2013 Five Year Work Program.) • The applicant shall construct a 7•foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Sidewalk may be located withi~a~ the required buffer area. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verb-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum b-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the proposed protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The AppUcant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated and approval of the tree mitigation plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurserSrman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in tJDC 11-3B-14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changeslnotes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Sidewalks; The conceptual site plan depicts a 7-foot wide sidewalk along S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road. The Comprehensive Plan (page SS} requires detached sidewalks along all ,~, arterial streets within the City. Staff is requesting as a provision of the Development ~~`~~~~ Agreement that a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk be constructed as a detached sidewalk along bath Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Pathways: No pathways are proposed for intercannectivity and pedestrian access to adjacent residential properties. I~owever, the approved pre ' plat for Harcourt Subdivision to the east depicts amino-path connection to this property at the east boundary. Staff recommends that a pedestrian connectiion (pathway and break in the fence) be provided from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. Additionally, staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fencelwaU) be provided to the property to the south for pedestrian access to the proposed commercial development. Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road tthe first, aright- in/riglit•out only access, 250+1- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+1- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E, Victory Road (the first, aright-in/rigbt-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a firll access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. Planning Stan, the Fire Department, and Police Department are supportive of the two full-access points proposed furthest from the intersection, but are not supportive of the two right-in/right-ont only access points proposed closest to the intersection. Staff is including a DA provision that access be restricted to the one access point from Eagle Road and one access point from Victory Road in locations approved by ACRD. If the Commission and Council should decide to approve the right-in/rigbt-out accesses proposed closest to the intersection, Staff recommends that a center median be required irr Eagle ~. . Shops at Victory AZ PP CUF PAGE 13 (~ CITY 4F MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 Road to restrict left-ir~Jle~t-oat traf,~c mavemen~s. Further, staff is supportive of the internal ~~ ~~ drivewa s ro osed within the site and does not believe that stub streets should be required to YP P adjacent residential properties. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between J the parcels (see Analysis, Section 10, below for more information). Easements and notes regarding access should be placed on the face of the final plat. As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ~4CI~D on this application. Stub Streets: No stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties and no stub streets are provided to this site from adjacent residential properties. Because residential properties exist to the east and south of this property and because these properties are designated on the future land use map for low density residential uses, Staff is supportive of no stub streets being provided, Existing Structures: The existing building(s) on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. Fencing The applicant is proposing a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall along the southern and eastern perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. With approval of the request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses, Staff is requesting that the proposed verb-crete wall be installed adjacent to areas where a reduced buffer width is proposed, as shown on the fencing plan a#tached in Exhibit A.S, tv provide more of a barrier tv the bordering residen~tal uses. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, a minimum 6-foot taU solid vinyl fence shall be installed. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. Fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction, Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where ,. permanent fencing is not proposed, prior to release of building permits. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-?. ~.f Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There arena laterals, canals, or ditches on this site. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface ar welt source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required, If a single- pointconnection isused, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature an the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- l 5 and MCC 9-1-28. Certificate of honing Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use coraaplies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 1 l -SB-1 A). To ensure that all of the requirements of the Development Agreement and preliminary plat, as listed in Section 10 and Exhibit B of this staff report are complied with, the Applicant will be required to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to building/parking lot construction, and all improvements must be installed prior to occupancy, . 3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP}: The applicant is requesting CUP approval fox a drive- . through window for the proposed pharmacy within 304' of an existing residence. Per UDC 11-4-3-11, if adrive-through window is proposed to be located within 300' of an existing residence, CUP approval is required. The drive-through window is proposed to be located on the south side of Pad A at the southeast corner of the building. ~. Shops at Victory AZ PF CIJP PAGE 14 (~ l~ ING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HRARtNG DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK -4-3-11 S ecific Use Standards apply to the proposed drive-through u$e of the Per UDC 11 P '~. property as follows: ablzshrnents rovidin drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, - All est p g r locatio and window (pneumatic tube} location on the plans submitted with the speake n, ertificate of Zonin Compliance CZC} application; The site plan depicts a stacking C g hat is se orate om the drive. aisle needed for circulation. The speaker location and lane t p ,1 ~' Z window location shall be depicted on a revised site plan submitted with the C C application. - Stackin lanes shall have sui~icient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- g wa b atrons; There is suf~`icient room for patrons to stack without obstructing the Y Yp public right of-way. - The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; The stacking lane is separate from the circulation lane. - The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feex (10'} of any residential district or existin residence; The stacking Iane is approximately 95 feet from of a residential g district, which complies with this requirement. - An stacking Iane greater than one hundred feet (100' in length shall provide for an Y escape lane; and, There rs a drive aisle adjacent to the stacking lane which wil! serve as an escape lane needed. - A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. As of the print deadline, comments have not been received from ACHD. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. ~~, ~" ~~~~ Sta believes that the proposed drive-thru does comply with the aforementioned standards. r The applicant shall demonstrate contr'nued compliance with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the drive-through window. fours of Operation: The proposed hours of operation for the drive-through pharmacy are 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. Staff has no objections to the proposed hours of operation, However, the Commission and Council should rely on testimony presented at the public hearing to determine if the nearby neighbors have objections to the proposed hours. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC}: A CZC application is required to be subnutted, prior to issuance of building permits, far the proposed drive-through pharmacy use, The site plan submitted with the CZC shall be revised to comply with the conditions of approval listed iu Exhibit B of this report and shall be submitted prior to establishment of the new use, All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development PAZ-U8- 00?, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011~ with a Development Agreement and the condi~ons fisted in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian PlanninT& ~ Zo_ning Camnnission heard these items on June 19, and 1~v 17~ 2008. At the Public hearing on Juiv 17, Zo08 they moved. to recommend approval of the subject AZ, PP, and CUP requ~,.The Meridian Ci~u,~ • st~hiect A7~, PP. and CiTP request. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 15 `_ (~ ~~~ TY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CI 11. EXITS ~: ~' ~_ A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18!08, Revised: 4/24!08} 3. Conceptual Site Plan tDated: 4118!08, Revised: 4124/08) 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4!18108, Revised: 4/24/0$) 5. Fencing Plan 6. Building Elevations 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7: Ada County Highway District "~ C. Annexation Legal Description 8t Exhibit Map r,, R:: D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 16 Exhibit B--Page 1 .* ~. ~:..:,' CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26 2408 A, Drawings 1. 'vicinity/Zoning Map -~ Exhibit 8 -Page 1 ~-~. ( 7 I~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Z. Pre ' ' ary Plat (Dated: 4118108, Revised. 4124!08) .__.r,._._._ ~.,... E,~~t~narygn~o ..~~~ R +, ~ ,~;:,~• .`"fir""' t ~ r *~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ a.~w ~~ F '~ 'i ~f i ~ IIII~f ' ~. ~ ~' ' ~~ ( ` Ir 1 r • ~~ ©wM~l~ .~~ ' ~4r*r...... 0 ~r ~' ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ • r MAIiR 1J~MM! R ~~~~MAk ~ n • , ~, • ! ~ M-l ~R 1-. X11 MMF lli ~ r f ; ~ ~' f+ ~ •i~ •~~ ~^ (r.~~ ,II~,+~Al~ ~ ~i ~i~M~w11MM1 ~ ~'- ~M1rM i11N f .w~w• ~~f•Y~I+NrwliYS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '•~; ~f ~IIINIR! i#IM~1wi11~ M ~ ~ i ~ CAI Nw ML1~111/OI 1.~ .~J.~• ~ i,. '~ ~!` .i ~... was :n ~~~~~ ~~,~' ~ CIMAf Cxuct~ ~ ~M~~iw .~~..e t •, i~.-.,L. t a Ir:e t IM~MI~~~IrA1A1riMMM~ . ~ '~ • 1 ' ;% . ~ ~ N. ,, ~~ ~ 1 f~ i` ~ ham,, .L ~~~,,,, ~tll~- i ' ~ _ ~ Rl~l~~.~r^~~tM 1 ~ I~III~ [ILIA ~~~~ ~ ~~~~i~~~ ` Exhibit B -Page 2 ~ { ~ y CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAIl~1NING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FDR THE HEARYNG DATE OF AUGUST zd, Z008 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/1 S/48, Revised; 4/24/08} r ~ 4a . ' . •fl ..~ ~ ~0 'n'. `0 ff f ' ~. ~ ~•t ~ 1 - .~ 1 f I w~ ~ ~~ 1 •, ~~ 1 ' 1 1 I .'• t 1 ,~ ' 0 ~ ~.~ ';.;';' ~ ,; 'll~ x a ' rl1 • ~4 ,,~ 1.f• ~ ~ 1. ~. ~ `. , rl u a ,, , ~ , r . ~ .,r< 1 1 !fir r (~ 'a'1j•~~ a {7 0 ~ , r..' f 11W i Si-1 1a 1i 1 ~ ~.~ '~ Q 1•r >rullr aaM'INI• ~~ K1~rN' ~R•A ' ~ , V ~ ~ ~ r f r , IY IYK1 1 i ,1 1 ~. ``---- '' ^^ ~ ~R • •~,' a~/ •1 >w1 'mod INi~ flu ! j ~J ~ w t +Mt v fll• F. u ,.. 1 Z f 1 1+. ' • ~,ti ~~.. ~ t rll~ ilt W r~N 1 ~ 1 ' bl~ IIMbM ~ ~, i ~ ~111N lil 17Wf: N{I ~ ,< +r. twa ~ ~ a -vt WI ~• ` 1 w'• al INI !f CM Nlt ' She Pten ... ~~r .~__.. .r:-r t a , ~'• arral.•Ir• eyl~q ...OW1gNr ..YYillarr ~ .~ l~gy~yr. ,,, 1-~ r ~ ~~' f ~ ~~r' ~ ' .~~+jl i ~~. 1• ;~~: '}. .i..t..•. t. ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ +'t•' 11 1 r ..i. ~ IIT f• M ., ...~. ,.rl- rr.~.,r w..la i ~ i 1 /~•~~ Y-r ~ ~ N!N rrN.. Q 11 /~ I [ • t.r HMl .. u N NI-~j yJ (J wh..,, ' MI M sly Iw , IN ~7Mro...y/ , ~ ~ ~`"'~ ror + 1 ....rp M .ar. s ~ rlaww 14 I~ ~ t ~ , c .....~.. •'' i 1` fi t ~ riq 01 bllaK.YI •': 1:• f~ IM 'IsR I fall CL,1.Miv' 1 hIM rah ~~ ~ 1 • IN'+ar ,•. / •1 .Mfi V +d ,q'lit ilk Ntfapatila; :a~lr ~ /. 7 ~~7~ Q'pC7J'1 I~ a/MM 11 lll• t.l.-, ~• . •a.r rl ~.-V•1 .1111 ,r• , s. 'r '•1'•1•IV N. 1'1r • •. • ~ .In, f w •K It1, ,Ir11 r•Iri/1 MSI«r N,h r •r4w~IM 1.1 .u. ~, MIY• • .!1 ~ N •.y1r 1-91t/1>A~ . M • . 1 , N r W• ~ ~•. ,•M . 1 , •IrrM y., ~~•~~yyyy ilM~ w~~~ / nyM Ilr• . N w , • w y ~ ar t t ~M'L • • N' ItlA •1AP '~* .•MFI r•rti a glfll - ,-•~r ~ q. nl , .. r.11•.~svr+o fY f l , - nr r. 1 •.... I 1 ~ •wr rlr• y. 11Wy~r • .~ ~L 1.•,.....• tr. ...• ~ • ..r ..•~ ':~ • _r.• I •~, « • y~« ~1~""' .T.. ,r 7, Iw ,/:4, • '.Ni '.1 '.• • :r AT 6 ~~.1~ • 11. r, '/•~. ' ••1/wlMr l N MM (?;Allll lr M rlrtro.~~rs :yl+y~tM ,IL: IY! ~ rt ste~.w;'I....,r'I.w,••.•aarw' •, :~.:.'--,i r C1-o3 Exhibit B -Page 3 ~~ , ~, CITY OF MER]DIAN PLANIVIfNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE NEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 4. ~Jandscape Plan tDated: 4!18108, Revised: 4/24108) .•~ ~ { 1j ~ 1 '• . •V.. • ~~ • . • . • • .. :r•~ 1 i~~ ~~:• .. .1 r.l . ' `I I V -~~ ~=- 1 ~ • '-•...rd Nlr M •. II.N.N .\~yY.M .,fV~.r •r•...: . •'MIwrM •wIM1NNIlN4Y 11 Vu•.MN.•1 X111 L r.•-IM•r./•A•1~1.IIIwM• tiN,rNr. •. •w..M•WNM •`•IrN.1.N. •YMr- Wr 1 ..r{w .•NI'•11': ~•-'+h .M-N AI•.•Y `MAr IY1lW~~'lllr n.1• ~ ••+•NM1•N•1/.rYwv. •ql riq.ti l..r N.1.IN.iN. rw.x •«.~1 'I..r •r' MW N •1 •'ti 4.{-.w, w•.W M.. rvllww / r•rw/r'rrw.••Il.rr•w-•I-~Ar111~IM1111Mr.M1111 rw1~1 r>t~. •11.11 r.1-1 •, w •. N r-wM-161~~1{ jI~IECIDUOU$_TP~, T~ ~ 1 ,. , 1, t w ~! 1 O~ .i'i r..~ ... r `; ~~. •~.-/~' ~- 1 .. ~, .. , ,~,, . .. ~ 1 ~~-s ~ ~ •' ~• ~+ :. ,;.~~~ VRYYArM. Y•~1•I•••11•.Y.til.. .i.W ..•.r.~,. it Mtil•~MI Wti11MAM+N M. ti•Nlrl~•.1 •1.•wl.w. 1,. ~' N.I. wI•.MV NNNN Y Y.V.•\'. Nn • ..•r'.1'N•'N • •• Inr.• \ •1 r/r/• • • /• r~111r111M .w1~ rv1/••wwnu...•, { nw7+'YAw•••wN.~1.•NMIMIIIIIMIw•,WII.~Ia.•.wr .I.r • .N{r/.1•'1.-v..r /,'rr N.-.1. w. w 11 Nr- wyw .. +•. •.la ~LN V N-V Ir\+•V.y rM.....~N..V •I.wl • ..Y.w ..••M.11•w•••11.1. { •~h ••11 rr-VI .1•.-11 1{.NN••MI. r•11~A/• •II~Ir411 M4.1• /~\ FIJ ~MT~ y ~.! .s.Y'a+ra.l .f ~~rAi~ ND~S:. • •~.....hw.•1••+r.••.•I.vN-.IIIY111.1'..r..r.ar ..... 1.1,1.... 1 ~M /r M11w•Y~w.rrrtYw••wlrr...yw 1 .•• w 1w1y1r11.11 r r l w-IV r..l..rr. •~ rwr4 11• /wW ~.r, w.rrJ•M.••ilW 1 r.l-w.n b~wli 1 .~•wwN w•rlrw/ll•rrY~{I~1{IIW 1r.IM11 .•~1..... N1nIrA• rr 1 .r.gMM~ rrr , .qr rl rlw.-••w•wrr Lrrr/r« r. .nw.•r rH /.•r1 rl w -.. •• qF •1. rr ~r • r till..~.r.wwr.r.•.w•.pr AVNNMM V NYM Ir~-tiNr 1 rrwl~rwlrrr rrlrrtl.~.•ww/•w~rr •Iw•{r.. / •.ro'+~r+-14.1w.-wY11....•/•1.~.•1r1 r1 ww.wl~.~.wl. r.lr.~...lr w••rl{rJ. 7 wrrtwl•t•NwM.lr -•w•r..r..y. w.l.~,. +-•..~wrwi/~..rnr /r /~ r rri-f.w•rr rY w p11 A.111Mr.Iti.Ir/ ti~rr.w-. MIIII M. I I I..rw •r w • r w-~ ~ 7 r~Ib-rww•rr ~••rl+M.•.N.~Lrw•rr- 1NNr.r1 W ~rA I.Mrl Mrw/ tit/ rIM rw r ~•w .IMWr41..faM I~.AYr./wWY•Y•Ir Nr. r r..rrl+r.+rwr wwwp.IW Iw•.••.w w~.w •r.l.llw N •I+wrrr`wr>•.11~r.•.11 wYHM A•.NrMM1r•W 11.• • ..1 r.~- rw~N~N •rM. r.1. M.w•Y\wl wl ~l.•Iw +•~ •rr.l..Irtl• •.YrY.rrrrAr•/Mb• ~ M/ r. •{r Mlrr•.I.w /•A.w~..wr. w.•ww ~wrr.ll•Mr•MMIMw~IalrrW w~/+ +. ti.AMrww w••Irwlwt••Mrr••M 1111~ti.r1w M.I•g11111M M V /Y111r ~rlMr•.r/Yl+lw. rN•...1•..w w MrghNA W r+~~•ti1Mr•~•.• rti.r~.r••~•rw ^r..•. •••q..~r. r..i ~~: • rw•1. ~~ ~! :~~ r :ry "'j_ W.Y~~. ~ .~~v ~~~II III7W:V (3~.~-Ell '~+a~r •Ip. ' ~1 .~.f ~''~ «•. .. , "'' rllTi~R ,r. ~1w ~ ..M,~,,._J-"'_«_u-~ .~•---•'-~"`'~"-• i~„JJ.+w~„M`•I. ~MwMtr_-~r~Lr~ N1.7~1 ~ 1~ 1 i •1 I ~ R 1 1 ' i .~;_'! 1 I ~ . ~ • - • LO . ~ •~• ~.. ~+.,rw~ •,M1 11, w~ ~ 1p. • ~' IM ~~.NwL~~.-,,l~... ~ .. ,. 1 ~~~~ Y tw1~1n11 /~ 11~ • 1I • w ~N~ ti.l.~..wr r11 ~~IM.'.. / li'~~,y:l~~, 1 .. 111 1 ~ - 1 _rr .~1~ wM 1 ~JI- ' • •• J . ,: (~ !~ ~•~! !~ O ~ .. ...~ ~ ~ ~• ; ;; Gr CAI.CIJRATIONQ I ~ ~~~ ,~ rIM1.rYwY fYllrq•1•h •rqp~ ~111 1 Mil M , rur• rN { • 1}•N• 1 t 11 •hMrllnll 1 I ~ `1 \~i~ ~~.1M~M/I-MY: 1'li•Y•'/I. I~wir~il 111 .h•• •..I% 1 A.. ,Jw .1qy. .111. IMr.A/M! ~ • '/ .h 4 ' rnn• v rrrr/ 1 1\I.. . j ,/ .. M• r.1; 1 YI1/•U .M. N,IIIw ,1.: .»•n ~ •• 1 Yl~Ir1A1, uN11111 ./~~ ,+ . PLANT SCHEt„ ~ ~ , itt+~wx lrv~ ~bvMpN ~-,+a;, ~J1 gyre ~, Can .rA1R ~!!'ZH'14~~~~'~M~IM{~Li4W 1 sir,~srnilwktr~wYit~iH t~WT • ' ~ ~'~ MI ~ /ww~iY ~ ~,~~1 i~~ ~ • (11 ~•frtllr•In.+rrr rl e~1~~1~1~+.~w ~r~ a P Fwwr ,..,~ . +a^R~r• 1 h.11.n....Nwrwwrw.IwwMr~wll.rwl+ w ~ y1~1F 1 •. 7.1'rlyr/ r~r ... .'.- /MIIIM.tI1r~.IWy ^w1••~w ..Iw.• ... ~S.~•~ ~ .Iw•I NN rr.r. Yr4... 1 M r11V..{ Irr• '••/'yLM..Y~w.r iwlw•rrl.w 1 • IVI111\.N ry.•.•. wIN.1•W ~wN 1~. 1 ~ 1 1 .•11 r w 111• ?~iliL;.:N6r rr••rr.1., rlMw.wrwY{w M r Arwywl l ~ w.-w • III•MMrllh! tinIF OI./`rlw '~ i~~.~ .. .. .._~ 1„nw . 1 .1 w .N V ..I. 1 :•1• .l• 11.1 Ir 1 ..K . aw ': h .• r.rl .N 1,...1.• 11 u •' 11' ' /•' ~I I. ...J •~i 14 •' •~ . .w; KN6 5,~~~~- •..,:,,.: r ~a~ Phan ti ~ r • ,~r '1' N., z ~ a U S U W ~r ~i l~lla M yr• •N hn•~ ..._~~ MPwrr/14 r• Mlw~w w• •~Ir.~.M -- ~ I~.Mt Mme/' .`II Y ~aaw~ a ~.~.0 ~~ Exhibit B -Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF ,REPORT FOR THE HEARIIVG DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5, Fencing Plan Y~ F. iy . y ~ =" 1 4~• \ ' ~~ I ..1.:d . ~ I• .~, r•w.4~ • .. I •~~ a a ~ ~. ••1wr'~ j,"'1'r' ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~1 J~,,~ ' -"`i 1' r' r. ..ti ~ ~ ` , •+~>/1MrV1 fYMXi M •~ ~ ' ,, 1. • .. ~ •~ i 1 ,~ ' ~ •''~ .. ~eA ~ ~ ~ ~~ 6-. y ,. . ~~::". 1 ., ~• f (~ ' .~i,, ~. '1 .rs f ~ ~!) t ,~~I ~!~ ji~~,• • ~~ ~~ T~~~ W II rr~~ ~ . I;Vl, +' 1Mt11~~ ~}~!! • '~ ~ ~.~ ,. ,. ~4~,;,,, I ,.. ~ ~ ~-{ ~. ~~ • ~ ~. ~ ', w~! J ~ '~ 1 ~, ..` , ~ ~~,~ ~ ;~'~ ~~ ~4ri ~ ~~ ~''+t! ~~ ~ ~ t~~.li ~ ~ . ~ V~r~iu~.'I~ p ~ ~~.~ A~.C~LATI 4 N S i rotrr.rt~'f~,T-~WM4.llN+Mtm~ nrw~iMr-+wr r t~p1f ib ~ >M 1AM~L ~!!~ ~ •~Rif ~Iitl1M1lS ~ir~~ 1 rti.' ~"f1N R' . W~ ~ 1iYA1,ltpr ~, trrir ~a •~ rMp:~ AIIY~ + UK:I.yk ~~ MAr:no -AYU Ilt • Iargs'KA ~N-'+UIN;L +W.r M~~r~ uNrM-.x yM ':'a Ewa a r~-~ «~: rrcrr u. •r+wa rvea~ l ~l/~f/aTu~•M{AW+ti1MM Mt~~~r. .,, 6' "~ , s~l~d rr•rrr ~`~1 ~~ /d11 r.ly ~h~ tali Exhibit B -Page S ,~ I ~ s~° ~ ~= r ..:., .. ~, ,Y ~~-• ~-~ IAN PLANNING AEPARTMENT STAFF REPGRT FGR TDE HEARING DATE DF AUGUST Z~, 2448 CITY OF MERID 'sal A•North EM+-~4ion .~ ~ ~ ~~ Wit' •.w ~ ~ .. '" W~ ~ .~ ~~~ J.I .:. T' F ,~ ~ ~ , M~'~ ~~~ ~ ~'~'~':i':« ~ ~~ ~ad.a ~'Ca« yT'f d,j ~~;. yam{ ~ • , ' ~y f rig ~e u.rruoN ~' .~ _ ~^ '~.! .a' .. ~ ^• 4 ..y~~ s I ~''~~ ~ .,;~ i r ~=~~i ~tP~` •Mr ¢¢ ~ J ~.. r n:i y ~• ~' r r ~~ ~ ~f ~ .~+i~ ...: ;:~~ .... _ f . . .t...~., 1gg i ~ ~ ~ ~`'~ ,. ' !'~ ~ _~,~ t t ~ r~^~ Exhibit B -Page d 6. Building Elevations 1 ,..AI ~ t 1 t ~ , I~Mw 1 .. / , ~` 'p CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DA'L'E OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ,, • ,. ~~,. ,Q ~~ ' \; ~~:~•' ~ i ~ ~ ~ r.,i fir. ~ ~ Pad ~Ihst Elwstion ~.w • O ~ ~ V ^ I '~ ' +i "~ ~ r •~..r. •.*C~ ~r il-. ys i '~''~T ,•~ ~~ ~ ... ; Pad ~lOftll ENY~Ii011 ~ ^ ~~i ,- x ,` v r"~' •, r ~~'1 ... ..., ~~ r .+. ~''~ ~,. ~~. 'iyw' .~ ~~ ~~i~-f~P~ l..J L.I r ~ ~ ; 1. ~' ;,Na'~ '~ .I J • ~ ~ 1' • ~•~ ~^ 1~ ~ t-J ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~[ M ~. 1~1 .~ .~ M .~ ..i 1 ;...:........J t}~~ : . t•TM~ 1,_ ~~~ ~~9~ i4i j}~ ` / i ~ {' S~ ~ wti ~ ~.^ Exhibit B ~ Page ~ ~,.' . 1 '~~... ,, CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 7008 ~;; ~; ~~.~ r Rsd FNortl~ lfwatlew _~ .~ ~,. . ~ ~4 Pad C-t~st ~IwNlon ~ ~ ~ l~r ~~ft r r or ~• r o. r •, ~• ~~~ .,.. ; ~. llyd C~WNt ~w~n ,.u,.r. a.{ ' 0 U• ~ V ~~ , ,.~ ;~ ., ~~9~ 1! ~3 !~ ~ ~, ~ ...r Exhibit B--Page 8 ~ 0 ~ ~.a csewk ewwaoN 1 ~, OF MER]DIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FAR THE HEARING DATE ~F AUGUST 26, 2008 CITY 7, Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment ~;. ~~ V~ x ~ /• D~~~o~~N~r s~~,~rC~:~ F.1\ , -i-~ ,t.. ~'K:~ :~~~~ `~ i~lt~J:~T. E~~'?ITT:. ;I'jsftti ~,~~ri~..;,tsci "~ ~, ._.,.~._._.._~ ....~... El'IL1~t~C;'_.....~ ~!r't~~~'~ERL\G PL~~ti'i;~'ta ' ~ , _ 7i~~'f~C.~ _._._..~...~... ~~lav b. 2W8 DI~r1G~ Real Estate Aartners/ R, Grey Goons :35Q ti+ 9~ Suite 2nl BoisN 1D, 8374 RE: RR~JECT'YC~MBER 20080456-PBA. Application for a Property 8oundarv Ad}ustmNnt in~~o1~'ing Tax Parcel Numbers S11?832307~ and R319325Q010 located at ;? 1~~ S Eagle Raad. Meridian, ID, Ta~anship 3 North, Ranpe 1 East, Section ?~ 11~ar Al~pli~•ant~ tin April ~, 2tI(l8 A~~a C'nunty DPVeIn}~mPnt Ser~~i,`~ r~- aiv~l ~-~~ur al~ph{ ~tum t~-r a pro~rtl~ lx~undanl adjustment, Based nn ~tafP~ review of the Ada Cc~unt~~ ~`rnje, this ,~,r#Y apphtat~un has been liven tentative appro~~al, sut~+: t to d~~ ~`~.~rrdiiiuns of Apprcwai .~~ ~ listed in Cxttibit ".a". please note, this approval shall become null and void i! thN ~~` Conditions of Approti•aZ have not l~n met, dnd if you have nc~t obtained a valid Zoning Certificate within one t) I gear of the date of this apprrval letter I~h~s ~ietemtinatipn was made based upon current information contained m the public. r~~orct and interpretation of ttt~~ Ada County Zoning Urdinanre, Yau ma~~ appeal this de<`~ston to the Baard c~! A~~a t:~ounh~ C:omm~ssionc~rs, ) o do su, vc~u must file thc~ appf~al u-~thm htteen days of the loth o! this letter, 1 ha tee for hlln~ iin appeal ~$ ~~5t). Pursuant to idahv Code § 67-b535, this lector ~ to further Inform you that to the extent a final de~•ision has teen made an a site~specific land use request, an a~+plicant has the right t4 request a re~ulatarv takings analy-s~ under Idaho Code ~ ti7~3. if vau have any questions, I can be reaehed at (208y 287-7901, Sine erel v, , Grp ~i~ ~nder~~n, Planner Il Acja County i~velt~pment Sprvlt ~ ~~: ti~tarl~ PPrfr~~1, Plannr~r (Il SEriwrvisr.}r; Arta C~~unty ~ev~-k~pmer~t S~rv~ces Sunva ~'~'attr?rs, Assa•ia1P C'itti- Planner; titPridian r~t,~ Prw~ N~c~c~XxiS~FKA _ . _ . ~ ~. 4~Mc; ! tin~r~ I~ua~ I too i Exhibit B -Page 9 ;; ` 1. OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2x08 CITY S'CAB' ANALYSES This application is for a Property Boundary Adjustment;evolving Tax Parce! Numbers SI 128Z21A7S located at 3210 S Eagle Road and 83193250010 lOr~ted at ~~QB ~ Falcon nrive nn April 4, 241QR Ada County C~evelopment Services r~~eiveci your application for a rrul~erty boundary adjustment. On April 7, 2E10A your acceptance letter was sent to you in~iK•ating tha[ your application would he acted upcm within 6~ days. There is a single family r~~dence located an each of the praperrties. ['ar~el number R3119325041Q contains 4.8 acresy it is zones RUT, it is lot 3 of C;~lden Eagle Estates and was platted in 1914, This property is a 4.8 acre legal nonconforming lot and w~iU become a canformirtig panel containing 5.0 acres. Parcel number 5112~82230r'S contains 3.9 acres ~t ~s zoned RUT amd was created an 8118/2QQb by instrument number 10613444b. ~I'h~s parcel was split farm parcel 51128223v'iU when a pardon of the property was deeded to Ada County H.tgftwav [)tstrict. Panel number Sl 1282280r7Q was created in 1954 and was 5 acres per deed recorded rn book 392 and page ?.50. Sirx~ this property was conforming prior to at ~-ing reduced by gavemmental action it is deemed a conforming propeM3• fO.r development purposes. ~1'ltis property contains 3.9 acres and will be 3.b acres this property wit! he annexed into the c~tv a! Meridian. APPLICABLE LAW This section details Ada County zoning ordinance regulations and other apRlicable stan~tards regarding develo}~rnent of the subject property, I. SSA-19: PRC?PERTY REpUC,I;D BY CC7VERNMENTA[. ACT1aN~ if a ~~ gnv~mrnpntal action (such as aryuisitican thr«agh p~ ription, purcha~, nr ~.~. other moans by the Ada C,'c~unty highway district, Idaho transporta~inn clMPartrnNnt, utility ~umpany nr ~~urpc~ratiun under the jurisdiction of the l~Iahc~ public utilities+~c~tm~issian, or other kx:al, state, ar federal agency) red ores an existting property below the required property size, such praperty~ 4hall ~ deemed as a conforming property for the purpcr~es of de~Plopment. ~- also se~•tian 8-~ 8-3 of this title. ~Qrd. ;~9, 6.14-2000; and. Qrd. 591, 7-~7, 20Q5) 2. ~Ctign 8.4C-4: PRC}PFRTY' BC?UNDARY Ai3JU5TA~~FIVT STAN~ARi~: A. A property boundary adjustment shall not reduce the property size below the minimum dimensional standards prescribed by thts title including regulations for indi<<idual wastewater treaba~nt systems and wells as set forth in sections B-4A~22 and S-4A•23 of this title respecn~~eiv. B. If one or more of the properties is nonconfarnxing as to the minimum dimensional standards prescribed by this title, the property boundary adjustment shall not increase the nonconformity. l'tvjaE ~MZ~~I~{K~K1Sfi-1'I3A ~1~ci / t~tc~, Pub 1 ~ j Y Exhibit B -Page 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2408 C. A property boundary adjustment shall not increase the original number of properties. D. A property boundary adjustment shall not change or rnave any public streets, private roads, easements, or publicly dedicated areas in am- manner, E. The property boundary adjustment shall not constitute a relocation of a property. F. For flatted lots, the property boundary adjustment shall E~ in substantial conformance to the recorded plat. Section 8.1 A•~l definitions SU BSTaNTIAL COIVEC~RMANCE: A €inal plat shall be deemed to be i,n substantial conforma~e to a prel~rninary plat provided that the final Flat represents no increase in the number of lets as approved far the prelamnnary plat and a tely percent X1016) or Tess deviation of any dimensional standard shown on the preliminar}- plat, prc~videci that the density and ~t dint~!nsions meet the;sta~~dards of the zoning base cii3tric~l. Unless required by a public highway agency, public utility, ar federal or state agen<~y, deviations greater than teen }~erc~ent (ltl~} car mare of any din~ensionai Standard sht~wri can the preliminary plat shall not he deemed in substantial conformance, Final plats in rural districts and the l~U'T and RSw districts shall be allowed a twenty five percent (25~) deviatit~n of dimensional standards ~:. ~,.~ 3. Section 8-4C-5: PRC?pERTY BC~UN~ARY ADJUSTMENT REQUipED F1NDiNG: In order t~~ approve the application, the dec-isicm•rndking body shall find chat, the proposed property boundary adjustment ~•R~mplic~ with the standards iii Section S-~`-4 of ibis Title, FINDiNG~i ~~ FACT (f any ~~f thew Findings of Fa~~t am deemed C'i~nciusi~~ns c7f l.aw, they are incc~r~rated u~tu the ("unclusiuits of Law ~c,~tiun. The f}ireriar finds khat Prx~jec~t Number 200$lXlfl5lrP8A complies with Section 8-4A-19 of the Ada County C:adP as follows. ra rrel n u mbar 511282.23070 was a 1Fga 1 con forming.5 acre property ~ the R t1T u~nP and was then reduced in size by an acquisition through purchase by Ada County highway distrut reducing the existing property below the required property size. 'this created parcel number 57128223075 this property is deemed a conforming property for the purposes of development. The Director finds that Nroject Number ZUO~uXlU56-PbA complies with Section 8-4C•5, A- ~ of the Ada County Code as follows: A..~s randitianed the property boundary adjustment will not reduce the propPr#y size of the parcels below fire minimum dimensional standards set for(h in their respective districts, PrU~C~I IY2~(~0456~FBA T)M~i l G~~ir~ Pale ; ~f S Exhibit B -Page 11 .. ...... .~~._~.~ .... .. ,:t j I, r y; pL,~G DEPA.RTit~NT STAFF REPORT FOit THE HEARING DATE OF ACJGUST 26, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN ~; ;. red in the record, Parcel A is a contorrning property' based on the B. As eviden dimensional standards set forth in the RUT Distri~•t for the property before it was redu~•ed by governmental arhon. As evidenced in the record Parcel B is a nonconfomning property teased on the dimensional standards set forth in the RUT Distract. Parcel B will be increased in size and Fill become a conforming property. I~hus the property boundary adjustment will not sncrease the nonconformity of a nont~onforming property. C. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, the property boundary adjustment does not change or move any public streets, private roans, easements, or publicly dedicated areas in any manner, t~. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, the 1roperty lx~undary adjustment will no! ronstitute the relaxation of property. F. As evidenced by the submitted site ~+lan drawing, the property bUUndary, adjustment will not ranstitute a relcx'ation vi the property. F. AS evidenced by the rerord~ the submitted site plane ~~omplies with 5ecuor~ ~- ~C•5, F of the Ada County Code as follows; As evidenced in the record Lod lot :~ of Golden gagle l;states t~ontains 4,8 acres. Per the code, the maximum allowed dimensional deviation ~ 25~ in the R~~f zone or I.2 acres on this property'. As proposed, the property boundary adlustm~nt would change tfie dunensional dev~ahon by .2 acres. ~~' As proposed, the property boundan+ adjustment ~ m substan~al ~~ conformance with the recorded plat. ~. CONCI.USi0N5 QF IAVV if an~~ of these Conclusions of Law are deemed Findings of Fact, they are incorporated into the Findings of Fact section. 1 The n~rec~tor rune{udes Prnj~-ct Numl~r Z(X1S(lil(~~-PUA ~~«tTil~fia~ witl~ Sec ticm A- ~`-5 caf the Ada ~uunty ~cxlN. ORDER Based upon the findings at Fact and Conclusions of Law contained in this Staff Deport, the Duector terttativety approves C'roject Dumber 20000056-PgA, sut~je<•t to the Candit~ons of Approval attached as Exhibit A, Prajuct N~tX~fiQC?Slr~'~~~t pact i c Ni~U t' ~ cif s Exhibit B -Page 12 1 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 ~;~, :i. rti; EXHIBFT A caNnrr~o~v~ o~ API~ovA~ PROJE(`T NUMBER 200SQOD5b~PBA DMG Real Estate Partners/ R Greg Goins REQUIRED ACTIQNS. THE FOLLOWING LIST DETAILS THE TASKS THAT MUST BE CQMPLE[ED BEFORE THE APPROVAL OF PROJECT KUMBEIt ?.p~84i1~6•pBA wIL~. BE CONSIDERED FINAL THE APPLICANT AND/OR C~'wN'FRg SHALL HAVE UN~'II. taNF YEA~t FROM THE wREI"t'EN DfiC>'S~CIN Tt~ ~'(aMPLETE THE REQUIRED ACTIOhiS AND TO OBTAIN wRI~'TEN APPROVAL FROM THE DAtEC'T~R. THIS APPROVAL SRAM, gEC4ME YO~D ~F WR~fi ~N A PPROVAL IIAS NOT BAN ISS~IE~D BY THAT DATE. 1. The appficantand/or owners shall cause the propert~- to be surveyed and a record of sur~~etil recorded. 2. The applicant and/or owners shall execute and record the necessary deeds to accomplish the property houndary adjustment, :~~ ~ 3. The applicantand/or owners shall obtain new parcel numbers from the Ada County n, .Assessor. ~. The applicant and ; ar owners shall cause parcel "A"' to be annexed into the city of '4leridian. The applicant shall complete condition number b after Meridian City Council has vt~ted to approve the annexahan for parcel "~", but prior to the urctinarx~e tieing aciopt~I and puhlish~cl. 5. 71~N ~tppli~ and anci/ar +~wners Shall provide the following dorumentatian tc~ the ~irertar: a) One copy of the mcorded record of survey, b) Cane tapy of the recorded deeds). ~-) Proof of assignment of tax parcel numbers. d) Documentation that parcel "A" has been approved for annexation by Meridian C.'ity ~:ouncil. b. Upon completing the above tasksy the applxanE sha1J request a letter from the Director stating that the Property Boundary Adjustment has received (anal approval. t f the propert}- is not annexed into the City of Meridian K~ithin one year of the date of this letter #ile numl~r 200060Q5frPBA will became null and void. f )M~- r cininc Page 5 n!' 3 Exhibit B -Page 1 ~ (,.. V~ ING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPaRT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN ~,s ~. q.. itY '. B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 A-NNEXATIDN COMMENTS ' n le al descri Lion submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2()08 by 1.1.1 The annexatio g P •s ' co rate bounds of 1~aron Y.,. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the ex~ ring rpo ry the Ciry of Meridian. for to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into 1.1.2 Pr etween the Ci of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), b ry and the develo r. The applican# s>rall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at $9$•SS06 to Initiate thfs rocess. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. (The P Plannin De artment required DA provisions are in Section'10 of the,Staff Report.) g P 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQLRREEMENTS--p~L~N~X PLAT 1.2.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-o8-04?), associated Development Agreement, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-O11) shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP~08-UOb}. 1.2.2 Prior to issuance of any CZC andlor building permit, the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.2.3 "The landscape plan included in Exhibit A, prepared by The Land Group on 4118/08 (revised 4124108}, is approved with the following nlodificationslnotes: ~~~ ~ • The a licant shall construct a miltimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire ~.. k~ PP frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets}, exclusive of AC right-of-way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. ~ The applicant shall constrict a buffer adjacent to the existing residential uses to the east and south in accordance with the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in this report. A reduct~'on in the required 25- foot wide buffer was approved in certain areas depicted on the landscape plan through ~4lternative Compliance with this applicarion. • Depict a minimum b-foot tall verb-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict nuniinum b-foot tall solid vinyl fencing, • The applicant shall construct a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened EaglefVictory intersection. ,did cidewAlk ~hs~ egten acrosa,t6e ~1dri ~e nrnnprty ~inn~ Fg~le Road to F~I~Q~LD~,Ye sod-be lOCeted Wi in ~ public ,_ pedestrian easement. _______ • The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated, and approval of the tree mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Exhibit B -Page 14 .... (~ '~~A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TIC HEARING DATE OF AUGUS T 26, 2008 ', ~ ~~'~ ~ A written certificate of completion shall be r ared b t • pep y he landscape architect, designer ~~ , or qualiEed nurseryman responsible for the landsca a tan, All st ' p p andards of installation should a l a pp y s listed va UDC 11-3D-14. where the applicant has submitted a pre ' landscape Ian ~ and where staff h p as reviewed such 1 the landsca in sb 11 p ~ p g a be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes shall be shown on a revised landsca e p plan submitted with the final plat applications . } 1.2.4 All coramerci~al street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a ermanent dedicated p buffer , maintained b the roe y p p rty owner or business owners' association, per UDC 11-3B-7C2. 1.2.5 Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any buildin ermits on the site t ' g P o contain • debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where e p r~nanent fencing is not proposed. All fencin shall be insta S lied ua accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.6 All existing buildings on the ~ site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final lat b ' p y the City ' En veer, 1.2.7 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance a lication with revised laps pp p fat compl with the conditions of a Y pproval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits, 1.2.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occu anc f p Y or the pro used develo meet. A to p p inporary Certificate of t~ccupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cast of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irri ation . A bid must g } accompany any request for temporary occupancy. ~- 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS----PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance an d as Hated in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat a lication s . PP 1.3.2 Sidewalks shall be installed witfun the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivis' ion pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 38-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, Sand, gravel or other non-ve etated surface materials shall not be used in o ens ace lots exce g p p pt as permitted under UDC 11-3B-11. If the storrnwater detention facility caru~aot be incorporated into the ap roved o en s ace ands ' meet the standards of UDC 11-3B- p p p ~ 11, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the res onsibilit of the developer to co 1 with ACRD Cit of ' ' p Y ~ Y y Meridian ar~d all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4 Coordinate firre hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works De artrn.ent, p 1.3.5 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within thus develo meat. p 1.3.b Per UDC 11-3A-d, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of an natural waterw (Ten Mile Creek) that inters cross or lie .. Y ays +~, within the area being subchvided shall be covered. This requirement doe not apply to the Ten Mile Creek which is classilxed as a natural waterwa and must be protected as stated in UDC 11-6A-11~. This r uir Y eq ernent shall not apply to the Beasley Lateral if the applicant improves it as a linear open space water ameni , tY ~, Exhibit B -Page 1 S r ~~ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STApF REPORT FQR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2048 1.3.7 Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. ,~.~. 1.3.8 Pre ' ' ary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set faith in UDC 11-6B-7. 1.4 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIltEMENTS -- CONDITIONAL ~1SE PERNIIT 1.4.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007) application and associated Development Agreement and Prelims Plat (PP-O8-006 shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011 }. 1.4.2 The Applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards for drive~through establishments listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 as follows: a, All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC} application; b. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way bypatrons; c. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; d. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; e. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, ,~. f `" ~ f. A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with ~~ {f ` the authority's standards and policies shall be required. 1.4.3 The hours of operation for the pharmacy drive-through shall be linuted to 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. 1.4.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed pharmacy drive~through with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to commencement of the use. 1.4.5 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above (UDC 11-SB-6F). If the drive-through use has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 2. Public wanks Depaent 2.1 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of the 12 inch main located in E Victory Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install at the developer's expense two water connections one in E Victory Road and one in S Eagle Road due to ire flow requirements. The applicant will also be required to stub a future connection to 3300 E Falcon Drive. The applicant will be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works department. 2.2 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in E Victory Road with service provided to 3250 E Victory Road. 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 ~;. Exhibit B -Page 16 (; 1 ~.'. ~__. D1AN PLANNrNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING BATE OF~ AUGUST 2b, 2008 CITY OF MERI ~- ~ ' ' ' cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is service. Minimum ee feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian less than thr ~~ Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 ' t shall rovide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public The apphcan p right of way (include all water services and hydrants}. 2.4 licant has indicated the required pressurized irrigation system in this development will be The app therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted trict di i ri , s on t ted b an ir owned and opera y ga rior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. If it is to be maintained as a private system, p laps and s ecifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the p p ~~ ' of the o erations and maintenance manual will be • construction plan review. A draft copy' p re aired rior to ran approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on q p P the last phase of this project. 5 2 The Ci of Meridian r uires that pressurized irrigation systems besupplied by ayear-round tY ~ . source of water C 11-3A-6). The applicant should be required to use any existung surface water for the source. If a surface source is not available, asingle-point connection to the p'y ulin waters stem shalt berequired. If asingle-point connection is utilized, the developer will c ary Y be res ansible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the p final plat by the City Engineer. 6 2 ' ' Works s ecifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius Meridian Public p . of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation requirement and comply with all landscape requirements. 2 7 Additional width to the public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement along theright-of way . shall be dedicated where the sidewalk is located past the right-of-way. The additional width ~~ . needs to be sufficient to allow for 10 feet of easement past the sidewalk. ~ : ~~~~~~~ ~ 2,8 esti wells tem within this ro'ect shad be removed from domestic service per Any existing dam c ys p ~ 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 inay 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. 2,9 Per UDC 11-3A-b all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, crass ar lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will net to be approved by the appropriate inzgation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval ornon-approval submitted to the Public works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.10 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be uastalled and activated, sewer system shall have passed air-testing and video inspection, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District , prior to applying for building permits. 2.11 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 114% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature an the final plat. 2.12 All development irnpravements, including but not lunited to sewer, fencing, nucro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2,13 r Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction ( ~.. inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat. Exhibit B -Page 17 r!. r ~ ~~r CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.1 S Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.16 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities ,Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 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 fitl material. 2.18 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 building pads are at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets, Two-hundred and fly watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections andlor fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 4: t l-~l`; '``- 3. Fire Department 3.1 Acceptance of the water, supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by .the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Final Approval of the fine hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 14'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 1$" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.3 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 1 SO' in length with no outlet. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius, The required ~g radius shall be maintained adjacent to the landscape islands off Taconic. 3.5 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.6 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Exhibit B -Page 1$ G DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 EPARTMEN'I' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HH~N D CITY O F MERIDIAN PLANNING 3.1 ~ ~ • ei t of mature trees shall have a vertical • and structures including the canopy h gh Fare lanes, streets, f 13'b ~ clearance o . an all ent street signs and access roads with or penman orar 3.8 y 0 erational fire hydrants, temp ou t on site. p cued before combustible construction ~ br weather surface are req sto constnictton. • the International Building Code for one and two ry Building setbacks shall be per , 3.9 3.10 pal Fire • ' es will r wire a fire-flow Consistent with the Interr~atio Commercial and office occupants ~ laced er A pendix D hall be p p p t d s s ran ' e the ro sed praJect. Fsre hy Code to servic p Po the result of the lled as t i 3.11 , a ns is that an future signalization The fire department reques Y ~ nsors to ensure a safe and efficient t of this roject be eq>upped with Opticom Se ' to be men p elo tion is d ll p a ev service vehicles. This cost of this insta re once by fire and emergency medical sP borne by the developer, 3.12 ' oration of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. Masntain a sep 3.13 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancY• 14 3 ' ' of the Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level, The first digit . 15 3 shall ' 'n s sterns including exiting systems}, processes ~ storage practices All aspects of the builds g y ~ . . be aired to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.I b • ated on this ro' oct must be within 154' of a paved surface as All portions of the busldings lot P J measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.17 ess li tin as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. Provide exterior egr gh g 3.18 shall be a fire h drant within 100' of all fire department connections There Y °~ . >>~ 3.19 ~ . access roads in accordlance with The International Buildings over 30 in height are required to have Fire Code Appendix D Suction D105. 3.24 res nse mutes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. Emergency po 3.21 USTRIAL -Buildings or facilities exc~~ding 30 feet ~9144mm} or three CONi~~IFRCIAL AND ~ for oath structure. Two of ans of foe apparatus access h ree me stories in height shall have at least t the be laced a distance apart. equal to not less than one half of the length of the access roads shall p ~ ~ a strai t Ilne. ' oral dimension of the property or area to be served, measur gh overall drag 3.22 ' ent strop recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to The Fire Departm ~Y rove the Fire ' a e intersection not be approved. If these access points are app d, the Victory/E gl ds that these accesses be restricted toright-inlright~out only as proposed. Department recommen 4. Police Department ' ent strop recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest 4.1 The Police Departm ~Y ~ ved the Police to the VictorylEagle intersection not be approved, If these access paints are appro , ends that these accesses berestricted tonight-inlrig~it-out only as proposed. Department recomm 5. Parks Department De artment has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 5,1 The Parks p 6. Sanitary Service Company - b, l No comments were submitted by SSC for this prof ect. ;- Exhibit B -Page 19 ~r ~.~ C ~' AN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE GF AUGUST 2b, 2008 CITY OF MERIDI ~„ ;~; ~~ 7. Ada County ~ghway District ~.~ 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of ApprovaY ' ant is re aired to construct one of the following along Eagle Road abutting the site: 7.1.1 The applic q Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline a) of the roadway; Or b Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $9,60 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection project. The a licant is r aired to construct one of the following along Victory Road abutting the site: 7.1.2 pp e4 a Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Qr b Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $14,000 for construction of the sidewalk with the District s scheduled intersection prod ect Construct one of the following: • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located a minimum of 315~feet from the near edge from the new curb line tmeasured near edge to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located a minimum of 315-feet froth the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge). pR .._.. • tract one ri t-inlri tout access driveway 224-feet from the north property line on Cons gk~ gh x~r~ .. Eagle Road; AND ,;; . -.. • Construct one right-in/rxght-out access driveway 215-feet from the west property line on Victory Road; AND • Install a 6-inch raised nnedian from the intersection back 50-feet beyond the driveways to restrict the turn movements. Coordinate the design and ultimate location of the raised median with District Development Review and Traffic Services staff. • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located 427-feet from the northernmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND • Construct ane fill access driveway an Victory Road located 25.5-feet from the easternmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND Pave the driveways their full widths and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge, Commercial driveways are restricted to a width of 3b-feet. tither than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to Eagle Road and Victory Road. Comply with ail Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Co~aditlons of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be t.: ( borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 2O r ~> TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEpAR }.~~ 7,2,3 curb tier and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the Replace any exrst1ng damaged ~ ~ ~ '~ at 38?-6280 (with file uction Serve t C ~, ~ ~" ~ __ r ons nstruction of the roposed development. Contact co p number) for details. ?.2.4 t less than five ears ald are not allowed unless approved in writing Ut~hty street cuts in pavemen ~ , , Y with file numbers) for t the District s ut,l~ty Coordinator at 387-6258 { t C ac on District, by the 7.2.5 details. ' ' n shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy All design and construcho coon Services rocedures and all Constru p lements ved su d , , pp appro Manual, ISPWC Standards an ' Ordinances unless s ecifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the applicable ACHD p State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. b 2 7 ' hall submit revised laps for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit The applicants p . . desi char es. (or other required permits}, which incorporates any required gn g ? 2 7 traction use and ro rtY development shall be in conformance with all applicable Cons p ~ . . re uirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. q 7,2,8 t f a licable road ' act fees are required prior to building construction in accordance Paymen o pp ~ ~ 'strict Im act Pee Ordinance, hway Di p Hi Count Ad g y a with Ordinance #200, also known as 9 2 ? 's the re nsibilit of the a pliant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The It z spo Y p . . a licant at no cost to ACID shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The pp ~ all DIGLINE 1-800-342.15 $5} at least two full business days applicant shall be required to c riot to breakin ound within ~ACHD right-ofway. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic p g 8r ACRD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised. during the event an 6190 i 3 $? y n - erations 4P ~r any phase of construction. riti i 2.10 ~~ 7 ng n w No chan a in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are g . ,. and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authori ' e Ada Count Hi wa ~ District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to representative of th y gh Y obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. ?.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this a lication, shalt require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or pp other re story and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest ~ unless advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought, z Exhibit B - Page Z l .~ .:_ C1TY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE BEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 rv~~ ` ~~ C. Annexation Legal Description & Bxhibit Map ~3 J tMd ].AND ~x~ut. INC. Mere 14, 2UIl8 iarojcct No. A71 b7 Annexation and Rezuno DV1G Real ~stalc Partral; 4.79 Aces L~xhibit "A" A tract of land for annexation anti rczune pu,lwacs situated in a portipn of the Northwest the Quarter of the l~arthwcst (~nc Quarter of Section x8, ~'owmship 3 North, Rsunge 1 East, 8aisc Meridian, Acts ~uunty, Idaho, described as follows: i3~ti1NNING al a found hras~ crap manumenting the Northwest Cumer of said 5+xtion 28 an the intzrse.~ction of the centerline of East Victory Road and the centerline of Sout1~ Eagle itoad; '1'he~e fallowing the northerly line of the horthwcst Gne Quarter of said Sec:ticn~ :~: 28 and the cetttetline of said Fast Victory Read, South 89°35'51" Fast s diataru:c of 530.{34 fc4•t to a point, which burs North 89°3S'Sl" West a distat~ of 2,127.tK Peet &arn a fa~nd brass cap nxmumcs-ting the North Ono Quarter Garner afraid Scxti~n 28~ Thence l ~~ ving said n+orthtrly lino and said centerline, South (1U°31'42" West a distance of ~t1+D.UU feat to a found 1 ~2-inch steel pin; ' 'bra South 1 Kp 19'SZ" WN~st ,~ distance of t 38.?Z foot to a act Sl8-inch stoat rin; TltenceNvrth BO°35'SI" West a distance of ~45.~7 foot to a act Si8•inc~h spec) pin; 'l`henc~ S~auth 06°2G't~" Weal a d3star~cc of 1 t}3.8.3 fvct to a sit S18•inch stc~l pin; Thence Note 89°31' 13' Wit a dists~ca of 9f1.p 1 fcc;t rU x set 518~irK;b sl~l pie; Thence Sr-uth OQa3 l'42" West $ distance of 73,7S feat to a s+:t Sl8-inch steel lain; Tlycnca North 89°3l' 13" West u distance of 92,85 fact to a act S/8•inoh st~l pin on dtc easterly ri8ht-of-way ling of said 5ouih EaBlc RaBd; Thence fallowing said ca~terly right-ofwaiy, South A0~28' 11" West a distaucx~ of 34.8b fs~t to a aet Sl8-inch stet! piA; Thenoc followutg said easterly right-of-way, North :#O~o3'4b" West a distanc~c of ~i1,5.3 fed to a sd 5!8-inch steel pug; Thence leaving said castet~v right•of-way ling, North 89°31'48" Wit a d;~tance of 33.00 feet to a point on the westerly line of said Section 28 and the centerline of said South Eag3e Read; Thcnee following said westerly unc anti said centerline, Nurch ()0°2K' 11 ^ East a distance of 518. l2 feet to the PRINT OF AR(iiNNING. 1 aiat~e .•ta~irxn • Swr ~ • C.r~r! F',~~+.r~ • r:~C~r~~ i~~~a ~ r~ • G+qM~ C.orrnrr,~a~r. 4GZ F. Six~c Unti~r, Ste io0, F.~e, tcl~ba a3btd • I' «l~,939.#04! F Z08.939.~5 • ~~ ~:1~D0>it)'t e7~ Aduun tE~b~IL_071 dT_t1~IJ14_I'1t~1/4„Antttx~n~tipc I~ ~ = t \ R Exhibit C -Page 1 C[TY 4F MERIDIAN PLA1MvING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING QATE OF' AUGUST 2d, 2408 ~..~~ `.r 't HM I.ANO UfUlltp, IkC• Thy abaYG~cscribad trac# of land contains 4,~~1 arms, mare or las, subjoct to alb existing cas~maats and rights•af-way. This description is intended for annexation purpascs anl~~ ~ shall not be used ror tl~~ purpuse of convcya~~ce. ~{- _t' ~tY. >1~~ Pr~parcd B~: 'i'H~ LAWA GltUZ1P, tNC, 4~i2 L. S~~AE aR~VE, ~uITE !QQ El~~,~, Q)AHa 8:~6i6 ?DR•93~i~Oq 1 aU8.93~-~~aS tt:11X} ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ M ,_~p~~ W~P~~~cS L~ Anbr~,rer • Sea PIa'r~ • catrl~~ ~ Get wnN 1rr~ArR tti' ~,~re+nrrrw2 ~ t;,.~iw Ce~w-er~ia~ar 4G2 F. 51tr~te i:mn, Str 104. ~3~c, lds:~a 8616 ~ P 211a,9,19,4W 11' 1Q9~4~9 tNi ~ ~~ ~ ~+~t~er~~,~ G:12~.n ~U716~A~1ix~~ I ;,p7 i b7_4a031 ~ Y'~nt:llr _'1aurx~ct.cbc. I'._~ Exhibit C -Page 2 r C1TY {7F MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 2b, 2008 ~:, ;t. ,_}~ ~~ ~ w ~ M• ~ ~ • ~ ~, N V7 ~ ~~ ~ : N89~3~'~ ~"w ~ • 94.Ot' ~ ' ~~ n-3a~a3'4-~»~ 29.53' v: . ' 89'31' 13'. 91.85 ~~'28'11 "W 3.86' • ,~HB9'31'48"w ~ 2~ 33. D4' ~~uNa s/aM -- STECI PI~1 ~~ 1 /16 CQRNf R kNG~NE~Al3URVEYQR r~ /~-•r, ~/ ~ , L.,awrw ~InM~K~w. r, , nrtt ,~wN.ry . M4 ^1M :c.~ ~ wN,ar. Nt L err 1k~ r ~ i~fA ;- i Situated in a parr~on of thQ Northwest 1 ~4 of the hiorthwest 114 of Section 28, Township 3 Nor#h, Ranee ~ East, B.M., Ada County, Idaho FOUND BRASS CAP NW Ct~h~R SEC~I~i ~8 C, P, ~. N o, 9400293 t ~. VICTORY RaAD N89.35'~1 "w ~~o.(~' FOUND BRASS CaP N 1 /~ CORNER S~C~ION Z8 PER CR~CF N o. 97003901 2t ~ LV r ~, •z~ ~ . . K~v~E ~ ~ a~ ~ S89'35'S1 "E ' 41 ~ ~ 2127.x5' ~aY . ~~ptAN ~Up~, M ' M ~QR~s~ Sl 1~82~31~5 CUitR~1~T x~ ~~T~~; ~~~r ~' ~- ~ ~ PR~~S.~D "CAI DI~'1txCT; C~ ~' . ,.. c~ °~ 4.79~AC. ~ ~ ~o ©~ ~~ ~!~' NB9'35'S1 "W 2~~ d~~ J~~o ti.~, ~~~I.~UEN F,AG1.~ ES~'A TES 1~~59 a ~~ ~~ b~ z.13~~ ~~ ~~ L~~er~d ...... ~OU~ aR~ss c~ ~ Four 3/e~ sT~~l Pw a 5~ t 5 f ~' S1~tl i~N~ ~ ~ou~ ~ ~~ sty P~ ® eA~-t~a Pays eaN3a~r ua~ --~ -- ~-~-,- --- SEC'tl0rt UHE S~-'31'~2"W 73.75' PROJECT MIFORAiATION $CM,E: '" • 100' EXHIBIT "Bp Parcel S 11282230y5 ppp~~T gyp, 07187 Annexation and Rezone ~ ~ F ~ Exhibit C -Page 3 (r l \~ \ OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE aF AUGUST 2b, 2008 CITY ,~> . D, R uired Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: U n recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigatioA im and shall, at the public hearing, review tLe application. ~Yn order #o grant an annexation andlor rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A, The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehessive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone ali the subject property C-C; the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The City Council finds that the ro sed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable p ~ provisions of the comprehensive. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the StaffReport for more information. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for tl~e proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the purpose statement of the commercial districts and the established regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for a reduction in buffer width adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. The applicant is requesting a reduced buffer width in certain areas through Alternative Compliance with this application. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision provfding public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site, E, The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11~5B-3.E}. The City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not requixe unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in general compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This is a logical expansion of the City limits. In accordance witb the findings listed above, the City Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to C-C would be in the best interest of the City if a Development Agreemep~t as required with the provisions noted in the star report Exhibit D -Page 1 ~. . ~~±:..: CITY OF MERIbYAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FQR. THE HEA1tING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2408 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: rip, ~~ In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-malting body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The Cit Council finds that the proposed application is insubstantial compliance with the Y ado ted Co rehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, p ~ Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Ci Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed tY develo went. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service p providers.} ~. The plat is in confortnanee with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 1~. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon cozn~ments from the public ,. service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACS, etc.) to determine this finding. (See fin uig Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings, and the Conditions of Approval in ~'k~=. Exhibit B for more detail.} E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The City Council finds that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the ubie health, safety or general welfare. ACED considers road safety issues in their P analysis. F, The development preserves significant natural, scenic ar historic features. The Ci Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, ~' loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of mayor importance. ,~. / ":r ~~. ~.~~ ~~ D AN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE 4F AUGUST 26, 2008 CITY OF MERI I ~~ ~ 3. Conditional Use Permit Findings: akin bod shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit The decision m g Y request upon the fallowing: That the site is la a enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the A. r$ d' ensional aid develo meat regulations in the district in which the use is located. im p The Ci Council finds that the existing site is large enough to accommodate the tY ro osed use and co ly with the dimensional and development regulations of the C-C p p ~ to residential uses. The a licant is zoning district, except for the requured buffer width Pp r uestin a royal of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas eq g PP alon the south property boundary. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies g with the conditions of approval in Exhibit ~ and the DA provisions listed in Section 10, development of this site should meet the intent of the UDC. ~. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and iu accord witlx the requirements of tbas Title. The City Council finds that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The property is proposed to be zoned C'C, which complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the tJDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use}. C. That the design, construction, operation a~ad maintenance will be compatible with ~._r~j; ~ other uses iu the general neighborhood and witL the existing or intended character ~= -~: of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essentia ~~,:.~ character of the same area. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed drive-through use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area, Further, the City Council believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. D. That the propased use, if it comp>ies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilifies and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council finds that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned public facilities and services. F. T4at the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and win not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. I#' approved, the Applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council 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, ,~ ~: Exhibit D -Page 3 7 ! ~ 1 ~" CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE NEARING DATE 4F AUGUST 26, 2008 ~~ G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or rocesses ' ~~ ~ ~ p , materaaly, equipment `" _ and conditions of operation that wiU be detrimental to any persons ro or the ~ P pe~Y general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, saaoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is , a concern; however, the Ci Counctl does not believe that th ~ e amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the ublic as there are no nearby residents. The Ci Council d p ty oes not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. H. That the proposed use will not result in the destrur~ton, loss or dame a of a nature scent ar historic feature g 1' ~ considered to be of major importance. The City Council finds that there should not be any health, safet or environments Y 1 problems associated with the proposed use. The City Council finds that the ro osed use will not result in the destruction loss or d p p image of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. 4. Alternative Compliance Findings (UDC 11-SB-SE); A. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible Gft Staff finds that the subject property has space linutations due to its size and irre 1 shape, which makes strict adherence to the buffer re air ~ ~ q e~aents not feasible. Staff finds that the proposed alternative means of request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimnm 6-moot tall ve ' ~~ ~~; rh-crete wail is constructed ~f~~ adjacent to aU areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum b-f • vinyl fencin is constricted i oat tall solid g n all other areas along with added landscaping along the entire boundary adjaceat to residential uses, This does, in fact reclude fu compliance with the Ci 's landsca ' ~ p 11 ty ptng standards. B. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for m etin requirements; and e g the Staff finds the alternative compliance proposal to construct a verb-crete wall ' where the buffer is below the re aired 25•feet and b- ~n ~ q foot tall vinyl fencing in all other areas, and added landscaping along the entire perimeter adjacent to residential uses dies provide an alternative means for meeting the City's Iandsc a buffer r uireme Therefore, Staffs its the ro s ~ e9 nts. p po ed concept landscape plan, as depicted in Exhibit A. C. The alternative means will not be materially detrimmeotal to the ubli impair the intended uses a p c welfare ar nd character of the surrounding properties. Staff finds that the proposed alternative will not be detrimental to the ublic w impair the use/character of the surr p elfare or aunding properties. ~. ; Exhibit D -Page 4 1 9 4 1 1 1 1 t 1 ~t ~~~ • •i ~t i n ~: Ej .g X H _~ a ~, f~ ~ °~ ~ } °=~~ ~ ~~ ~~ 5 `~ ~~ ~~ ~+ r 7 t r ~- iti2~ r ~. - ~~~~e . ~~~ i ~~~~~ "~~ .~ ~a~j~~ aa~~B~ ~ag~g~ ~e~~~~ ~`~~ae ~~p~l~ Y C ~~~5~'~T~V'TS, ~N~. ~$~i N ~~ ~~ M ~~ ~~ ..__ .. m '~~~~~~~~~a~ ''to~~~~~~~~~~ ,~~Q@~R ~ ~~~~ ;@ x "r ~iC N _` a, r~ i'~~ ~~, ~ ~~ j ~I~I,Npp111QNfA~Af ~~ t~~~i ~ ~t •~~,~srr~~*'4~ /~~ M ~ it r r~Mr•. ~fR' ~ •.~Ms.. ~•w.~l 6 --»-+•--'~ ~ ~~ ~! t ~ ; ~ i Pi ~i i •~- r ~ ! ~ ~ t . ~ t ~ ~ M r » • n ~ I ~. ~ ~ ~ f M O ~ ~ .M, ~.,+N.~~.. ~ r ..:... d ~ ~ ~, a ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ , A .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ' ._ A ~ ~ ,... ....p..,... .4. s ,. .w ., .~ ~ ~ , ~. .. M w ~~ ~~ ~. i~ ~~ ~ 7 r Y~Y`r/YY`w~'M~ ~ It { ! ~ f1 ~ g# 1 1 Q + ~ P V~ ~ V i f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~~ ~~ ~ • ~~ ~~ ~ ^ ^^ ~ ^ ~ f ., v ~' ~ ~~ ~>~ dr d R r ~~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~p~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ I~t~ MM~IIN ~ ~ IM~kIDiA~i CIVIL StJRV~Y CONSULTANTS, INC. ~ ~.. ~~ . ~! ~ `~ ~ ~-' ~" !1~ ~ ~Q~ ~tiTION t~ AxD WNO 6s1R1-sYi~3 ~~ ~~ ancc+ 1164 ~ a ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ 1, ~ ~~ ~R~ ~~ ~~~ p Y mp F ~K~ ~~~~~~a ~ ~°~~~ ~ ~. t~~a~' ,~ g~~~ '. ~ ~ a ~: ~~ .~a.~ aoo, ro ,ro~~ r ~~ry~'~ ~ ~ 11624 ~ ~ 0,~ ~ ~p4 ~' ~, tE~ OD ~• F' EXHIBIT G No, Item Item. Description Estimated Quantity Unit Unit Bid Price Bid Item Total 3d?.4.1.H.1. FULL WIDTH PAVEMENT SURFACE RESTaRATIC~N ?7~ SY $5.30 $1 ~,~31.8~ 1,4.1.A.1 C 40 12" PVC, AAA COO, DR18, 1NATE R MAI N ?~3 LF 3~.~0 ~ $27,13.80 1 501.4.1.B. 8" PVC, AST~I D3034, SANITAR'~ SEWER PIPE 2~5 LF ~4,g0 ~ ~' 345.50 $ 502.4.1.A.~ 48" STANDARD SE~'E R MANHt~LE, T~'PE A 1 EA $1500,x0 ~ 1, 500.00 SP•5A 24"1~ 318" THICK STEEL CASINO PER DETAILS SHEET 8 3o LF x.00 ~~5 ? ??0.00 ~ SP•5B ~ 8"~ 318" TI-IICK STEEL CASING PER C~ETAILS SHEET 8 3o LF 123,00 ~ $3~OO.0 Total Amount ?o $~?,1 ~0. ~~ :~ -~ N MN ---------r W /-- EOP EOP ~ % ~~~ CN0~0 N 0o I N J a N i m W 0 y u po ~ m yn ~ u p O ~ ~ A ~ ~ A D ~ _ ~' o a o ~ > ~ m ~ fq ~ ffRR ~ m x nm ~ yO O O O v my 2 l~1 ~1 ; f O A ~ ~ y~~ ~ ~ gm ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ s > A m 0 f~ !I ?_ ~ 5 N O ~ F ~ ~ g o o n m > $ g A~~ g ~ ~ o p O T V V 2 m _ ? .ro A N In > "~ ' ^^' W ' p o pNp N O N Oo T W n n > y N N Q O S . 0 ,'~i ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ > ~ O F ~ ~ r^• W ~, ~ u N ~ Q D ~ ~ . ~• ^ ' W ~ ~ ~~>~ Q ~ ~ ~m f~ \1" a ==g~~ ~ m $ y( ~ QSp4 ~ ~m e m ~ m ~F 70 m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~f w n ~ ~Q ~ ~ o $ gg ~ ~ ~ r0 ~ o O o rn ~ " 7 . _ $ mg Q„~ pp~ ~ . ~i c i < f!~ jmf~l~p ~~m~~n C1 v ZZ n f)= ~ NO < ~ N O E1 m ~ m ~ ~ y I _ v ~\~ ~i~ n O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m p ~ O. O O p m 0 ~ ~ ~ 7 rt 0 ~ / $ ~~ ~ ~ ~ -~i y Q ~ M a IV o ~ l /~^~ (~ u ~ ~ ~ N u o m ~ O p -i 7 E E N Nn C ~ ~ ~ A Y ~ y ~ ~, 0 ^^ ,, W K y N 7 a~ D \ ? ~ u n~ ~ u o 7 W {a O 7~ ^3 W ~ D m Z O IC 2 m ~ O _ foQ ~ ~ r z ? fD i~ ~ N f~ ~ N ~' u N . ~~ ~+~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ yc>iirti~~~ ~F u N .y ! m~ m ~p ~ ~QyN ~1~1~1 4~~Z~{~ Oz W ` RI o N y~ ~ L N 11 f!yJ p yy o$N A > N> .I ~ ~ C~In v~~ 'T~N>~ ~ I + ~ 77CC ~1 N m ~' z tiz o m m ~~ $ > g mZ ~ Sl2~ F ~~ ya =~"~~~~R ~i b 4~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~m ~'aj~~~ ~ Z I I ~ r N~ z mz a' ~7 m~ ~ ~ 40 ~g~ n ~ ~ (~ W~ a ~ ~ j~ ~~ a~p~~~ m N L J ~ ~ ~ ~~ ®000 ~ ((~~ ~~// ~ Q > l.1A~~Af= N N Vl mC ,pyy ~i ~ E w C a rel. ~~ >1~1 1/~~20~~ m ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ A A $ ~ _ ~ ~~j~~~~m ~ a ~~ m ~ ' ~ ~g ~~ ~~~~`~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ in ~~ A~~ 1~r5' ~ ~ O rti o2 ~ K Ski ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A 9~M Titls p~ ~ y ~;~ ~ ~,~ Conditional Use S.E.C. ~~ ~ ~s~~ ~~~~~~~ p ;~ Victory/Eagle W ,o I ~ ~ e~ ~ - Site Plan ~ $ ~ ~ ~ g ~ Meridian, Idaho ~~ i 4~ N ~ ~_~ ~I ~!g ~` ~I~ ~~ rte 9 '~J Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4B PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of New Beer License for Meridian BBQ LLC, dba Dickey's BBQ Pit; located at 2845 E. v 0 erland Rd. Beer License Expiration Date,: 4/30/ 11 MEETING NOTES ~~~~ ~ CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4C PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of 2012 Beer, Wine, Liquor License R~ Firehouse Pub & Grill 17b7 W. Franklin Rd. B/W/L 127 Club 127 E. Idaho B/W/L The New Frontier 116 E Broadway B/W/L Famous Daves 3510 Eagle Rd. B/W/L Schooners 499 S. Main B/W/L Epi's A Basque Restaurant 1115 N. Main St. B/W Pinnacle Sports Grill 2902 Eagle Rd. B/W/L Corona Village 21 E. Fairview Ave. B/W/L St. Lukes Regional Med. Ctr. 520 S. Eagle Rd. B/W Piehole 726 Main St. B The Griddle 2310 E. Overland Rd. # 132 B/W Harry's Meridian Grill 2032 E. Overland Rd. #125 B/W/L Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill 980 E. Fairview Ave. B/W MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FI NAL A C TIN DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Beer, Wine & Liquor License Renewals for 2011-2012 Approval by City Council on April 12th, 2011 DBA LOCATION BIW/L Firehouse Pub & Grill 127 Club The New Frontier Famous Daves Schooners Epi's A Basque Restaurant Pinnacle Sports Grill Corona Village St. Lukes Regional Med. Ctr. Piehole The Griddle Harry's Meridian Grill Smoky Mountain Pizzeria Grill 1767 W. Franklin Rd. Rest B/W/L 127 E. Idaho B/W/L 1.16 E Broadway B/W/L 3 510 Eagle Rd. Rest B/W/L 499 S. Main Rest B/W/L 1115 N. Main St. Rest B/W 2902 Eagle Rd. Rest B/W/L 21 E. Fairview Ave. Rest B/W/L 520 S. Eagle Rd. Rest B/W 726 Main St. Rest B 2310 E. Overland Rd. # 132 Rest B/W 2032 E. Overland Rd. #125 Rest B/W/L 980 E. Fairview Ave. Rest B/W Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4D PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Approval of Award for Bid for Grit Classifier Equipment to WesTech En ineerin and Authorizin P ' g g g urchasing Manager to Issue and Sign a Purchase Order/Contract in the Amount Not-to- Exceed $48,008.00 MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT N OTES INITIALS Memo To: Jaycee L. Holman, City Clerk, From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Agent CC: Clint Dolsby Date: 4/8111 Re: April 12 City Council Meeting Agenda Item The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the August 7 City Council Consent Agenda for Council's consideration. Approval of Award of Bid for "Grit Classifier Equipment" to WesTech Engineering and authorize the Purchasing Manager to issue and sign a Purchase OrderlContractinthe amount of $48,008.00. This award is the result of Formal I FB #PW-11-100468 issued March 14~" and opened March 29~'. Three bids were received. Recommended Council Action: Approval of Award of Bid and Authorize the Purchasing Manager to issue and sign a Purchase OrderlContract for the Not- To-Exceed amount of the Low Bid Award of $48,008.00. Thank you for your consideration • Page 1 .J W ~~ 11 ~c z4 ~~ ~a Q- w 0 M .. N r O N 01 'N 2 U Q .. W W a 0 W D Z W a ~~ 'cis W W N N Q •.J• LV W Q Z m m t0 O O T T 1 a W m Z 0 m 0 Q cM0 Q Z ~ Z r ° ° o o O Q N O z (0 ~ ~ ~ 6~} x x x x x x N C ~L U _ ~ c W U ~ .~ ~ J t N L ~ ~ N (/~ N Q T~ Li r W d C Q. 0 .. y Q Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4E PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Task Order No. 10232 ent Dated A ril 13, 2010) with Murray, Smith and Associates, Inc. 10232 (Master Agreem p W ter Su I Plannin for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $128,340.00 for a pp y g MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFI CE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ~~i~E IDIAN~- Public ~ ~ A H O Works Department T0: Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the City Council FROM: Kyle Radek, PE DATE: March 11, 2011 Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Cowntii Me~nber~~ Keith Bird Brad Hoaglun Charles Rountree Dauid Zaremba • TASK ORDER 10232 ACCORDING TO THE MASTER AGREEMENT SUBJECT. FOR WITH MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES DATED JUNE 30, 2010, ATER MASTER PLAN FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $128,340. W I. RECOMMENDED ACTION A. Move to: 1. A rove Task Order 10232 with Murray, Smith and Associates (MSA) for pp Water Su 1 Planning for an amount not to exceed $128,340; and pp y 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement. II. DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSONS K le Radek, Asst. City Engineer 489-0343 y Warren Stewart, PW Engineering Manager 489-0350 Tom Barr , Director of Public Works 489-0372 y III. DESCRIPTION A. B ack~round Cit staff and their consultant, MSA, conducted a water supply workshop as part Y of the 2010 water master plan update. The workshop examined Meridian's long term water su 1 needs, supply characteristics and discussed what future pP y challenges the City might face in meeting its needs. Page 1 of 2 B. Proposed Proiect ' ect icks u where the water supply workshop left off. The The proposed prof p p if the short and ion term .threats to the City's water supply, prof ect will ident y g . . ' ' ion actions to counter the threats, and research the viability of the identify mitigat ' activities to allow the Cit to take proactive steps now to ensure future mitigation Y water supply. C. Consultant Selection sultant Murra Smith, and Associates, was selected based on their The con y, ' s work on this sub'ect including the 2010 Water Master Plan and their previou J qualification for the City's on-call roster. IV. IMPACT A. Strategic Impact: mission of Public Works is to anticipate, plan and provide exemplary The ublic services and facilities that support the needs of our growing community in p ficient customer-focused and financially responsible manner. This task an of . order hel sus to anticipate and plan in order to achieve that mission. p B. Service/Delivery Impact: This ro'ect will ensure that the Engineering and Water Divisions are being PJ roactive and strate is in their efforts to deliver outstanding service to our p g customers now and into the future. C. Fiscal Impact: Proiect Costs Consultant A Bement $128,340 ~' VI. TIME CONSTRAINTS his ro'ect will take 10-12 months to complete. Council's approval of this Task T p J Order will allow the consultant and staff to get the proj ect underway. Page 2 of 2 ~~E IDR IAN-- \_~ TASK ORDER NO. 10232 Under the MASTER AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC This Task Order is issued by City and accepted by the Engineer pursuant to the mutual promises, covenant and conditions .contained in the Master Agreement between the above mentioned parties dated April 13, 2010. WATER SUPPLY PLANNING CITY OF MERIDIAN PURPOSE This Scope of Services is for Professional Services between Murray, Smith & Associates Inc. (MSA) and the City of Meridian, Idaho (City). Services authorized by this Task Order No. 10232 shall be for professional engineering services in support of the City's Water System. SCOPE OF SERVICES The project will be based on a phased workshop approach with City and consultant staff. Once the threats to existing sources have been evaluated, an associated "percentage" of source water at risk will be estimated. At that point, potential mitigation strategies will be identified. These alternatives will be reviewed with City staff to determine which ones should be studied further. Based on a subset of the potential supply alternatives, a feasibility .analysis will be conducted . to determine the regulatory, legal, economic, sociallpolitical and "other" .parameters that could impact each alternative. Once that information is compiled, a workshop will be held with the City to determine when and if any of the water supply options will be pursued. A contingency task has been included in the project to help cover unforeseen evaluations or related requests by City staff. A technical memorandum will be developed as part of the project and additional information and levels of detail added as part of each subsequent threat. The following tasks are included in this scope of work: 1. Perform. Existing Supply Threat Evaluation 2. Identify Potential Strategies to Address Threats 3. Feasibility Analysis of Potential Strategies 4. Contingency Task Order No.10232 Water Supple Planning 1 Task 1-Perform Existing Supply Risk Evaluation There are a number of potential threats that could impact the City's ability to use and/or acquire adequate groundwater supply to serve long term water needs. These include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Conjunctive Management of Water Supply in the Treasure Valley 2. Groundwater Quality 3. Groundwater Quantity 4. Water Rights Availability 5. Growth of City Water Requirements 6. Climate Change 7. Regulatory Changes Conjunctive management of the Treasure Valley surface and groundwater supplies has been discussed as a potential threat to the City's use of a groundwater under a senior water rights "call" situation. The majority of the City's water rights are no more than 20 years old, and could. be subject to regulated use if more senior water rights holders were being impacted. Such a situation has occurred in the East Snake Plain Aquifer over the past few years. Presently in the Treasure Valley it is .only likely under a prolonged drought condition, that impacts surface water users. It is reasonable to expect that over the next 50-100 years such a situation could. occur in the Treasure Valley and a determination of what types of mitigation strategies are viable, is proposed. The City has dealt with water quality due to uranium over the MCL in several wells recently. This is an extremely expensive constituent to remove through treatment. If the number of wells with uranium .contamination increases over time, it could also pose a threat to the City's ability to meet municipal water demands. Groundwater quantity concerns currently appear to be relatively small. Wells with over 2,000 gpm are common in the City and .the drawdown from pumping appears to be relatively localized, suggesting that the overall groundwater levels are not declining. However as growth continues in the valley and if prolonged droughts occurred groundwater availability could bean issue. The process by which the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) issues water rights could change in the future making new water rights more difficult to get, particularly as more and more groundwater is removed from the Treasure Valley Aquifer. Another important variable is demand. How much water will the City of Meridian's customers require in the future? While current projections are available, these numbers could change significantly due to the changing of land use types to encourage higher density development or if more water intensive industries locate within the City. A decision will need to be made to determine the "factor of safety" that the City wants to place on future demand growth and the water required to meet those demands. Task Order No.10232 Water Supple Planning 2 One of the biggest. variables that particularly the Inland West faces over the next 100 years is the impact of climate change. A reduction in precipitation andlor the amount of that precipitation that falls in the form of snow will have a significant impact on the surface water supplies in the Treasure Valley. Other factors may also be included by the City. Information regarding each of the items listed above will be collected and discussed with City staff. The challenge will be to provide reasonable assumptions without being overly conservative. An attempt to quantify the portion of the City's existing water supply that each of these factors might put at risk, will be completed. It is understood that some of the decisions will be "policy" based due to the inability to put precise numbers on some variables. Assumptions: The budget is based on an evaluation of the six (6) items listed above. If additional factors are identified for evaluation, budget from the contingency task will be required. Up to two (2) workshops are included in this task. Team subconsultant involvement will be limited to the workshops. in this task. Deliverables: A draft version of the technical memorandum summarizing this task's work will be provided to the City at the conclusion of the task. Task 2 -Identify Potential Mitigation Strategies A number of potential mitigation strategies exist. The goal of this task will be to create a list of options to mitigate the threats identified in Task 1. This evaluation could include but will not be limited to options such as; the acquisition of surface water rights, expanded use of wastewater reuse, interbasin transfers (Snake or Payette), trading of WW effluent to canal companies for upstream canal water, the investment in new surface water storage and leasing of agricultural water rights. The MSA team will work with the City to develop the list of alternative strategies along with the easily identifiable challenges associated with each. The MSA team will then meet with City staff to review the strategies anal conduct a "reality check" on each to decide which ones merit continued analysis (Task 3}. Assumptions: MSA, SPF, Westwater, and Idaho Water Engineering will be involved in this task. Two onsite meetingslworkshopstyill be conducted as part of this task. Deliverables: A draft technical memorandum that summarizes this task's work will be provided to the City at the conclusion of the task. Task 3 -Feasibility Analysis of Mitigation Strategies It is envisioned that three (3) potential mitigation strategies will be identified for more detailed evaluation as part of this task. A preliminary diligence evaluation will be developed for each of the three potential mitigation strategies. The diligence review will provide a description of the strategy. The diligence analysis will also include specific review of regulatory, legal, economic benefit, cost, social/political, physical and technical reliability, and "other" parameters that could impact feasibility of each strategy. The MSA team will Task Order No.10232 Water Supple Planning 3 collaborate in developing the diligence reviews, with each consultant taking on specific areas of research. The objective of the diligence reviews. will be to provide a comparison analysis for each strategy allowing the City to evaluate the best strategies to pursue further. A workshop will be conducted with the City to discuss the assumptions and add, delete or modify as appropriate. At that point, an additional round of evaluation will be conducted by the MSA team prior to providing the summary to the City, in the form of the draft summary report of all work. A final meeting will be conducted with the City to determine which of the future water supply strategies will be pursued. Assumptions: MSA, SPF, Westwater, and Idaho Water Engineering will be involved in this task.. Two (2) meetings/workshops will. be conducted with the City as part of this task. It is assumed that the City's water rights attorney will provide a legal perspective on the strategies studied in this task and will be contracted directly by the City. Deliverables: A draft and final summary report will be generated as part of this task and delivered to the City. Task 4 -Contingency It has been acknowledged that this project could include additional areas of investigation that were not originally anticipated when the scope was written. The contingency could also be used to develop a specific game plan and scope for the actual implementation of a selected water supply strategy or strategies. Assumptions: Provides a nominal budget for use by the team for out of scope or follow on work to be completed. Deliverables: No deliverables have been identified at this time. TIME OF PERFORMANCE The completion date from .Authorization to Proceed for this Task Order is through December 2011. The. MSA team will make every effort to complete the work in a timely manner; however, it is agreed that MSA cannot be responsible for delays occasioned by factors beyond its control, nor by factors that could not reasonably have been foreseen at the time this Task Order was executed. COMPENSATION The .Not-To-Exceed amount for all services listed in this Task Order No. 10232 is one hundred twenty-eight thousand three hundred forty dollars ($128,340.00). The hourly rates for services and direct expenses is attached (Exhibit A) and by this reference made a part hereof. Fees will be billed for actual time services are rendered up to the Not-to-Exceed amount per the hourly rates for services and direct expenses, attached as (Exhibit A) and by this reference made a part hereof. No compensation will be paid over the Not-to-Exceed amount without prior written approval by the City in the form of a Change Order. Task Order No.10232 Water Supple Planning 4 ,~ MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC ~;,. BY: Dated.. k Approved by Council: l d Attest. ,~ i~,^ r .,a ~ «.' ~r wM ,w«' d ~ f aaa *w ~JAYCE H~JLMAN t C I~Y ~ RK .~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~F ~~~~ °~, ~.~. ~p ~ ~~ ~~ Approved as to Content Talc nr~lor ~In 'IA9~9 tNs~for Ci~nhl~ Dl~nninr+ Table 1 Labor Hours, Subconsultant Fees and Total Projec# Costs Approved as to Form CITY ATTORNEY N TITLE: Dated: ~ ~~1 ~'~ .: Task Order No.10232 Water Supple Planning Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 5A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Ada County Highway District (ACHD) Project Priority Process Presentation MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ~ + ~ -~~ "~ ~R -~-~~ ~ 4/12/2011 ~~. APR 1 Z 2011 CITY of C%!~~ ~~. ~e-Ma CITY c~~~KS of=i=lc~ Capital Programming & Prioritization Sabrina Anderson Manager, Planning and Programming April 12, 2011 ., ~ ~~~~ ~~ -- ~~q Sy .~ . '+s.x~''-^~ r"fir ~`' Our Msscan~ OMe Drive Quality Transportation l:or all ~fiAda ~c~unty.~ ~~ Anytime, Anywhere! ~~ ~~ IB 1 4/12/2011 ~~ ""`" "°°Where do Projects Come Fro - Projects enter Five Year Work Plan (FYWP) from the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), City requests, Interaction with ITD, etc - Diagram 2 4/12/2011 '.'""'~'°" Guiding Principles - Projects historically based on Commissioner advocacy and awareness - Prioritization intended to depoliticize - Methods developed with partner jurisdictions through CICAC - New prioritization has technical and community factors ~'~ '~'! / ~ r~ ~`~;.~f~~:"~E` Ca ital I~ r~ve~ent Plan ~CIP~ ~ ~ - CIP is for 20 years- sets impact fees - Not a complete "CIP" only capital increase to serve new development - Variety of issues with new CIP being discussed with the CICAC - New CIP is currently being revised, new CIP must be adopted by October 2012 3 4/12/2011 ~,.~ ~~, }~, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~{~ Five Year Work Plan FYUUP C ~ - FYWP =seven year plan. Five years plus "PD" (preliminary development) - Includes roads, intersections, bridges, traffic congestion (signals, ITS) community projects (curb, gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian facilities), and capital maintenance projects such as overlays - CICAC reviews and recommends ~rs sc,~t~~ ~ , ~ 1 ~~ .'. 6F ~x ~ ,Y r ~ ~~' ~ 4 ~`9Tf 04;:, U ~t - Two year budget cycle - Fi rst year FYWP =starting point of budget - Revise with revenue and cost updates - CICAC reviews and comments - Public Hearings/ Input from partner agencies in August ~t ~ ~,"_ ~. s~ 1sx 4 4/12/2011 fLflATING FEATHER RD T8 '~ ADA COUNTY MIWIWAY DISTRICT ao ~ so FwE TEAR wows ruN ,.:.. coMNUNtTr rROat<r-Na ~ t a r ~ ~'~"` ~ . ~ zoos • so~~ ~~A Eagle ,~* ~~4a alYO G a r d~ n f:Er- - _ a ~ _. ~ Meridian e ~, x,~ t ~ YGYt1AN RD ~ G ~' !1 '~j _. ~ ~ a:. ~~T k. '•.. ~Yµ . - . , Adoption ~_ s ~~~ ~ - Draft usTK~ Rn ~ ~~ . _._. B o _~.5 e +r i .__~..., 93 ,~ r d2 FA~tYEW AYE 1a ' R ~ } CHERRY i!f E _ . ~ ~ Er _~,_- ~,°-.^,:', ~ .. _. ` 15 95 T4~IFtPE ~,Y r ~~ __... ,. 1<d 96 93 73 ; FRA~(LiM RD :... m. ~ I - . ~ ., .: ~ w _ ~, .W._~ ._ ~ .. _ __ -___r - ~ n: g ~ .,~ .,~~~. $} a~1#uwoRQ ~ a9 ~ ~ a6 w ~_, ~ t- 4 p9 ~ ~ ~ VUCtURY RD ~ ~ i '...e ~ ,; ¢ AIM'fY Ro - ~ ~ o ~ u ~ ___..,. ., LAKE HAZEL RD ~ Rp CONSTRUCTIC+N ___ YEAR ~! ' ~ 2G1 $ COIiR/81A RD 2G13 c`e ~ X41 ~ HIi~9ffi,ffi! ~ ~ s ® ~6i~, .~ KU~na ~ ~ ~ ~}i6 _. ----%~- I DEAR FIAT RQ Q ~, m FIQATING F atHER RD ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 22 62 flYE YEAR IIYORK ALAN 34 ~. ; 87,~;~.„~ 2011. 2016 a~ta~" ~ ~~ ~- Eagle '' L ~,w, y , ~ ~ 45 ~FNIiDEH BLVD CJ a C cl~~ n ,,:s . ~ Meridian ~ - ~ Cr"tY~~`'~. ~ ~'~ Adoptio ~MILLAM Rf1 ( .~....a.__----~ ,.~32 ~eC40 ~ 3U ~ Q~c?f t •_~ ~« ~_._, ~' ~ , _~.. ~ T8 6T [}StYCKRQ r w 38 35 ~ ~ 31 13 ~~~ `~ ``' 47 PO i ~~ i6 ~ 15 14 ..._ ~MO..I,.~ n~ 1f "~',~ f 3 ?t1~1 G T LM '~ FAI~tYRrW AYE ~ ~ ., v 4 f ~ .. ~44 4 e°~ `~" PR1E ,~Y ~ T 4~ 9 11 § FRS{ RD _ ~~ ! ~ 64 <.-~.~~. ..~_w.:~. ~. 5 ~~__ ,~ Q ~ ~ ~ ao ' W I` f, '~`_' '~ 48 ~ ~ 43 YI ORY RD ~ ~ "~ ~ o 'k' ~ w ""~ ~ 0 .. _.,.. ~.., ~ { _._. _. __.__ IJifTY 4a ~ ~ s ~,~ d Gall~lA 1<Q CONSTRl1CT10N NA,IOR . ~ .. _. ,_ _. YEAR PRUJECT~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2Dt2 Bnd 2Dt3 , ~ J ~ ir~oersect~s ~~ K u~ n ~ ~ sa ~ ~ 2D1a ~ ~ D FLAT fib z ~ ZLt15 ~~ __..~. ~ _ ~ 4Dib ..^ ant 40 " ~ ,~- PRlkrir.~y a ' .__..1 ,~,Naomert ~.. __ K~lIAR© 2 5 4/12/2011 ,< ~~~~~~ ~,+~'s~1 ~~ x:,~~s Stakeholder Involvement Annual calendar - Significantly reconfigured CICAC in 2010 to increase city involvement - "More technical information earlier" to allow more informed requests- HANDOUTS - Technical info to cities/task forces- Existing LOS maps (HANDOUT, accident information. - City task forces meet- with our support - Cities/County review and recommend - City Council or County Commissioners change or endorse List, submit to ACHD ~ACHD Prioritizes ~ %~ -~ • ~x,..« Purpose o Prioritization ~ PRIORITIZATION IS NOT ABOUT WHICH PROJECTS WE DO, ITS ABOUT THE ORDER IN WHICH WE DO THEM 6 4/12/2011 ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~. T ~ n ~~~ rite ria Benefit Cost Ratio (70%) $ Safety Benefit+ $ Congestion Benefit/ $ Project Cost - Safety Benefit- annual cost of accidents (by type) X reduction in accidents expected from improvement - Congestion Benefit- daily travel time reduction system wide from project, X 250 (workdays) X $24 per hour - Project Cost -cost of the project in current dollars ,~ ~~~~ ... ~~`~` ~~`~`~~~C~n~r~unit F~ctor~ (CICAC~- ~~ - Percentage of project inside city limits- serves existing population - Bike network- priority in Bike Master Plan - Agency Support- citycounty request list - Importance to the System- Communities in Motion (CIM) corridor ACRD priority corridor Mobility corridor Freeway Diversion Route 4/12/2011 Community Factors Cont. - Previous Investment Previous Pro rammin -work or unds programmed to ate - S ecific Area Plans or Access Mana ement Pan- project included in approved plan - CICAC narratives- factors difficult to quantify such as economic development, land use, future growth areas, comprehensive plans. Written and scored _by CICAC (about 10% of overall score) ,:~ ,~~ ~~,, Programming Considerations . Other PROGRAMMING CONSIDERATIONS are used to schedule projects Utility conflicts Detour routes for other projects Irrigation issues for construction phasing Logical sequencing Potential cost share Coordination with overlays or chip seal schedules s 4/12/2011 ,~~ ~~t~ti ~~ ~4n'xd`~r+ ~ ~-~~s. Project Develapment (Design, Right of Way Acquisition, Construction) - Partners in project teams or closely coordinated - City Councils/County Commissioners review proposed concepts on large projects Public involvement scaled to project 9 ~~~~~ Where Roadwa Widenin Pro'ects Come From.... .~ ~ v g ~ D Land Use Cities' Comprehensive Plans ,,, ~~. Decisions ..~ ~,,~- ~~~'~ ~ COMPASS Regional COMPASS Demographic ~'~ ~ ~-•~ ~ Advisor Committee ~~ ~:~ Travel Demand Model y ~~ ~J ~ G~~ `~~` ~`, °' ~ Adopted by COMPASS Board H ~ Regionally Important Projects ~ ~ i in Long-Range Plan ^ ~ N ~ ^ Establishes Deficiencies List ; >+ _ ^ ^ O 0 ^ N V ^ ^ O ^ ^ r ^ ^ i 0 C ~ ,0 ~~ N ~ L L N >+ ~ o~ r V Projects identified for ACRD ^ Capital Improvements Plan (CIP ~' City ^ Involvement ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Establishes CIP for the Impact Fee Program (Adopted by Commission; ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^'^^'' ' updated every 3 years) Projects Prioritized for Five-Year ~,^^^^ ^ Work Program ^ ^ Projects identified for ACHD ^ ' Five-Year Work Program ^ ^ ^ Annual City Requests / City Participation L ~- 0 ~ -- ~~ N i L ,~ d y ~' 0 ~V r ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ACHD Commission Adopts FYWP Le ec~nd ACHD Action or Plan ~ Adopted Plan °~' Input COMPASS Action or Plan ~ Agency Action Output City Action or Plan Process September 6, 2005 2005042011 x17 Where. Projects Come From.ppt ~^ ^ ^ ^ FYWP Updated Annually Projects identified for ACHD Annual Budget ^ ^ Design (min. l year) ~' ^ ^ ^ ^ Right-of-way (min. l year) ^ ^ ~~ ^ Construction (min. l year) ^ ~; ^ ^ ^ Deficiencies Continually Evaluated ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ through COMPASS; Long-Range Plan update every 3 to 5 years Federally Funded & Regionally Significant Projects in TIP ~tion icinnc » � » ■ ■ r- 0 � w m a % » - � \ :CD CD , . <. CD 0. CD 0 � » � » ■ ■ r- 0 � eY � r_ - Y z 0 Allo 10 `Z z WIZ SVVVVDOgdjuimnvvwoo 0 VV3A 3A" 131MISIG AVM N ff Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 6 PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Items Moved from Consent Agenda MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE; E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 7A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Proposed Spring/Summer 2011 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks ' and Recreation Commission MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the ordinances of the Cit of Meri ' Idaho, that the Cit Council Y dean and the laws of the State of y of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at 7:00 .m. on Tuesda Aril Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadwa Avenue p Y~ p 12, 2011, at y ,Meridian, Idaho, regarding the 2010 Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Fee Schedule, including proposed new fees as set forth below. Further inf well as the entire Parks & Recreation fe ormation regarding these fees, as e schedule, is available at the Parks & Recreation Department at Meridian Cit Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, (208) 888-3579. An and all intere Y Y steel persons shall be heard at the public hearing. Written testimony is welcome; written materials should be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 48 hours prior to the public hearing. All testimony and materials resented shall become ro p p perty of the City of Meridian. For auditory, visual, or language accommodations, please contact the Cit Clerk's Office at 2 Y (08) 888-4433 at least 48 hours rior to the ublic hearin . Generations Plaza Rental $10.00 Cam Mer-IDA-Teen-Full Da $100.00 Cam Mer-IDA-Teen-Half Da $80.00 Le o Cam $80.00 Fishin Class $8.00 Orienteerin for Youth $40.00 Essential Oils Class $10.00 Ballet $50.00 Tumblin and Dance $30.00 Violin Classes $65.00 Jewelr Class $25.00 Women's Ka ak $79.00 _Young Rembrandts Art Camps $49.00 DATED this 31 st day of MARCH, 2011. PUBLISH on Apri14, 2011 and April 11, 2011. ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE April 12, 2011 ITEM # 7/~ PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME 2011 Spring/Summer Parks and Rec Fee Schedule Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 7B PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. _ V1 -~ 0 A Resolution Adopting the Sprin /Summer2011 F • • g ee Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; Authorizin the Meridian • g Parks & Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providin an Effective D g ate MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFF/CE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO SENT TO SENT TO STAFF AGENCY APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ~~ ~ / -- ^- CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 1 — WO BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, HOAGLUN, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE OF THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, following publication of notice according to the requirements of Idaho Code section 63-1311A, on April 12, 2011, the City Council of Meridian held a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, following such hearing, the City Council, by formal motion, did approve said proposed Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department is hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of said fees. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho this 12th day of April, 2011. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 12th day of April, 2011. ATTEST: aycee f, eerd, Mayor CSE �LJ'Jijkz aPij ��„ y N City Clerk ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 1 OF 1 Meridian Parks and Recreation 2011 Fee Schedule = Denotes fee change/addition/removal Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Volleyball Competative Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 10 games + tournament $180.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $30.00 Basketball Men's, Women's, Men's Over 40 Team Fee 10 games + tournament $475.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $50.00 Spring Softball Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 10 games + tournament $450.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $50.00 Fall Softball Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 8 games $220.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 ASA Fee if team is not already registered $12.00 Late Fee $50.00 Softball Tournaments Field Rental for tournament per hour $5.00 Field Prep for tournaments per hour $15.00 Girl's Spring Fast itch Softball U10, U12, U14, U16, U18 Team Fee ASA Fee not included $420.00 Late Fee per team $50.00 Girl's Fall Fastpitch Softball U10, U12, U14, U16, U18 Team Fee 8 games $220.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Meridian Parks and Recreation 2011 Fee Schedule = Denotes fee change/addition/removal Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Volleyball Competative Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 10 games + tournament $180.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $30.00 Basketball Men's, Women's, Men's Over 40 Team Fee 10 games + tournament $475.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $50.00 Spring Softball Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 10 games + tournament $450.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee $50.00 Fall Softball Men's, Women's, Co -Ed Team Fee 8 games $220.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 ASA Fee if team is not already registered $12.00 Late Fee $50.00 Softball Tournaments Field Rental for tournament per hour $5.00 Field Prep for tournaments per hour $15.00 Softball E" ui ment NEW Used Softballs each $1.00 NEW Girl's Spring Fast itch Softball U10, U12, U14, U16, U18 Team Fee ASA Fee not included $420.00 Late Fee per team $50.00 Girl's Fall Fast itch Softball U1O, U12, U14, U16, U18) Team Fee 8 games T220.001 1 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee per team) $30.00 Men's _Fast Softball Men's Fast Pitch Tournament -Team Fee $250.00 Men's Wooden Bat Tournament Team Fee $250.00 Dodqeball Co -Ed, Open) Team Fee 8 games + tournament $150.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee per team $30.00 Flag Football Men's, Women's Co -Ed Team Fee 10 games + tournament $375.00 Resident Player Fee $10.00 Non -Resident Player Fee $20.00 Late Fee per team $50.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Shelter Fees: Extra Picnic Tables $3.00 Alcohol Permit 5 hr. time block $20.00 Amus. Equip./Lrg Canopies 5 hr time block per item $10.00 Amplified Sound Permit per day $20.00 Short Term Concessions Permit per day $10.00 Short Term Concessions Permit annual $100.00 Storey Park Blue & Green Shelter) Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Shelter Rental 51-100 people $45.00 Shelter Rental 101-150 people $60.00 Shelter Rental 151-200 people $75.00 Softball Field Rental per hour $10.00 Softball Field Lights per hour $15.00 Volleyball Equipment 5 hr time block blue shelter only $10.00 Tully Park Small Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Large Shelter Rental 1-150 people) $60.00 Large Shelter Rental 151-200 people $75.00 Large Shelter Rental 201-250 people $90.00 Large Shelter Rental 251-300 people) $105.00 Softball Field Rental per hour $10.00 Volleyball Equipment 5 hr time block large shelter only $10.00 Multi -Use Fiend Rental per hour $10.00 Chateau Park Shelter Rental 1-30 people $30.00 Multi -Use Field Rental (per hour) $10.00 Settlers Park Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Shelter Rental 51-100 people $45.00 Shelter Rental 101-150 people $60.00 Shelter Rental 151-200 people $75.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Baseball/Softball Field Rental per hour $10.00 Heroes Park Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Shelter Rental 51-100 people $45.00 Shelter Rental 101-150 people $60.00 Shelter Rental 151-200 people $75.00 Shelter Rental 201-250 people $90.00 Shelter Rental 251-300 people $105.00 Multi -Use Field Rental $10.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Seasons Park Shelter Rental 1-30 people $30.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Gordon Harris Park Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Shelter Rental 51-100 people $45.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Bear Creek Park Shelter Rental 1-50 people $30.00 Shelter Rental 51-100 peoplee $45.00 Softball Field Rental per hour $10.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Champion Park Shelter Rental 1-30 people $30.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Renaissance Park Shelter Rental 1-30 people $30.00 Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Jabil Park Multi -Use Field Rental per hour $10.00 Hertiage Middle School Ball Fields Softball Field Rental per hour $10.00 Generations Plaza Stage and Grass Area Rental per hour $10.00 NEW Special Events Meridian Barn Sour 1 Mile Fun Run $10.00 6k/10k Run $20.00 1 Mile Fun Run Late Registration $15.00 6k/10k Run Late Registration $25.00 Boise Hawks Family Night $10.00 Meridian Christmas Street Faire Vendor Fee 10'x10' or smaller $25.00 Vendor Fee larger than 10'x10' $50.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Camps Camp Mer -IDA -Teen 1 wk 7:30=5:30 N/A i $100.00 NEW Camp Mer -IDA -Teen 1 wk 9:00-3:00: N/A "' $80.00 NEW Lego Camp N/A $80.00 NEW Camp MerldaMoo 1 wk 7:30-5:30 $94.00 Camp MerldaMoo (1 wk 9:00-3:00) $74.00 Sports Camps $39.00 Outdoor Adventure Camp $160.00 Winter Adventure Camp $96.00 Christmas Art Camp $45.00 Whitewater Sampler Camp $395.00 Kayak Skills Development Camp $495.00 Jump Rope Camp $39.00 Camp MerldaMoo Winter Edition 7:30-5:30 $75.00 Camp MerldaMoo Winter Edition 9:00-3:00) $65.00 Camp MerldaMoo Spring Break (7:30-5:30) $84.00 Camp MerldaMoo Spring Break 9:00-3:00 $64.00 Bogus Basin Mountain Discover Camp $140.00 Babysitting Boot Camp $40.00 Teen Belly Dance Camp $50.00 Activity Guide Classes Fishing Class N/A $8.00 NEW Orienteering N/A $40.00 NEW Essential Oils Class N/A $10.00 NEW Ballet N/A' $50.00 NEW Tumbling and Dance N/A $30.00 NEW Family Fun Art N/A' $6.00 NEW Violin Classes N/A $65.00 NEW Belly dancing $30.00' $32.00 7% Jewelry Class 10.001 $25.00 150%i Women's Kayak Clinic $75.00' $79.00 5%' Young Rembrandts Art Classes $44.00" $49.00 11% Adult Aerobic and Dance Class $35.00 Adult CPR/AED $50.00 Adult Golf $50.00 Adult Watercolor $49.00 Amazing Athletes $50.00 Art Academy Saturday Class $45.00 Awash in Watercolor $149.00 Baby Signs -Sign, Say and Play $44.00 Ballroom Dance Classes $25.00 Beginning Jewlery Making -Youth $47.00 Beginning Modeling $65.00 Beginning Piano $100.00 Beginning Sewing $49.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Building Blocks Lego Class $45.00 Capturing the Light in Floral Still Life $65.00 Christmas Crafts Preschool Class $24.00 Complying with Contractor Registration law $15.00 Composition in Landscape $75.00 Creative Beading & Jewelry Making $56.00 Creative Childrens Dance:Ballet $38.00 Crochet Basics $20.00 Drawing Floral Arrangements $65.00 Drawing for Comic Books $45.00 Drawing for Painters $75.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Activity Current Fee Proposed Fee % Change Dynamics Of Light Filled Landscape Painting $99.00 Empathy Practice Group $10.00 Estate Planning -Considerations for Minor Children $15.00 Estate Planning -Do you need a trust? $15.00 Exploring Art for Youth $120.00 Fall Recovery $60.00 Family Rafting Trip $40.00 Family Spanish $35.00 Family Tang Soo Do $35.00 First Aid $40.00 Healthy Pregnancy Class $20.00 Hike With a Ranger $8.00 Infant/Child CPR $50.00 Interpreting a Photo --Painting Workshop $75.00 It's About Couples $29.00 MPR Fee Schedule 4/6/10 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: $A ITEM TITLE: Finance Department: Strategic Plan Update Including Discussion on the Budget and Investment Policy MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN INVESTMENT POLICY Revised March 2011 SCOPE This investment policy applies to the cash and investment activities of all funds under the jurisdiction of the City of Meridian Finance Department as authorized by Idaho Code 57- 127 and by City resolution. Employee Retirement Fund and any Employee Deferred Compensation Plans are specifically excluded from this policy. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES The primary objective of the Finance Department is to safeguard City funds while providing adequate liquidity to meet the City's on-going operating needs. The investment objectives in order of priority are as follows; 1. Safety Investments will preserve the capital in the portfolio. Investments will be purchased that mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. A. Credit Risk — will minimize the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer by limiting investments to those investments authorized by state law as detailed below. B. Interest Rate Risk- interest rate risk will be minimized by structuring the portfolio so it is not necessary to sell securities before maturity to meet cash requirements and by limiting the average maturity of this portfolio. C. Custodial Credit Risk — the risk that in the event of the failure of a depository a government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in possession of an outside party. 2. Liquidity 3. Yield The investment portfolio will remain liquid enough to meet the operating needs of the City. In addition to meeting anticipated daily needs of the City an amount of the portfolio will be available in money market or Idaho State Investment Pool funds that offer one day liquidity for unanticipated operating needs. The investment portfolio will be designed to obtain the highest yield possible under the constraints of safety, liquidity, and state regulation. STANDARDS OF CARE 1. Prudence The standard of prudence used by City Finance employees and any investment advisors contracted by the City shall be the "prudent person" standard. The "prudent person" standard states that "Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." 2. Ethics and Conflict of Interest Employees, officials, and contractors involved in the investment process must refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper management of the investment program or create an actual or perceived impairment of ability to make sound investment decisions. Employees, officials, and contractors shall disclose any personal financial or investment positions that could be related to the performance of the investment portfolio. 3. Delegation of Authority Authority to manage the investment portfolio is granted to the City Finance Director under the direction of the City Council. Any investment advisor contracted by the City to purchase investments is bound by this investment policy. 2 ALLOWABLE INVESTMENT VEHICLES PER IDAHO CODE 50-1013 (a) Revenue bone issued by the revenue bond act (b) City coupon bonds provided for under section 50-1019, Idaho Code (c) Local improvement district bonds provided for under chapter 17, title 50, Idaho Code (d) Time deposit accounts with public depositories (e) Bonds, treasury bills, interest-bearing notes, or other obligations of the United States, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. (f) General obligation bonds of any county, city, metropolitan water district, municipal utility district, school district or other taxing district of this state. (g) Notes, bond, debentures, or other similar obligation issued by the farm credit system or institutions forming a part thereof under the farm credit act of 1971 (12 U.S.0 sections 2001-2259) and all acts of congress amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto; in bonds or dentures of the federal home loan bank board established under the federal home loan bank act (12 U.S.0 sections 1421-1449) ; in bonds, debentures and other obligations of the federal national mortgage association established under the national housing act (12 U.S.C. Sections 1701-1750g) as amended, and in the bonds of any federal home loan bank established under said act and in other obligations of agencies and instrumentalities of the government of the state of Idaho or of the United States. i. Bonds, notes or other similar obligations issued by public corporations of the state of Idaho including, but not limited to, the Idaho state building authority, the Idaho housing authority and the Idaho resource board, but such investment shall not exceed beyond seven (7) days. j. Repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreements covered by any legal investment for the state of Idaho or as otherwise allowed by this section, provided that reverse repurchase agreements shall only be used for the purpose of liquidity and not for leverage or speculation. k. Tax anticipation bonds or notes, income and revenue anticipation bonds or notes and registered warrants of the state of Idaho or of taxing districts of the state of Idaho. (1) Savings accounts including, but not limited to, accounts on which interest or dividends are paid and upon which negotiable orders of withdrawal may be drawn, and similar transaction accounts. (m) Time deposit accounts and other savings accounts of state or federal savings and loan associations located within the geographical boundaries of the state in amounts not to exceed the insurance provided by the federal savings and loan corporation, including but not limited to, accounts on which interest or dividends are paid and upon which negotiable orders of withdrawal may be drawn, and similar transaction accounts. (n) Share, savings and deposit accounts of state and federal credit unions located within the geographical boundaries of the state in amounts not to exceed the insurance provided by the national credit union share insurance fund and/or any other authorized 3 share guaranty corporation, including, but not limited to, accounts on which interest or dividends are paid and upon which negotiable orders of withdrawal may be drawn, and similar transaction accounts. (o) Prime banker's acceptances i (p) Prime commercial paper (q) Money market funds, mutual funds, or any other similar funds whose portfolios consist of any allowed investment as specified in this section. (r) Bonds, debentures or notes of any corporation organized, controlled and operating within the United States which have at the time of their purchase, an A rating or higher by a commonly known rating service. SI AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS DEPOSITORIES AND BROKER/DEALERS All brokers and dealers doing business with the City of Meridian must be registered with the State of Idaho Department of Finance and must adhere to Securities and Exchanges Commission Rule 15C3-1 (uniform net capital rule). Non-bank broker/dealer firms and the individuals handling the City's account must be registered with the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). INTERNAL CONTROL The City Finance Department is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to protect the City from loss of public funds due to fraud, error, or actions inconsistent with the requirements the laws governing allowable public entity investments. The City will require an annual independent audit to include reviews of the investment internal controls as necessary to issue an opinion on the financial statements as a whole. REPORTING The Finance Department will prepare annual, quarterly, and monthly reports for Council containing: • Percentage of the total portfolio each type of investment represents. • The percentage of the portfolio each fund represents. • Monthly rate of investment return for each type of investment. • Quarterly summary of market conditions. • Annual realized and unrealized gains and losses on in market value and amortized expense or income from amortization of bond premiums and discounts. • Annually average weighted yield to maturity. • Annually listing of investments by maturity date. 5 City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted 1. Objective Resolution# The objective of the budget policy is to address and follow guidelines for the following elements; The responsibilities of the Mayor, the Finance Department, the City Council, and Department Directors in compiling and establishing the annual City budget. The principals that will guide the City's budget process. The principals that control and ensure adherence to the adopted budget. Compliance with the provisions of Idaho Code 50-1002 Annual Budget and all code references within that section. 2. City Budget Purpose and Mission The mission of the City of Meridian's budget is to help decision makers make informed choices about the provision of services and capital assets and to promote stakeholder participation in the process. The budget is a plan that tells how the City will use limited financial resources to best provide for the needs of its citizens. The final plan is the responsibility of the City Council and the Mayor based on recommendations of the individual departments within the City. The individual departments within the City are responsible for adherence to the plan. The budget should be presented so that it is a document that can be used to inform and educate the public and elected officials about the City's structure, achievements, challenges, and direction. The budget documents should be a policy document, an operations guide, a financial plan and a communication tool. 3. Budgeting Model The City of Meridian uses a combination of incremental and program based budgeting. Incremental budgeting is generally applied to the development of the base budget. The base budget is considered to be personnel and operating costs that remain consistent from year to year. Incremental budgeting means using the costs from the prior year to develop the New Year's budget. The City modifies this approach by reviewing each base budget line to determine if the budgeted amount can be reduced, should be maintained or increased. A program is a broad category of services (WHAT) for an identifiable group (WHO) and for a specific purpose (WHY). A program has specified goals and objectives. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted Resolution# The first step in the budget process is to identify the needs or problems that make the program necessary. Once the program need has been identified and the program goal established, the program must be evaluated. This requires systematic review to determine if the program is meeting its goals or moving in the right direction. From this evaluation financial needs can be identified and financial expenditures tied to results. Examples of programs are Police and Fire services, Parks and Recreation, and Water and Wastewater. 4. Definitions Appropriation/Spending Authority — A sum of money that has been set aside for a specific use. Amendment — The process of altering the current fiscal year budget. Transfer — To move money from one fund to the other, to move budget dollars from one department, general ledger line item, or project to another. Personnel — The expenses associated with salaries and wages to include benefits and taxes. Operating — The expenses associated with running the daily business of the City. Capital Outlay — Tangible or intangible property that meets the current City minimum dollar threshold and has a life of more than one year. Fund — Self -balancing set of accounts organized into types by major service provided by the governmental unit. Department — A division within the City that has its own specific purpose. Carry Forward — Budget dollars not spent on capital projects during the current fiscal year that will be spent in a future fiscal year on the same project. Budget Notice — A formal publication in the local paper following Idaho code to notify the public of any budget hearing/workshop. Budget Workshop — A meeting for the Council, Mayor and department directors to discuss the current year budget. Budget Hearing_— A public hearing to allow public input with the formal adoption of the final budget. Chief Financial Officer — The executive who is responsible for the financial planning and record-keeping for the City. Fiscal Year — The 12 -month period October I to September 30. One time expenditure — An expense that will only occur during the current fiscal year as opposed to continuing year to year. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted, Resolution# Base Budget — On-going personnel and operating expense budgets needed to operate the daily functions of the City and maintain current service levels. The base budget does not include capital or other one time expenditures. Council Liaison — A Council member that is assigned to a specific department. Idaho State Statute — Idaho law established by an act of the legislature. Under the U.S. and state constitutions, statutes are considered the primary source of law in the U.S. 5. Appropriation Level The City sets spending authority at the major program (function), major object, and fund level. The fund is the highest level of appropriation. A fund classification is based on the purpose of the fund's expenditures and the sources of the revenues. Program level is defined above as a category of services for an identifiable group and for a specific purpose. One fund may have several programs. Some major programs are a roll up of several smaller but related programs. For example Police is a combination of traffic, community policing, criminal investigations and code enforcement. The object is the account code assigned to identify what the expenditure is for. For example office supplies, personnel expense, or equipment. The major classes of objects are; Personnel Operating Capital The project level is used to identify specific projects within an object code generally within capital. The object capital — buildings within a fund may have several project codes to identify different buildings. Spending within the major classes personnel and operating is not controlled at the line item object level. Additions of part or full time equivalent positions require the approval of the Mayor and City Council. Spending in excess of the original major class appropriation require a budget amendment to be approved by the Major and City Council. The budget reports are adjusted upon Council approval. The City accounting system tracks both the original budget and the amended budget. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted Resolution# The City legally appropriates all the amendments one time at the end of the fiscal year through ordinance and public hearing. Changes at the project level within appropriated capital do not require an amendment but require documented approval of the Mayor and Council. 6. Balanced Budget The City will adopt and maintain a balanced annual budget. For each fund annual expenditures cannot exceed annual revenues plus available fund balance. Each fund must maintain a balance equal to four months operating reserve. The dollar amount of the operating reserve is determined by the current year budget and is to be recalculated on an annual basis. The base operating budget of the City, those operating expenses necessary to maintain the current level of City operations from year to year must not exceed the current year revenues for each fund. One-time revenues or use of fund balance will be permitted only for one-time projects or items. On-going personnel or operating costs resulting from such projects must be sustained by on-going and consistent revenue streams. Expenses may be incurred only in terms of the approved annual budget or amended approved annual budget. General Fund requests for new or expanded programs will be considered during the course of the regular budget process. Only in extreme circumstances will such requests be considered during the course of the year. 7. Emergency Hold Back At any time during the fiscal year subsequent to the adoption of the budget if the Chief Financial Officer determines the current year revenues will not cover on- going expenses he or she will report to Council and recommend a spending hold- back. The Council will approve such spending hold -back up to the amount necessary to ensure current revenue will cover on-going expenses. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted 8. Budget Development Resolution# Revenue Manual - Subsequent to consideration of the budget the Finance Department will prepare and distribute a revenue manual. The document contains revenue projections for each source of revenue by fund for the budget year under consideration as well as a forecast for at least three years future anticipated revenue. The document will contain relevant past history for comparison purposes. The City's policy is to prepare revenue forecasts in a conservative manner. Departments are responsible for notifying the Finance Department about any changes to contracts or fees that will impact annual revenues. It is the policy of the City to charge fees for services when it is allowable by state statute and the benefit from the service can be traced directly to a particular and individual customer. Budget Calendar - The Finance Department is responsible for preparing an annual budget calendar showing key dates in the budget process and ensuring that statutorily required budget dates are satisfied. Budget Development Manual — the Finance Department will prepare an annual budget development manual for City Departments with forms and instructions and the budget development manual. This manual will be available to the public via the City website. Base Budget - The Finance Department is responsible for developing the base budget, those personnel and operating expenses necessary to maintain the current level of operations. The Finance Department will remove all one-time and capital expenses and make slight adjustments to line items if warranted. The Finance Department and the City Departments will review all line items to determine if reductions are possible or if changing conditions necessitate an increase. Program Enhancement Request - A major component of the budget process is the department budget enhancement request. Budget enhancements identify an opportunity or problem, a course of action to address the problem, and the financial impact of the course of action. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted Resolution# A request for additional personnel, operating expense, or capital outlay to perform a new service, solve a problem or provide the same service to an increased population requires a budget enhancement request. The budget enhancements will tie to the strategic plan. Departments will demonstrate what issue or challenge, long term program goal and measurable objective from their strategic plan the budget enhancement will address. There can be cases wherein an item is requested that has multiple year costs and those costs are not all requested in the current year budget. If this happens the future costs and any prior costs relevant to the particular project will be detailed on the enhancement request form. Program enhancements are listed in priority order by department. Department Directors review budget enhancements with the Mayor and their Council liaison. Compensation Changes - All compensation changes will be communicated to Finance for inclusion in the draft budget through the Human Resources Department. Compensation changes include merit, reclassifications, equity adjustments, across the board increases, cost of living increases, and Fire union changes. Reclassifications approved by the Human Resources Director are included in the base budget. Merit increases, across the board increases, cost of living increases, and union contract compensation clauses are approved by the Human Resources Director and the City Council. If a new job classification is created the job description must be submitted to the Human Resources Director for approval and salary classification. Budget Positions — all City positions must be budgeted as full or partial full time equivalents. Executive Budget - The Mayor will review the budget materials and upon approval the Finance will submit the following information to the City Council; Enhancement requests Wage and Salary Report Base Budget by line item and total Capital Replacements City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted 9. Capital Policy Resolution# Capital outlay is defined as meeting the minimum dollar threshold in the current capital outlay policy and having a life of more than one year. Capital assets may be tangible such as equipment, land and land improvements, and buildings or they may be intangible such as computer software, water rights and easements. All capital enhancement requests for equipment or construction must consider and include the estimated operating cost estimates including maintenance, other operating cost, and any associated personnel cost. All capital enhancement requests must consider and include the total cost of the project even if the project will be appropriated and spent over several fiscal years. Each new year request for an existing project will include the prior budget and actual amounts. Replacement Capital Outlay — Capital items may be replaced if they are worn out or obsolete. Leased Equipment — A lease that meets one or more of the following criteria must be accounted for as a capital lease and requested as capital in the budget. • The lease term is greater than 75% of the property's estimated economic life. • The lease contains an option to purchase the property for less than fair market value. • Ownership of the property is transferred to the lessee at the end of the lease term. • The present value of the lease payments plus an interest factor exceeds 90% of all the fair market value of the property. Capital Improvement Plan — On annual basis the City will prepare a five year City-wide capital improvement plan as detailed in #14 below. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted Resolution# Cary forward — Capital projects that are not completed in the fiscal year of initial appropriation may be re- appropriated to the next fiscal year. The City only considers re -appropriation for operating expenses that are one-time enhancements for significant projects that cannot reasonably be completed within a one year time frame. Department Directors are responsible for notifying the Finance Department which projects will need to be carried forward. This notification must be in accordance with the dates set forth in the City budget calendar. The Finance Department will adjust the carry forward at the start of the new fiscal year to remove budget amounts spent between the date of notification and the end of the fiscal year. 10. Budget Adoption Budget Workshop The City Council, Mayor and City Directors will hold n annual budget workshop to discuss department enhancement requests. At the conclusion of the workshop the Council will approve a draft budget. Per Idaho statute 50-1002 and 50-1003 the authority and responsible for setting the budget rests with the City Council. Notice and Publication Requirements The City Clerk will publish in the local paper all applicable notices pertaining to the annual budget process per Idaho Statutes 50-1002 and 50-1003. Public Hearing The City is required by Idaho statute to hold a public budget hearing. The City Finance Department will prepare a presentation highlighting the budget enhancements and items of interest to the public. The public are encouraged to attend and submit comments related to the draft budget. At the conclusion of the public hearing the City Council formally adopts the budget. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted, 11. Budget Amendments Resolution# Additional spending authority may be requested outside of the annual appropriation process for an emergency or unexpected situation or to receive authority to spend an unplanned source of revenue. All effort should be made to enhance programs or add or change the budget through the regular budget process. All amendment requests will initially be reviewed by the Finance Department to determine availability of revenues and impact on future years. Amendments must provide the same level of detail required for budget enhancements. Upon approval by the CFO amendments will be forwarded to the Mayor and Council for review and approval. The Mayor and City Council approve amendments during the year at regular Council meetings while in accordance with state statute legally amend the budget during the approval process for the next fiscal budget. 12. Monitoring the Budget Financial Reporting — the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) is responsible for monitoring adherence to the budget and the financial condition of the City. The CFO is responsible for providing the City Council, Mayor, and City management with monthly statements of revenue and expenses and comparison of actual to budget as well as updates on the financial conditions of the City. Public Reporting and Transparency — The Chief Financial Officer is responsible for ensuring the City's budget, financial results, and financial transactions are available to the public. The Finance Department will also make available the budget calendar, revenue manual, budget development manual, capital improvement plan, and the annual audit report and audited financial statements. Director and Executive Branch Budget Responsibility - The City Council is responsible for establishing the spending authority in the budget. The Mayor and Department Directors are responsible for adhering to the established budget and establishing and monitoring performance measures and strategic goals to optimize the level of service provided with available resources. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted 13. Performance Reporting and Monitoring Resolution# The Mayor and City management are responsible for monitoring that departments are meeting strategic goals and performance measurements and evaluating reasons for variances. 14. Capital Improvement Budget Content - On an annual basis each program in the City will prepare and update a five year capital improvement plan. The individual capital improvement plans will be rolled together to create a City-wide plan. The capital improvement plan will contain construction projects and significant equipment purchases or replacements such as fire engines. The capital improvement plan will include operating and personnel costs and numbers of additional employees associated with construction projects. The plan will include actual to budget comparison history for at least the three fiscal years proceeding the current year. The plan will include estimated funding sources for each year of the plan. The plan will prioritize projects for each program and for each fund. The plan will provide detail on the entire cost and construction timelines for multi-year projects. Process - The plan will be reviewed and approved by the Mayor and City Council on an annual basis. Projects to be started in the upcoming year will be formally appropriated during the regular budget process. The Finance Department is responsible for preparing an annual budget calendar showing key dates in the capital improvement plan development process. During the annual review it is expected the plan may be modified as service needs and/or funding sources change. If the City Council approves an amendment or budget enhancement that differs from the existing capital improvement plan the plan will be modified to reflect the change. City of Meridian Budget Policy City of Meridian Budget Policy Adopted. Resolution# Reporting - On an annual basis each program will prepare a report on the completion or percentage of completion on previously appropriated projects, any change in scope and any concerns on completion of the project on time and within budget. City of Meridian Budget Policy Untitled Document Page 1 of 1 TextjSgg I View Another Idaho Code Mj Search Idaho Codes ba Li Please contact the municipality for questions regarding regulations. 1-9-2: DEPOSITORY: A. Designation: The Farmers And Merchants State Bank, Meridian Branch, is hereby designated as the depository for the City. The City Treasurer is hereby ordered, required and directed to keep monies belonging to or in the care of the City coming into his hands and into the hands of the City, in the above named depository. (1955 Code § 1-1001; amd. 1999 Code) B. Bond: Such depository shall furnish a bond executed by it to the City and deposit with the County Auditor collateral security sufficient to save the City from any loss in the sum not less than the estimated maximum amount on deposit at any one time. Such bond and collateral shall be approved by the Mayor and City Council. (1955 Code § 1-1002) http;/,rwww.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/main.php?book_id� ,306&keywords=&ft-&fin... 2/24/2011 Untitled Document Page 1 of 1 pq 0-M Text View Another Idaho Codej Search Idaho Codes Please contact the municipality for questions regarding regulations. 1-9-3: FISCAL POLICY; BUDGET: A. Budget Policy: The purpose of the budget is to help the public understand the costs of services and how they relate to the services provided by the City. This budget shall also serve the purpose of advising the City Council and Mayor about the finances of the City and assist the City Council in determining what they desire to do for the City and in setting its goals. The City Treasurer shall meet the provisions of Idaho Code section 50-208, and shall be custodian of the monies belonging to the City, shall be responsible for all accounting and investing of the City's funds, and shall prepare and present to the City Council monthly statements and tentative annual budgets in accordance with this Section. The annual budget shall showexpenditures and revenues as required in Idaho Code section 50-1002. 2. The City Treasurer shall keep a separate account of each fund or appropriation, and the debits and credits belonging thereto; he or she shall give a receipt to every person and state on what account it was paid, shall file copies of such receipts with his or her monthly statement, shall at the end of each month and every month, and as often as may be required, render an account to the City Council under oath, showing the status of the Treasury at the date of such accounting and the balance of money in the Treasury; he or she shall accompany such accounts with a statement of all receipts and disbursements, together with all warrants redeemed and paid by him or her, which said warrants, with any and all vouchers held by him or her, shall be filed with said account in the Clerk's office. B. Fiscal Year: The fiscal year for the City shall begin on October 1 as set out in Idaho Code section 50- 1001. C. Monthly Budget: The monthly budget shall set out the status of revenues and expenditures. The monthly budget shall contain figures of expenditures indicating the total funds budgeted for the year and amounts spent through the date of the monthly budget statement and the amount of revenue collected. The monthly budget shall show the balance of all general accounts, special accounts, enterprise funds, and any other dedicated accounts or funds as established by the City Council. This budget shall be broken down into, and by, departments in sufficient detail to allow the City Council to be able to determine where the funds are being expended, i.e., salaries, equipment, services, etc. http://www. sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/main.php?book_id=306&keywords=&ft=&fin... 2/25/2011 RE cTy APR '11" 2 20H CITY OFr',q CITV C, RKS oFF�CE Finance Department April 2011 Strategic Plan Presentation • Next Accounting Manager 1 Finance Department utility Billing Department Financial Analysis & Payroll Reporting Finance Department Purchasing Accounts Department Payable Budget Professional Finance and Accounting Staff Chief Financial Officer a Controller Purchasing Manager Accounting' Utility Billing Manager Manager Accountant Technical Finance and Accounting Staff Billing/Accounting Payroll Clerk Administrator €. (4) ,A•, Billing Accounting Administrator Specialist (2) Accounts 9-3 F:5 Payable Buyer 44 is Completed and Ongoing Projects 4 Payroll Department Development of new Citywide Timecard system Integration of ABRA and Payroll processes f Developed new databases to increase efficiency (monthly 16 hours) Accounts Payable f Promote Electronic payments to vendors to reduce manual checks i Paperless filing of 1099 — first time was January 2010 i Improved process efficiency with Credit Card process and Contracts f Budget CIP plan now drives a majority of the capital enhancements u Performance Measure development to assist in financial and budget analysis 4 Accounting Implemented Grants Committee to oversee all City of Meridian grants. Working with vendor to develop a credit card "shopping cart' for the City website that will allow citizens to make a payment or donation with their credit card over the internet K] Completed and Ongoing Projects Accountant — Jenny Ma —Grants Financial Manager — General Ledger Analysis — Developed Operating Manuals — Budget Development — Reconciliation of General Ledger — Assist with Audit development — Cross -trained as AP/Payroll backup Questions µ • Next Controller a I When? For the City we must implement in the FY2011 financial statements Implementation? Create a policy to: Classify fund balances and grant authority to assign reserves Classify FundBalances 1. Nonspendable — non cash assets such as inventory, long term notes, prepaid items or endowment funds. Fire Prevention & Burnout Trust Funds (only $4,000) Deposits and prepaid expenses 2. Restricted — external parties constraints. restricted by State Legislation, such as; — Impact Fund 3. Committed — internal constraints or self imposed restrictions made by Council, such as; — Police Bldg Debt — Capital Projects Fund 4. Assigned — internal self imposed restrictions but Council can grant the authority to an appointee, such as; — Carryforward or Encumbrances — Reserves for emergency, operating, depreciation 5. Unassigned — unreserved/unrestricted funds 5 Current fund designations NEW fund designations Govermental Enterprise Fund Balance FY2010 Restricted for: Impact Fund 1,964,241 Capital Improvement Fund 2,519,705 Ponce Debt Service - Unrestricted General Fund 21,762,216 New Designations Govermental Enterprise Nonspendable Fire Funds 4,000 Deposits & Prepaid 'hems 206,455 270,370 Restricted Impact Fund 1,964,241 Police Debt Service - Committed: Capital Improvement Fund 1,819,705 Public Safety Fund 2,070,983 Assigned Development Svc Fund 700,000 Reserve for Carryforward 3,220,993 4,932,178 Reserve for Operating 9,054,738 4,500,000 Reserve for Depreciation 4,000,000 Reserve for Emergency 5,000,000 Unassigned General Fund 7,205,047 IMPACT FUND UPDATE .J, Last year committee requested we update the model using actual CENSUS data and then meet again. - CENSUS data 2010 population came in 6.29% less than COMPASS projection. COMPASS = 80,136 vs. CENSUS = 75,092 We're waiting for COMPASS adjustments for the next 10yr projection before finalizing numbers. 4 We'll meet with committee again this summer. Questions Next: Utility Billing Manager Utility Billing Drivers F� Number of water turn-offs per semi-monthly turn-off — average number in 2007 was 148, 164 in FY2009, 174 in FY2010, and as of now 180 for FY2011 I1 Consistent customer phone contacts — Monthly Average -- 2009 at 4302, 2010 at 5721 'a Process an average of 107 renter billing directives a month. a The change in the SSC rate structure change has increased billing adjustments and changes. Since the initial delivery of carts, we have seen an average of 444 exchanges a month. , - C2, 7 Completed Projects ,q Changed Policies and Practices to improve overall customer service H Payment deadline to avoid shut off extended r`' Unlimited Payment Arrangements Unlimited After hours service rJ Updated Billing Directive and Renters Addend R Pay by Phone in Use since 12/09 j'� Updated Online Payment System 10/10 PE MERIDIAN CARES Program Update 3/10 What the future holds r,Yn Near Real Time Turn -Off Process *Field staff on-line and can avoid turning off customers who have paid during the travel time Evaluating feasibility of automated phone calls prior to shut off day Continue to evaluate and modify rental process to safeguard all parties interests. Research feasibility and impacts of offering level pay program to our Citizens Update Billing System? Questions or Suggestions 01 • Next Purchasing Manager • Keith Watts, Purchasing Manager • Kathy Wanner, Purchasing Assistant is Completed and On-going Projects Purchasing F1 How to do Business with the City Event (bi-annual) ;t Created Standard Operating Procedures for most purchasing processes. (constant review and improvement) Employee Purchasing Training City Wide (on-going) ,I Achieved National Certification (Public Purchasing Officer) from the National Institute for Governmental Purchasing (Completed!) J� Implemented bid/solicitation subscription service with registered vendors (Auto Notification). (Completed) No successful Bid Protests (fair, legal and ethical processes). O FUTURE PROJECTS Project Management Software (Contract tracking & reporting). Update City contract forms (Public Works Construction & Capital Equipment Purchases). Re -design Invitation for Bid (IFB) and Request for Proposal (RFP) forms. Regional Reverse Vendor Trade Show (to be held at Meridian City Hall). pn Back to the Boss 10 Taking A look Back and Looking Forward There is an established correlation between population and government employment growth. (Population growth puts demand on government services ) 12 Operating Budgets (Before Transfers) FY2003 Compared Personnel Budgets (Before Transfers) FY2003 Compared to FY2010 $9,000,000 - pFY2010 $6,000,000 ■ FY2003 S6,000,000 $7,000,000 t 1 $6,000,000 'z $5,000,000 $4,000,000- 4,000,000$3,000,000 $4,000,000 jji 3 $3,000,000 All i $2,000,000 --- — $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000- 1,000,000$0 a $ 0 i Genera/gdr,jj, k8 Po/ice P, r. Deye/op General Parks Police Fire Develop Utilities SeN/celsit/es Admin Services 12 Operating Budgets (Before Transfers) FY2003 Compared to FY2010 $6,000,000 © FY2010' $5,000,000 ■ FY2003 $4,000,000- 4,000,000$3,000,000 $3,000,000- $2,000,000 --- — $2,000,000 $1,000,000 1 i a i General Parks Police Fire Develop Utilities Admin Services 12 City of Meridian Major Funds - Historical Year-end Balances $60,000,000 — Total General Fund Balance $50,000,000 E.TotII-terprise Fund Balance $40,000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000 —i $10,000,000 $0 j City of Meridian Total General Fund Balance $35,000,000 — — — -------- $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 ---- $5,000,000 - $0 1. 13 PERCENT CHANGES IN FINAL BUDGETS (Before Transfers) Average Annual Change Change FY2003 - FY2010 FY2010 - FY2011 PERSONNEL General Administration 18% 4% Parks and Recreation 17% 8% Police Department 12% 13% Fire Department 19% 4% Development Services Not Calculated 3% Utilities Not Calculated 5% OPERATING General Administration 10% -30% Parks and Recreation 29% 15% Police Department 11% -29% Fire Department 31% -26% Development Services Not Calculated -7% Utilities Not Calculated 1 % City of Meridian Major Funds - Historical Year-end Balances $60,000,000 — Total General Fund Balance $50,000,000 E.TotII-terprise Fund Balance $40,000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000 —i $10,000,000 $0 j City of Meridian Total General Fund Balance $35,000,000 — — — -------- $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 ---- $5,000,000 - $0 1. 13 14 Reserved or Restricted General Funds ®Reserve Police Debt CITY OF MERIDIAN PROJECTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE $16,000,000 — Locust Grove Overpass $14,000,000 ® Impact Fee Fund As o13/1/2011 $12,000,000 13 Develop Services Fund pCapital Improvement Fund FY2011 $10,000,000 Public Safety Fund FY2014 FY2015 $8,000,000 Beginning Fund Balance 10/01 $6,000,000 $13,501,498 $12,934,667 $12,317,574 $4,000, x- $2,000,000 $26,331,230 $27,816,282 $29,207,096 $30,667,451 r- $0 Budgeted Personnel Expense $21,224,330 $21,708,038 $22,512,955 $23,631,517 $24,607,375 $25,834,511 ek e< ek e< e< e< .,ti e< ek e< Inti Budgeted Operating Expense $6,308,242 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PROJECTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE As o13/1/2011 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 Beginning Fund Balance 10/01 $19,640,694 $13,501,498 $12,934,667 $12,317,574 $12,548,722 $12,760,49 Budgeted Revenue $26,331,230 $27,816,282 $29,207,096 $30,667,451 $32,200,823 Budgeted Personnel Expense $21,224,330 $21,708,038 $22,512,955 $23,631,517 $24,607,375 $25,834,511 Budgeted Operating Expense $6,308,242 $6,497,489 $6,692,414 $7,027,034 $7,378,386 $7,747,305 Budgeted Capital Expense $3,084,348 $8,356,500 $5,834,000 $4,708,000 $2,071,500 net Expense Transfer infout of Fund -$1,446,494 -$1,445,959 -$1,639,347 -$1,720,749 -$1,806,786 -$1,897,126 Transfer From Other Funds for CIP $7,147,500 $4,784,000 $3,650,000 $850,000 Budget Amendments Legal $1,500,000 City Hall Repairs $1,500,000 Land $300,000 End COPS Grant $300,000 $315,000 CIP Increased Operating $414,544 $1,208,167 $140,500 $273,578 Ending Fund Balance 9/30 :$13,501,498 $12,934,667) $12;317,374 .$12648,722 '$12,760,4931 Four Months Operating Reserve $9,177,524 $9,401,843 $9,735,123 $10,219,517 $10,661,920 Unrestricted Ending Fund Balance ':$4,323,974 $3,532,825,: $2,582,451 ':$2,329,205 - $2,098,573 t Assumptions Annual Growth in Property Tax of 5% Annual Expense Growth in FY2012 and FY2013 of 3% Annual Expense Growth in FY2014 and FY2015 of 5% Using 2010 Capital Improvement Plan 14 FY2012 Budget Assumptions • Meridian's total taxable value applicable to FY2012 property tax calculation drops 10% from FY2010. ■ New construction taxable value applicable to property tax calculation drops 30% net of tax classification changes from FY2010. ■ Losses in new construction and annexation value due to legislation allowing retroactive tax changes from commercial to agricultural have stabilized. $19,108,536 subtracted from new construction last year as opposed to $631,000 this year. • Annexation taxable value is insignificant. • General Fund revenue from sources other than property tax will remain at FY2010 and FY2011 levels. • Level of residential construction will remain at 2011 level (slightly down from 2010). Commercial construction permit sales prediction will remain conservative. Hard to project commercial sales. • Population increases will be insignificant due to weak economy and housing crisis. • Highest annual population increase in Idaho for the decade was 2.6% in 2006. 2/3rds of this increase was from migration. • In 2010 population in Idaho increased 1.3%. 1/4 % of this increase was from migration. • The January 2011 State of Idaho DFM economic forecast predicts employment will likely not reach it's 2007 level until 2014. 15 Projected Unrestricted General Fund Balances $10,000,000 $8,000,000 Ghntrided Ending Fund Balance $6,M,OW —f— Operating Reserve $4,000,0 - --- $2,000,000 - FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2012 Budget Assumptions • Meridian's total taxable value applicable to FY2012 property tax calculation drops 10% from FY2010. ■ New construction taxable value applicable to property tax calculation drops 30% net of tax classification changes from FY2010. ■ Losses in new construction and annexation value due to legislation allowing retroactive tax changes from commercial to agricultural have stabilized. $19,108,536 subtracted from new construction last year as opposed to $631,000 this year. • Annexation taxable value is insignificant. • General Fund revenue from sources other than property tax will remain at FY2010 and FY2011 levels. • Level of residential construction will remain at 2011 level (slightly down from 2010). Commercial construction permit sales prediction will remain conservative. Hard to project commercial sales. • Population increases will be insignificant due to weak economy and housing crisis. • Highest annual population increase in Idaho for the decade was 2.6% in 2006. 2/3rds of this increase was from migration. • In 2010 population in Idaho increased 1.3%. 1/4 % of this increase was from migration. • The January 2011 State of Idaho DFM economic forecast predicts employment will likely not reach it's 2007 level until 2014. 15 Change in Taxable Value to Change in Levy Rate $7,000,000,006 $6,000,000,000 $5,000,000,000 $4,000,000,000 $3,000,000,000 $2,000,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $0 EMICity Taxable Value —O—Levy Rete 0.006000000 0.005000000 0.004000000 0.003000000 0.002000000 0.001000000 0.000000000 Fy2003 FY2004 Fy2006 Fy2006 Fy2007 F y2008 Fy2009 Fy2010 Fy2017 Fat F y2p12 Impact of Changing Taxable Value Change in Taxable Value Taxable Value Base Tax Levy Rate Prior Year $4,632,728,973 $18,947,847 0.004090 Decrease 10% $4,169,456,076 $18,947,847 0.004544 Increase 10% $5,096,001,870 $18,947,847 0.003718 Increase 15% $5,327,638,319 $18,947,847 0.003557 • Highest percentage calendar year increase in Meridian taxable value increase of 34% from 2005 to 2006. • The biggest decrease (so far) in taxable value was 12.05% drop from 2008 to 2009. • In two years, from 2008 to 2010, taxable value dropped 23%. 16 FY2011 Property Tax Calculation updated 3/21/2011 FY2012 Computation of 3% budget increase highest of last 3 years budget $18,947,847 multiply by 3% $19,516,282 New Construction/Annex Standard 2011 new construction $87,827,174 2011 annexation $820,100 FY11 approved levy rate 0.004089997 Tax Calculation Tax Calculation new construction budget increase $359,213 annexation budget increase $3,354 foregone $20,393,849 Maximum Property Tax $19,878,849 Taxable Value $4,169,456,076 ,Levy Rate 0.004767732 Assumptions $27,678,849 Preliminary new construction numbers 3/21/2011 $28,393,849 Preliminary Annexation per City Clerk 0.004089997 Taxable value decreases 10% 0.0046660780 0.00407727 Property Tax Calculation Scenarios Based on 3/31/2011 Data Estimated Discretionary Revenue FY2012 17 FY2012 Estimates Standard FY2011 FY2011 Before Standard Forego 3% 004 Levy Rate wfforegone add Budgeted GF Revenue Replace/Enhance Tax Calculation Tax Calculation Tax Calculation Tax Calculation Property Tax $18,947,847 $19,878;849 $19,310,414 $17,000,000 $20,393,849 Other $7,838,426 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 Total Revenue $26,786,273 $27,678,849 $27,310,414 $25,000,000 $28,393,849 Levy Rate 0.004089997 0.0048024110 0.0046660780 0.00407727 0.0049307910 FY2012 Base from initial summary 3/31/2011 FY2011 GF Base $24,000,000 $25,000,000 $25,000,000 $25,000,000 $25,000,000 Available Revenue $2,786,273 $2,878,849 $2,310,414 $0 I $3,393,849 Property Tax Revenue Increase 5% 2% •10% 8% Note; In FY2011 all salary and wages changes are included in the base. In FY2012 the Police step plan moves and a 3% increase for fire has alreadybeen included in the base. 17 FY2012 Possible Discretionary Revenue Scenarios Nate; In FY2011 all salary and wages changes are included in the base. In FY2012 the Police step plan moves and a 3% increase for Fire has already been included in the base. Considerations ..... • Future approach to the 3% allowable property tax increase ? — Maintain future personnel and operations at rate of new construction increase (2% this year) ? Police Step Plan — Fire Contract - COPS Grant — Develop a trigger for taking some part or all of 3% ? — Not likely we will ever go back and reclaim foregone amounts. 11, FY2012 Estimates Standard FY2011 Standard Forego 3% .004 Levy Rate w/Fore one Available Revenue $2,786,273 $2,878,849 $2,310,414 $0 $3,393,849 Police Vehicle Replace .$325,500 -$240,000 -$240,000 -$240,000 -$240,000 Parks/Fire Vehicle Replace -$29,000 -$170,000 -$170,000 .$170,000 -$170,000 Move Police Step Ranges included in base -$170,000 -$170,000 .$170,000 .$170,000 3%Merit -Non Fire/Police included in base -$240,000 -$240,000 -$240,000 .$240,000 Computer Replace $200,400 -$100,000 .$100,000 -$100,000 .$100,000 Available Revenue $2,231,373 $1,958,849 $1,390,414 -$920,000 $2,473,849 Ada County Court ? ? ? ? COPS Grant End FY2014 $300,000+ $300,000+ $300,000+ $300,000+ Nate; In FY2011 all salary and wages changes are included in the base. In FY2012 the Police step plan moves and a 3% increase for Fire has already been included in the base. Considerations ..... • Future approach to the 3% allowable property tax increase ? — Maintain future personnel and operations at rate of new construction increase (2% this year) ? Police Step Plan — Fire Contract - COPS Grant — Develop a trigger for taking some part or all of 3% ? — Not likely we will ever go back and reclaim foregone amounts. 11, Thank -You Mayor —Driving our collaborative budget Process Council — Being educated participants in all stages of the budget development Department Directors - Working on a City budget, not just a department budget 19 .i. LL 4uj Ua .< U L �.{ . •� O O O U .-.�� O O _ .0 E O O O � H O O c 0)N O N cz LL O .iO U� OO +� -,- ,V :�O,cn UO O O O � (- O O U O x0 E 0 UOQ p cz 0 CD c: E L_ cm " C: (n 0E i 0 cz O L_ -�-� fn O O l- - U00 7-1--j-1--jN :'= o cz C:cn ^ `'– CV cm- - ' � O E N X=W c� " O L_ L_ CV O — 0 NCZ ' OO CZ 0 = r- 0 C— CD �U 0 C:cz wa)0w cz 0 cz CZ o Cn�.�L-_0 0 N 0ON�-0 0 to (Z O N cn N }' CZ O= p 0 �0 C�� O O O).�� ov�-0 of cz cz�Ua� Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: $B PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Continued from Apil 5, 2011 - Planning Departn Cost Share and License Agreements with Ada County Highway District (ACRD) for the Landscaping and Maintenance Associated with the Ustick, Duane to Campton and the Franklin, Ten Mile to Linder Roadway Projects MEETING NOTES C& qllqlll CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: $C PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Works: Surety Presentation MEETING NOTES -6 1 �L �) , J- �, t �� lp,��, CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS C E I DIAN�- Public IDAHO Works Department TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the City Council FROM: Tom Barry, Director of Public Works DATE: April 7, 2011 SUBJECT: Private Development Surety Evaluation and Proposal Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Mernberfe Keith Bird Brad Hoaglun Charles Rountree David Zaremba At the Council's request, the Public Works Department has evaluated its current private development surety program. Last fall I assembled a team of representatives from several PW divisions as well as staff from other departments to study the issues and concerns associated with sureties to make a recommendation to the City Council. Please recall that each of you was updated in December on our progress where we also presented our initial proposal. We subsequently developed a stakeholder focus group comprised of a number of developers with whom which we held three meetings to refine our proposal. We also consulted on multiple occasions with industry experts in the financial, legal, and insurance fields. Additionally, we conducted a regional benchmarking study to identify the surety practices of other municipalities and districts to strengthen further our proposal. As we have concluded our work, please find attached the framework proposal detailing the recommended changes to our surety program. I have also included two supplements for your information: 1) a description of the various types of sureties and their advantages/disadvantages; and 2) a guidance document on development compliance agreements. The team is scheduled to meet with you at the April 12th Council Workshop to review and discuss our work. Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns regarding this proposal in the interim. Thank you for your consideration and I and the team look forward to discussing this proposal with you next week. rr 2 Nom✓ � �'` �. �`v N � v M1 y' t .w - r Private Development Performance &Warranty Surety Proposal Meridian Public Works Department April 7, 2011 Existing Surety Process Background The current City of Meridian Ordinance governing the subject of Development Sureties is found in the Unified Development Code (Chapter 11, Title 5, Article C. Surety Agreements). In general, the purpose of this provision is to allow an owner/developer to post surety to guarantee the completion of all required improvements related to public life, safety and health, in order to obtain the City Engineer's endorsement on the final plat. This code also provides an avenue by which an owner/developer can post surety for non -life, non -safety and non -health related required improvements, such as landscaping, pressurized irrigation and fencing. In both cases, owner and developer can obtain the City Engineer's endorsement on the final plat once surety is posted. The City's endorsement on the final plat allows the owner/developer to proceed with obtaining the remaining endorsements and ultimately the recordation of their plat into Ada County Records and begin selling lots. Unified Development Code Section MCC 11 -5C -3D sets the amount of performance surety at one hundred ten percent (110%) of the cost of completing the required improvements although jurisdictions are not prohibited from requesting higher amounts. The Unified Development Code Section MCC 1I - 5C -3E also specifies the forms of surety that are appropriate. Currently, only an Irrevocable Letter of Credit or Cash surety is accepted by the City — bond sureties are not currently accepted. Additionally, while the City of Meridian requires a one year warranty period for completed infrastructure, it does not currently require a warranty surety to guarantee correction of warranty deficiencies. Need for Change There are two surety -related issues that need to be addressed for the City to adequately cover its potential risk relating to the construction and transfer of developer -constructed infrastructure. The first of the surety concerns is related to the performance surety amount and the second is related to the need to develop a warranty surety process and amount. Performance Surety: As stated above, the City's existing performance surety amount is 110% of the cost of completing the required improvements per UDC minimum requirements. City Staff has recently reevaluated the performance surety amount and has determined that 110% is an inadequate amount to cover the City's likely costs in order to satisfy a developer's obligations when they fail to perform. The current surety amount of 110% does not account for additional cost factors like Bid Variability, Economic/Inflationary Factors, Project Management/Administrative Costs, Rework Costs, Construction Contingencies or Project Timing costs associated with completion of the project. Warranty Surety: Additionally, the City of Meridian does not currently require the posting of a surety to cover the warranty period following the completion of construction. This has proven to be problematic and costly for the City. If the contractor or owner of a project is financially unable or unwilling to address warranty deficiencies, the City must currently fix the problems at its expense and use legal recourses in an attempt to recoup its costs. The Approach In light of these concerns, the Public Works Department assembled a cross -functional team of individuals from several divisions and departments including Engineering, Development Services, Business Operations, Finance, Construction, Inspection and Legal to review our current surety process and develop recommendations. Additionally, experts from the bonding, insurance and legal fields were consulted to gather information, answer questions, and provide recommendations to the group. The Department also developed a stakeholder focus group comprised of a number of developers with whom which several meetings were held to refine the proposal. Additionally, the Department conducted a regional benchmarking study to identify the surety practices of other municipalities and districts to further strengthen the proposal. Guiding Principles: The Team used guiding principles to help direct its actions and approach. These principles included the following: ■ Be open and transparent in developing the process, method used, and recommendations ■ Be fair and balanced in both the approach and outcome ■ Engage stakeholders in developing the path forward ■ Address the City's exposure and meet Developer requirements in the most optimal way possible ■ Ensure that all Developers are offered the same options to eliminate favoritism ■ Seek solutions that best fit any economy — whether growth, recession, or recovery ■ Use a simplified and streamlined approach ■ Use benchmark data from regional entities to compare and calibrate the approach taken ■ Align outcomes and recommendations with the City's mission, vision, and values Every effort was taken to ensure outcomes based on collaboration, communication, and coordination. The team met weekly to engage in process development, research, and analysis to develop its recommendation. Actions Taken: Several actions were taken by the Team in an effort to address the situations, issues, and problems. These additional actions included: ■ Reviewing statutes and policies to determine options available ■ Evaluating current and past development projects to assess the level of exposure to the City ■ Surveying general practices in regional cities and highway districts ■ Evaluating both current and future conditions ■ Defining the surety process for construction and non -construction scenarios ■ Conduction communication sessions with Council members to get their input ■ Conduction multiple focus group sessions with the developing community ■ Engaging Subject Matter Experts in the legal, financial, and insurance industries The City's Engineering Division also conducted a survey of 25 entities comprised of 19 regional cities, 5 highway districts, and 1 sewer district (see Exhibit A). Conclusions of that study are as follows: "._,.5io 71.x:..11 , vL!Jnlil �'_ ".v if ,inti, '-tiret� t c )F a�ai Anrii �)1 I' 2 of 4 ■ 21 entities require a Warranty Surety/Bond ranging from 10% to 50% ■ The regional average of the Warranty Surety/Bond amount is 34% ■ The regional average of the warranty period is 1.2 years ■ 11 entities require a Performance Surety/Bond in excess of 110%, ranging from 120% to 150% ■ The regional average for the Performance Surety/Bond is 127% The study covered 14 Idaho locations, 3 Oregon locations, 5 Washington locations, and 3 Utah locations. These locations ranged from just under 10,000 to over 200,000 in population. Proposed Surety Changes and Recommendations Warranty Surety (Developer Projects): A. Proposed Warranty Surety Requirements 1. Require 24 -month warranty period (See Exhibit B) 2. Conduct warranty inspections 3. Add cost of warranty inspection to initial inspection fees 4. Require a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of total construction costs 5. Allow the following surety options: warranty bond, letter of credit, cash, or cash equivalent Warranty Surety (City Projects): A. Unlike private projects, on publically owned and managed projects the City requires a Performance Bond (required for all City projects via the Construction Contract). This is not a cash equivalent surety, it is an actual bond. However, Staff will need to extend the warranty time period from 12 months to 24 months on public utility projects to comport with the privately constructed infrastructure warranty period recommended above. Performance Surety: A. Proposed Performance Surety Requirements 1. Increase amount from 110% to 125% a. Surety amount is based on the engineer's estimate 2. Allow the following surety options: performance bond (automatically includes warranty coverage), letter of credit, cash, or cash equivalent The following exhibits provide additional detail and information that formed the basis of the above recommendations: A. Supporting Documentation and Concepts 1. Exhibit A: Benchmarking Survey 2. Exhibit B: Construction Warranty Period Timeline 3. Exhibit C: Calculations, Basis for Warranty and Performance Sureties 4. Exhibit D: Estimated Premium Costs for Bond Options 5. Exhibit E: Proposed Surety Process for Private Development Projects Conclusion The City of Meridian currently requires performance sureties for developer projects. However, the surety amount required is inadequate to cover all costs that could result if the City were required to cash the surety and construct the project on its own. Therefore, a 15 percentage point increase in the overall cost of the performance surety is recommended to protect the City against unplanned and unbudgeted expenses. Currently, the City of Meridian does not require a warranty surety. It has become apparent, due to recent events and the current economy, that the absence of a warranty surety leaves the City exposed to the cost of making infrastructure repairs even though the project may be under warranty. The adoption of the warranty surety process outlined above would protect the City against unplanned and unbudgeted expenses. It would also provide a means to insure that the cost of private development is born by those benefiting from or requiring the development. In addition, it would help protect subsequent property owners from the cost and delays that can occur from resolving warranty related issues. Next Steps If the recommendations made are supported, then the following next steps are recommended: ■ Direct Staff to revise/create ordinance(s) and fee schedules enabling the recommendations presented ■ Update Development Agreement Templates ■ Revise the Meridian Supplemental Specifications (MSS) ■ Update Public Works Contract Documents ■ Modify Public Works bid specs and other applicable documents to include a 2 -year warranty ■ Develop a surety agreement template for use in private development projects 1,"1 U " r.. 2 N L N 0 ti N T" L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L • N N O O N O N N O O N N N O N N N O N N N OL N N N w, L W >1 >% >1 i >1 >� >1 >> >1 >, >, >1 >, >1 >1 >+ >+ >1 >1 >1 \ >1 >1 >+ a N .- r �- N r N r- � N �- C O O N m U N O U N ° O O L O o o O O C O O O O •� O O O O O O O O A �% 0 0 0 0 O N to 0 0 O O to O O 0 l0 0 0 O to t0 L L _ 1-0 3 = O O O p O CO) i z Z Z Z a -a -a a - V c NN N a) N C O O co o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 D o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 m E — O Lo Lo Lo Lo 0 S O' O to O s 0 D- 0 0 O O O O O to s to O o i�' � N N N N � � � � m O N N O N LO 0 m N Q N B O d O O O O O m a N z z z z z a d N r V U _ U C 'L •C L N a+ � N t0 U •L Q D U L Q L r in ST Q`u Y�I u N +� V a L -Q ui E C f6 ca a� — o m U- U- O C L O O -C 0)> O o E O C m i Q O T U) N 0 N 0� N tn O O C C 3 L N +J 3: SL- L a QUz0zmzUY��2m020v)-imm�uiin o3: N L N 0 ti N T" CL cn ■ CL 0 0. ■ CL CD CL 0 CL ■ 0 L. 6 ■ c,s a N 4 C O O (n * o � 00 CU - c �' o\\ o o o o U E o m ca c LO 0 LO � o a- 0 00 _C cu ca Cl)�, Lo W ui C N 0 0 a) (Q r dj p } O UQ - C O ® C? 0 C Q� — C— 0 11 Efl O O C it p cUj > 0 Q N E -00U O C 0 O ' 0 0 0 cn Q ®� ea Q C j O� (A a 0_0 0 O� C 0 0 OCD tiS C p O O C N O+. O O� N M 0 GJ E � o N E � C O O FL O � C O� Lo N Efl C E9 (n C Q. O CU MU O N C (0 f c>3 C U N N II O O II 69 to O U �• U ca N II O UJ 0 m � o` ° cEUC�I— cu :Q a - (D O SP3 _ m o m g co o " O - C N p a) O> Q LU CZ o0 O> C3 p C � C Ncn � W W m ) > W d cNa� d19 °�ca Q UJ 0 o I? cn cis ■ ■ ■ ■ . ■ W f- o M CL 4) 0 ;av p to o 0 Co 0 N C 0 °? (o N N O V (B 0 (13 C) ® O II L Ab ® -p co -o C O O C O o n E o U O N > E E E O E X U cn >+ a'' 60- II y C + .. Q Q Q¢ U ca i1i o co U _ � U o 0 C c' U o O O o U O N d' X cn E m 0 M 0 i U ca 0 O U O O O O U O 0 Q >% 0 o 0 0 o LX) o + 0 O � 0 N 00 V U a� Q In 14-) Lo 0 C N C> d} N O 4) `- X U m p 0 sz o m 69- 0 a cf} 0 LO i O ( U U C U G> N C C) Q- O C II C >, pc U E �, O C LoE —0 U I� C N (0 L O N i M CD1 Q o C N C) U U C T s - p CLL 0 C O C O C O + N 4BS 11) C O E CO + U o N 0 N p 0 ` O o lei C) o c C C C C c o X E� �'o O s� cn cu - ca C 6 C O' >,co w - O rn O E U_ O C O tn II .V O U E co L U L�d� i E L(n O ® N C C O cn C O S? 0)(D 0 0 cB C N V) (D� O N CO �p a>' O M °W Z U).0 �LLICL - O m ® W d U U ( > - p U O O �-2 (D O Q ■ ■ ■ is O 0 U 4- U ■ ■ ■ ■ > Z ■ U N O Q. O i m L N U E .E 0 I— CL CL .a ca N W n a 4) 0 Q M E o W o (D C 0) M cu L � 0 L a.,.. � o p o � ,0 N o O O O O O O O 60- 601 6c)- 6c)- 69- 60- U U (f)- 60, 61), ()D- 60- 60- d tm pO L J N O O O LO O O p i J Or N O O O O LO O O > O r r N Q d O O O O O IM --� C 0 O O O O O O O O O ,� 0 CD � co O CA L tq 61) 61-> 64 6 N Q O 0 0 0 O y, ON O CD CD C O 00 O O O i. a O 60- r N M 69- O r Nt O � CO � �— � _O > O O o O O O O O O C) 0 0 o O O C O Or O O O O CD O m oor_ LO N LO r r N 0 nj co LO N N r Li) N r - M � N O N r..r N O N C) 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 o 0 O O p E o LO o o LO C L 0 r N LSA r- 0 L o o Lor) o Lon O O CL r 6c)- N 60-64 LO I` � E N 0 N T L I O m 0 LO O L N N N N N N N o O r O r O r O r O r O r p U (f)- 60, 61), ()D- 60- 60- d N p i J Or N O O O O LO O O d r r N > O Q O Ln o LO LO r- O O 0) N N rV r coNfl N E O O OO O O i O CA Cr0 a r Nt O � CO � �— � d m > o O O O O O o r_ oor_ LO V) o� CD o O m nj co LO N N r Li) N r - M � N LO N T N O +r o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 E d o o Lor) o Lon O O >O r 6c)- N 60-64 LO I` � ^L ii E Irk I" .X U- 0 as a . cl 2E LEO) t LL (D 0 a) CL , 0 (D C, 0 (D w a)o: CL a, > - > > I CL c > N 2 2 1 0 CL m w CL 11 C E E EL < F •c 0 to O 0) o2 4.) -- aW) (D C- Nco a) Co N m3 U) co 06 cc z, -0 16 C) Z 2 C: 0 L) 2i r- 0 CL (L) CY CO cu 0 CL CO co . 0 '6- > x z LU ;t_ L) 70 2 z a) < LUa- :>: U) CL a) O CL < C) 0 C)- (D Eo 'a .0 a) -MO 0 - 0 (D c -R I.r CL0 a) CL 0 < C ol < a) t- 0 0 N 0 0 2 Cl) cOa cc 0 T E0 a) N C C13 cu C, < 0 0 a) (DL � =1 C L) 2 E E E C, > 0 0 C) _0 (D a) L) E C (D E m 0 c c �5 > -0 O CL (D 0 t c (D 2 c '0 = t5 rz- E! C" > a) 0 (V of L o 0 o 16.9 Z ZY 0co E m.2�, a- a) if c 0 co LL co r_ E 0-0 E 0 < 72 'r; o -po. a) c-, > 13 co a) 2 -No- (D c-. E 0 L) 0 2 00 ig .s >0 0-4-0 O(_ 0 0 0 E L) 0 _j O) o E L) 0 CL 0 '= a) L) a) U) Types of Guarantees Most frequently, the owner/developer will select one of the following forms to guarantee completion of the improvements: 1. Corporate surety bonds 2. Irrevocable letters of credit issued by a financial institution, e.g. bank 3. Certificates of deposit (CDs) 4. Other, such as cash, certified/cashiers check or money order 5. Tripartite agreement Pros and Cons Corporate surety bonds are far and away the most preferred option for most owner/developers when you consider the potential disadvantages of the alternative guarantee forms. Irrevocable Letter of Credit (ILOC): To secure an ILOC, the owner/developer typically encumbers a portion of its line of credit for a fee. The security for the ILOC may be funds on deposit at the bank with their immediate right of set-off (seizure). If the bank elects not to renew the ILOC, the public agency would have the right to promptly draw down on the full amount of the ILOC. Such a drawdown of the ILOC will create a loan, which the bank could promptly call for immediate repayment. • The governmental entity holding the ILOC has the right to draw on the ILOC anytime they believe there is a breach of the owner's obligations and the owner would have little or no opportunity to stop the drawdown. The ILOC is strictly a financial instrument and the bank provides no prequalification services to assure the owner/developer has the capacity or experience to perform. Certificates of Deposit (CD): It is effectively a cash deposit that ties -up the owner/developer's capital, which normally can be deployed more productively. The CD is subject to forfeiture by the unilateral demand of the public body. For the public body accepting the CD as security, it provides no prequalification benefits. In addition, it saddles the public body with administrative burdens to make sure they accepted a CD that was in proper -assignable form, that they in fact had unequivocal authority to draw down on the CD, that they don't release it until all possibility of nonperformance had passed, and that they hold the instrument in safekeeping and properly return it to the owner/developer. Other Security (such as cash): This option has many of the same concerns as with CDs. In addition, the public agency would have to make some determination that the cash being deposited was "legitimate" and not subject to possible bankruptcy preference rules. Tripartite Agreement: These agreements (used infrequently) may involve set-aside letters from a bank, special escrow accounts, and/or fund controls. Tripartite agreements typically place disbursement of the construction funds under the direct control of the governmental agency. Disbursement of monies may be delayed by concerns about the value of completed work or the adequacy of monies to complete the improvements and provide the required maintenance. Tripartite agreements are not really performance guarantees but rather control over a fund of monies that may not be adequate to pay for all the improvements. These type arrangements place significant additional administrative burden on the public agency and can create liabilities if the funds are not properly administered. Advantages of Bonds Corporate surety bonds generally have none of the disadvantages of the alternative guarantees referenced above and have the following distinct advantages. • Surety bonds provide prequalification of the owner/developer through the underwriting process. • Surety credit is unsecured and does not reduce or tie-up the owner/developer's source of funding. • Surety's claim department will work to facilitate a resolution of any problem and not merely to forfeit the owner/developer's security. ■ Corporate surety bonds typically provide the public agency with a 100 percent performance, 100 percent payment, and 1 -year maintenance bond. ■ Irrespective of how much the owner/developer may have spent to complete the improvements up to the time of default, the full amount of the bonds are available to complete the work. Important Distinction The key difference between subdivision bonds, often also referred to as site improvement bonds, plat bonds, completion bonds, or simply performance bonds from regular contract performance bonds is that the owner/developer (the Principal) has to pay the cost of building the bonded improvements rather than the public agency (the Obligee). This is also an important point to remember if a general contractor should agree to secure/post the subdivision bonds on behalf of the owner/developer. Normally, the general contractor has the contractual right to stop work if the owner does not pay him. However, if the general contractor posts the improvement bonds in favor of the public agency, the general contractor is obligated to complete the improvements and pay all the bills irrespective of whether the owner/developer paid him. Therefore, a general contractor should generally avoid posting such bonds on behalf of the owner/developer or seek advice from their legal counsel on how best to protect him or herself. Not All Sureties Write Subdivision Bonds Subdivision/improvement bonds are a type of bond that not all surety companies want to write. The reasons for avoiding this class vary. Some bonding companies lack the familiarity or underwriting expertise. Some have had poor experience in the past and have found that these bonds can have a very long lifespan. Some are uncomfortable with developers whose financials may show considerable leverage (debt) and whose valuation of land and developed properties are subject to wide market fluctuations. Nonetheless, over time the surety industry has reported favorable underwriting results for those companies who properly underwrite this class of business. General Underwriting When an owner/developer applies for surety credit, the surety underwriter will begin by developing the usual background and financial information to make a general assessment of the owner/developer's capacity/experience, their credit/financial and their character. They should be prepared to provide three fiscal year end financial reports on their operations, concurrent personal financial statement on all owners, resumes on key people, list of completed projects, information on banking relationships, business continuity plans, and copies of any trust, partnership, or operating agreements. Most surety companies will also have their own application form, which may ask other specific information. Once the bond underwriter is comfortable with the account in general, they will then underwrite each subdivision bond request. Specific Bond Underwriting The underwriter will require information such as the scope of the improvements to be made, an estimate of the cost to complete the work, and information about where the money to pay for the work is going to come from. Scope of Work. The subdivision/improvement bond guarantees the completion of specified improvements such as grading, storm drains, utilities, curbs and gutters, streets, sidewalks. Therefore, the underwriter will want details on the work or scope of the improvements to be installed. This information will normally be spelled out in the subdivision/improvement agreement that the owner/developer signs with the public agency. When will the work start and be completed? What is the estimated cost of the improvements and the amount of the bonds? Usually engineer worksheets are available that outline the cost estimates including how the amount of the bond(s) was established. The public body will generally include some cushion or "fudge" factor to allow for possible escalation in the cost to complete the work. This increase factor is not entirely unreasonable because experience has shown that sometimes the improvements are not completed within the original time frame and the ultimate cost months or years later could be greater. Cost of Work. The underwriter will also want some confirmation of the owner/developer's estimate of cost to complete. The preferred method is for the developer to have firm bids or signed contracts from trade contractors to complete the work. Depending on the value of the work and/or time to complete, the surety may want the owner to secure performance and payment bonds from the trade contractor(s) to assure satisfactory performance. At first blush this may seem like double bonding but the bonds from the trade contractors run in favor of the owner/developer and not the public agency. Since the owner is obligated to complete the improvements, it is really in the owner's interest to have this guarantee or they may find that they have to hire someone else to complete the work for more money. Funding Source. Because the owner/developer is responsible for paying the cost of all the bonded improvements, a major underwriting concern/question is where is the money to pay for the work? The necessary funds should be set aside under an arrangement whereby they can only be used to pay for the improvements as work progresses. This can be accomplished under an escrow agreement with a lender or title company. Most often, however, the owner/developer will have secured a development loan for the overall project. The surety will then want to obtain a set-aside letter from the lender whereby an amount sufficient to cover the cost of the bonded improvements will be irrevocably set aside and held in trust for the benefit of the surety. It effectively carves out a portion of the development loan to pay for the bonded improvements. The surety will most likely have their own set-aside form. EX UUTIVE SUNiNIARY All public entities nse surety bonds for one purpose or another. They are a universal guarantee for the performance of public works contracts. They are the accepted means of securing snpply contracts for everything from electrical power to catering services. Snrety bonds guarantee that abandoned oil wells will be pingged. public officials are regnired to have a bond to assure the faithful exeeution of their duties. And, in many places, a surety bond is still required to pull a building permit Given the widespread nse of sorety bonds, it is cnrions that they are sometimes resisted as the primary form of security for publie improvements related to the subdivision of land. The obligations associated with this process are, by their very natare, particularly well spited for the use of surety bonds, and the expertise of the surety companies that stand behind them. '" Bother it is a bond or a letter of credit, a frequent problem is a misumleistanding of the role the security instrument plays in the regulation of land development Not that the public officials involved in planning, engineering and mapping an orderly expansion their comninnity do not appreciate Clio importance of the security, hilt in many regions growth has growth has been so explosive, and public resources so overwhelmed that the structure of development regulation is sometimes compromised by the pace of the [process. While this article is intended to familiarize the public official with the benefits of snrety bonds, this is by no means its only purpose. In our experience and this experience has been considerable— charity in the conditions that will be required of the developer is the best means of avoiding prolonged controversy daring both the approval process and the construction of the impro venie tits. TOPIC SUN AURY Above all, our objective is to illustrate the importance of a comprehensive program for development compliance. GVe achieve this by focusing on key elements of development regulation. Development Compliance Agreements The standard means of defining the developer's obligation to construct pablic improvements is through a development compliance agreement. The appendix contains two sample agreements. One is substantially a form used extensive[}' in the Pacific Northwest The second is a sample of the more detailed agreements common to California. The Statutory Program A compliance agreement has many advantages, but some cities prefer to tie the security directly to the conditions set forth on the approved map or, in some instances, the. conditions may be set out in a permit or resolution for the project As a result, the obligations secured by the developer are sometimes ambignons. h'o• the city that prefers tying the security directly to the conditions, it is essential that clear and comprehensive regulations be adopter[. The appendix contains a model ordinance that is exemplary for its clarity and thoroughness. Special Purpose Bond Fold The bond form is a critical element of the development compliance agreement The obligation of the surety company is largely dettned by this document and the nnigne conditions inherent in the subdivision process call for a form manuscripted especially for this purpose. A model form used by many cities is included in the appendix. The key elements of the form are also covered in the text of this article. Surety Company Qualifications A surety bond is only as good as the company that stands behind it Thee bond should be written by a company that has been licensed by the state's department of insurance to insure that it has met all capital and surplus requirements. There are a number of resources that provide underwriting evaluations of those companies that write snrety bonds. These include ratings furnished by the United States Treasnry Department and A.1A. Best Company. The role of reinsurance is also an important factor in building the capacity of a snrety company. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance DEVELOPMENT COMPLIAINChi A(=REL\II YES As it' the platting process isn't bad enough, once the snbdivision is recorded, the cite faces the tash of malting sure the public improvements necessary to serve a new addition to the eoi n innity am installed and functioning. Tbese improvements will ultimately be dedicated to the city and it becomes the city's responsibility to maintain them in perpet tity. The last thing the cite needs is a brealudown in the development process that derives it with a nelvorh of open ti•encbes, nests of e_xposed rebar, and impaved roads to nowhere. To minimize the potential for sncb failtires, most cities require some form of seenrity for the u constrction of the pnblic improvements. The method used to seenre tine improvements can va r.N. But whether the city is holding a surety boil or sitting on it deposit of hard cash, the secluity is only as effective as the city's ability to define the time and manner in wbich the improvenrenis will be carried ont In most places, the obligations of the developer are set ont in a contract. Variously referred to as subdivision i iiiprovemell t agreements, develop -meat compliance agreements or development improvement agreements, these Contracts cover the public improvements that are to be constricted by the developer and conveniently serve its the contract for which the seenrity is applied. As suggested by the sample agreements included in the appendix, compliance contracts can be simple or elaborate. The detail of the compliance contract is a matter of locatl concern, but it should, at minis nun, cover the following points: ® Incorporation of the conditions ani(] all approved plans for the subdivision. ® A schedule for completion, with provisions for the approval of extensions. The right of the cite to `Mahe over and complete the iniprovenents" in tine event of default. In practiea] terms this is a precursor to calling upon the suet }• or other• secnritY deposited by the developer. US IMAJOVIM"! ; • A reliable procedure for the approval of the iniprovements and the release of tliv secarity. A standard for nnaintenance and war-�antiy reg siren cents. THE STIVI'UTOPY PRO(MAII Although the compliance contract has many advantiiges, it is not runtsual for the developers obligations to be defined by an ordinance, a resolution approving the plat, or perhaps a simple list of, conditions appearing on a perch The developer nny be given a letter setting forth the amount and acceptable t.)Znes of secrarity for the improvements, which is presented to the surety underwriter or Ninher, who selects the instrument used to secnre the obligations. A bond or letter of credit may be pilled from the shelf of generic forms, and Tach appropriate reference to the conditions it is snpposed to guaranty. And even when the conditions are referenced, the ordinance or resolntion itself often lacks the specificity necessary to efficiently address site]) issues as timely performance or tic standards for completed work. Clarity in the conditions imposed on the developer is crucial to a successful subdivision program. hit order to be effective and properly, secured, it is f'unda inentad that ordinances, or resolutions cover ar subdivision's schedule and methods with the same thoroughness as a well drafted compliance contract The nnodel ordinance appeauing in the appendix provides a good illustration of how these details can be addressed. SE,(VINTY FOR `l'H hi IIIPROVEMENTI S Surety bonds are, by far, the nmst, prevalent form of secnu•ity for the installation of public improvenients. In ni.my regions, particularly those which have experienced unprecedented growth, sneb as California, Washington and Nevada, bonds have become the dominant and preferred fornn of security. The reasons for this preference become apparent when contrasted with other fornns of secul•i tv. Most statnrtes, such as Oregon Revised Statantes §92.090(4)(b), allow for ,.a bond, il-revocable letter of credit, contract or other assurance by fhe subdivider." The California _llanp A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance Act evvii allows for it deed of trust, so long as it is in first position and held only until the developer secures coustructiorn financing, at which time it is replaced by it bond. Atleast one cite, Oro Valle)" Arizona, places the entire project in escrow until the improvemernts are accepted. In NV7i('hita, Eausas, and nuoiy smrouuding coluuiimities, the improvements are funded by the creation of a Special assessment district, and constructed under a. public works couutract. Ot' course, the developer nmst post it bond to guaruuty the pa.vmeat of the assessments. Despite the arra.)- of alternatives, most cities recognize only three: bonds, cash or cash equivalents. Aid for some cities, cash or cash equivalents "Ire the preferred, if' not required, methods of secrnrity for public improvemmilts. In the event of a problem, the rnegotiation of a letter of credit or the trinisfer of funds from an escrow account seems like it simple solution. But cash alone is not always the most efficient way to remedy is default and, under certain civel uustances, may not even be available. Escrowed accounts call be especially vnlnerable. -When the 15mds are used to both secure and finance the improvements, any significant change in couditious can ral)AY deplete the account, Even it' the city has authority over the disbuulement of the fmids', rigid control accomplishes little more than accelerating a default. ll'heu the developer runs out of money, effectively, so does the city. Ease of negotiation is prominently cited for the prefercntial use of a standby letter of credit. In most cases, a draw oil tit(, letter of cre('lit is conditioned only upon a precise statement that the tcwws of the agreement hlive been N iolatcd and the fends are regunired to meet the developer's obligations. Backs are rarely concerted with the substance of the statement. There are, however, some excep-times. All implicit condition for the negotiation of a letter of credit is a, warraity that the statement is true cued the fends will be used for their intended purpose. 11'liere the grounds for the draw are legitimately contested, the developer ma,° m copel a retin•n of the funds or, in extreme cases, negotiation of the letterrnay be enjoined. Evern when there is no controversy, the letter of credit yields only money. It is the cite that roust deal with the daluotiug tush of completing the project. With it sobdivision improvement bond the cit;}- can avoid of these hazards, and receive seem ity that is superior to a mere source of Bids. Underwritiu,t the develww] R71ien cash or a letter of credit is used to seeure pubic improvements the issuer is concerned solely with the developer's abilit,v to provide sunfficieut security to qualify for it loan. With .0 bond, however, the qualifications of the developer are the most importaait. consideration for the sun ety. The key objective of miy surety is to minimize the prospect of failure. This is achieved through a vigorous mxlervriting evaluation of the developer's ability to fulfill the obligations for which the bond is issued. And v\,]tile the fimuicial condition of the developer is certainly important, it is not the surety's only underwriting consideration. The underwriter also exanuirnes the developer's capability tbrough a comprehensive assessment of the developer's business structin•e, irntegrity, and a chi evemeu ts. Experience and expertise of the surety The primary function of security for public improvements is to minimize the prospect of default, In theory, the risk of forfeiture will motivate the developer to move forward with the improvements, regardless of declining rnarliet conditions or unexpected cost overruns. In rcalit;v, there will be failmrs. Il'hen they h,ippen, the surety is accustomed to dealing with issues of default. A responsible surety lnvvides the experience and expertise necessn•y to take over perforularnce or redder the assistanice the developer needs to deliver the imin•ovenients. A subdivision bond is reliable security The aulournt (referred to as it "penalty") of it surety bond is set ill the same uiaamer as other forms of wcmity. It includes the figures taken from the engineers estimate rend aauy contingencies that play be required by the city. licdnctiou of the bond penalty is, however, entirely discretiomay. Unlike other Corms of security, the bond peoa.lty remains static throughout the bond's initial term (usually two Years). Thereafter, the developer nr,I), ask for a rethution to increase his bonding capacity, but iuuN.y adjustauent that is made need not correspond to the work completed. Bather, the penalty maybe adjusted to corvespornd with the work remaining, providing the city with complete assurance that, the secuu•ity will be adegn"ite to cover the obligations of the developer. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance SPECLU, PURPOSE BOND l ON -Al Special ptuhose bonds are critical to an effective program. Dne to the unique conditions inherent in the subdivision process, the statutory forms commonly used for pnblic works contracts are consistently inappropriatc for this porpose. The city has the authority to manuscript its own bowl, and regnwc that all bonds submitted conform to the approved format. This is often accomplished by inducting the rig's bond form as an addendum to the development compliance contract. While the city has considerable discretion in creating its bond, the form should not become so onerous that a responsible surety company must decline to write. it, The appendix includes a form that has been adopted by many cines. This form is specifically tailored to cover the public improvements required tinder a compliance contract: The penal sum of the bond is determined by the criteria established b.), the City. Iu most cases, the penal sum is 110% of the estimates provided by the developer's civil engineer. This is generally found to be adequate to cover con till gencies or escalations in price that may occur during the coarse of construction. ® The bond form incorporates the subdivision improvement agreement which, in most cases, specifics the standards aid schedtile for the construction of the improvements. • The bond, by its terms, is a continning obligation It remains in effect until the improvements have been accepted and the bond formally released by the city. ® Once the improvements have been accepted, the bond automatically provides for a. warranty period of one year, based upon ten percent of the original penal sum. ® This form also includes appropriate waivers relating to any extension of the subdivision agreement, the recovery of costs and fees in the event of litigation and the surety's waiver of any defenses relating to the incapacity of the principal. ® Although this form does not make reference to express statutory anthoritygoverning its interpret.Ldon, where the city has enacted its own development regnlations, these regulations can be incorporated into the. form. SUlil+TY CODIPANY 0U:A1,1Fl('AT10NS There are many fine companies that provide the surety bonds necessary to secure both the construction of pnhlic inyn•oveuneuts and the perforrmnnce of pnhlic works conh•acts. Surety bonds are custounrrily delivered through local insurance agents, who are not only familiar with their accomtts, but work hard to insure that bonds are naderwritten by reputable and fiscally sound itl6urMutee companies. 'Neve rill no discussion about surety bonds is complete without some mention of the resources by vvbicb the city can independently verify the qualifications of an insurance company. The assessment of a, company's qualification, is uteasured by more than its financial stature. Most nta.jor insurance companies write some surety, but this may represent only a small fraction of their business. There are also a uantber of companies that either specialize exclusively in surety bonds, or concentrate heavily in this market. While such companies ntay not represent a monolithic presence in the world of insura.uce, they do provide more than adequate capacity for the bonds they write. Ultimately, a surety should be evaluated in a manner comtneusnrate with its obtigatious under the bond. Durst be admitted in the State Statutes relating to surety hoods often specify that the bond is to be furnished by an "admitted" surety company. Surety bonds are classified as a fortis of property and casualty insurance, and an admitted" surety company connotes a, company that has uret the statutory and financial requirements to engage in the business of surety insurance iu the state in which Cite bond is issued. This is the foremost criterion for the qualification of a, stirety company. By confirming that the surety for a boil([ is an admitted insurance company, the city is assured that it has met with all capital and Surplus requireutents of the state's insurance regnlations, and is subject to the regulatory authority of the state's insurance co mnnssi o tier. Treasury List The most wide Ly recognized rating system for surety companies is provided by the United States Treasury Department. Ia order to fnrttislr a bond to any agency of the Vederal Government, a. snrety company mast be certified by the Treasnr;v Department and enrolled as an acceptable surety on Circular 570 conuuonly referred to as the 'I`reasur.y List. 4 A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance The I)-easury conducts an annual financial examination of approved companies and assigns an underwriting limitation. This limitation is expressed as a specific dollar anount and applies to individual bonds issued for government contracts. All surety companies and reinsurance companies appearing on the 'IS-easu•y List must also furnish the depa-tnnent with quarterly financial statennents to demonstrate that tbey lane sufficient capital to maintain their underwriting linni tatioll. The cover letter for the most current issue of Circular 570 is included in file appendix. The list of approved companies, with their underwriting authority, call be accessed at the Treasury's website: www.fins.treas.�ov/c570/c570.htanl. The Role of Reinsurance As stated in Circular 570, the uinderwriting limitation appearing on the Treasnry List does not Limit the anount of a bond a company can write. "Companies are allowed to write bonds with a penal sum over their nuderw iting limitation as long as they protect the excess amount ln*h reiusnrallce. Reinsurance is, by definition, insurance for insiu•ance companies. It is the method by which in insurance company gains financial capacity and protects itself against catastrophic loss. Nearly all nnsunUlce collnpanies carry some fon'ln of reinsuu•ance. Knowledge of the quality and extent of this coverage can be a superior means of evaluating the quality of a surety bond. A.111. Best Ratings Those companies that offer surety bonds, either as one of their malny lines of insill-ance products, or as their area of specialization, axe rated by the A.Al. Best C'ounpany. A.Dl. Best is the preeminent rating bnreau for the insurance imhrstry. It conducts individual evaluations of companies engaged in all lines of insurance and assigns a grade composed of two elements, the company's gnality and financial grouping. A guide to the ratings assigned by A.M. Best is included in the appendix. CONCLUSION A development compliance contract can play a. vital role in creating an effective progran for subdivision regulation. The seenrity used to gnaranty the installation of public improvements is applied to that agreement, and becomes snbjcct to its terms and conditions. N11here a surety bond is used to secnre the improvennents, a. special purpose foivn should be adopted by the city. That form should be required, in tandem, with its approved development compliance contract The qualifications of the surety cc» npany sbonld also be considered. Foremost, any surety posting a. bond with the cite should be properly licensed to engage in the business of insurance, with underwi-iting limitations cornnnensurate nith its obligations ander the bond. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance APPENDIX CONTENTS ExNlit 7 A. (oug.Uxlice Contract -----------------'---------. Tl Comp] ilice Contract (long fm`n) -----------------------. 0 C Model Ord xnn,, --'--------'----------_------ /f D. BnoJ Fxn` ----'_------------------------- lY E. (ln,do,570 ........ 10 F. 0uid,|oA.8iBest Bxtbig ................................................................................... 20 6 6s^nw41/|Bn,in/mi>,Seci/rSlibdi6si'mCompliance COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT his Agreement, made and entered into this day of , by and between the City of a Alnni(,ilrIl Corporation of hereinafter referred to as CITY, and , hereinafter referred tons SUBDIVIDER and hereinafter referred to as OWNER. VTI`NESSETH AVIIERI+SAS, SUBDIVIDER has petitioned the CITY to accept rind file a subdivision plat known as , located in the C'itY of ; and WHEREAS, the City Development Code, Section andapplicable ordinances and laws of the CITY require that the 01111 ;R execnnte and file with the CITY aan agreenjent, providing for, among other things, the period within ,)which all required improweunents shall be made within said subdivision and that. if such work is not completed Mthin the period specified, the CITY niaY concplete the same and recover the faall cost and expense thereof from the O\VNER; and WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to acceptance and filing of said subdivision plat upon tine execution of this Agreeineut and connplia nce by the SUBDIVIDES and OAVNEH with the provisions of the City Pn1n1iC Wonlcs ('onstn•nction ('ode and Development Code. IN CONSIDERA`T'ION of the nnrtacal promises, covenants and agreements of the parties, it is agreed as fol I ows: 1. The SUBDIVIDER aand ONV'NEE agree to install all of the required public improvennents as, provided in the Cit), Public Works Construction Code and Developnnent ('ode and bind themselves to use such materials and to so coustaoct all of the innprovcnrents according to CITY standards is defined b*v the applicable ordinances, rules anul regulations of the CITY, and as shown on [lie approved subdivision plat. 2. The S11I3DIV'IDER and OWNEE agree to restore atno cost, to the CJTY any uoncunenterected or used as a survey- marker or bonndarY of ally tract., plat or parcel of hand which nnonnncvnt is broken down, damaged, obliterated, removed or destroyed, ,)whether willfully or not, by the SUBDIVIDER, OWNER, or the agents, ennplo.yces or contractors of the SUBDIh1DE11 or OAA7NER. 3. The SII111)IVIDEI3 and 0NNINT ;R agree that all of said pnIll ic intIroweunents sl a11 be completed on or before the dar of and that the SLTI3DI VIDER and OWNEE will correct, repair and maintain all such innprovennentsfronn an,° defects, onnissionns or irregularities in the consta•nction, nlaterials or wmlc thereof for a period of one (1) calendar •ear from the date of acceptance of such ingn-ovemb ents ' resolution of the C'it,,v Council. The SUBDIVIDER and O�l'N'E13 agree that in case tile *v shall abaudon the work, fail to make satisfactol-Y progress on the work, or fail to complete the nvork by the date specified, the CITY play caaise the work to be connpleted byanother pen5on under contract, b}- its own forces, or both. The SIJBlll1\rIDER and OWNER shall be jointl*N• and severable liable to the CITY for aunY and all loss and daunage from such abandonment or failure, either from the greater expense of so connplet.ing or repairing fanpty or damaged work, orfronl any other related cause. 1. Upon execution of this Agreement, the SUBDIVIDER or OWNEE shall deliver to CITY written assurance (Escrow Agreenneut in Lien of Corporate Surety Bond, Corporate Surety Bond or cash deposit) for the purpose of assnu-ing SUl3DIVIDER'S and MAINER'S full and faithful completion of the public iugrovennents within said Snbdiwision. The amount of tine written assurance shall he the surnn of $ The aonount of such written assnraaaces i5 based capon an estinnate of the cost of completing the required improwennents. CITY'S acceptauee of such assurance shall not be cousta•ned as a limitation on the annonut which nnaly he spent. on connpletion of required innprovenuents. n. Atsuch time as all required public inclwoveuents, (escepf sidevallis and ill iscelL•uaeous inaprovennents), within the Subdivision have been completed in accordance with the CITY'S requirements, the SUBDIVIDER or OWNER shall notif'v the CITY of the readiness for final inspection. Upon cert ficaticnn b,• tic Citi' Engineer that all requirements of the CJTY have beer met and CITY accepts finch u innproveuvts, till, S113DIVIDEE or OIVNER will subunit to the CITY a Maintenance Bond in forms approved by the CITY in the suns of b to provide for correction of anY defective nraterials or A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance workmanship in such public improvements for a period of one (1) year after final acceptance, as defined in the Cite Public Works Cbnstrnetion Code. For purposes of this Agreement, miscellaneous improvements shall be those on attached "Exhibit A." 6. The SUBDIVIDER and OWNER agree that. sidewalk and miscell,ureons public improvements within said Subdivision shall be completed not later thaii the day of . Upon execution of this Agreement, the SUBDIVIDER and OWNER shall deliver to the CITY written assurance (Escrow Agreement in Lien of Corj)orate Sm -et y Bond, Corporate Surety Bond or cash deposit) for the ))III -pose of assuring SU13DIlIDER'S vxl 0��1�EB'S f5rll and f�aithfnl completion of the required sidewalk aild nriseellarneous public improvements within said Subdivision. The amount of the written assurance shall be the siun of $ 7. The CITE' agrees to accept the completed required subdivision improvements upon certification by the City Engineer: 1. That all required subdivision public improvements have been constnicted in accordance with the City Public Forks Construction Code; 2. That the SUMA-VIDER or OIVhTER has fulfilled the requirements of the City Development Code; and 3. That the SUBDIVIDER and OAlITER have provided written assurance for construction of sidelvalks and niiseellaneons poblie improvements as herein above provided. Such certification is not intended to relieve SUBDIVIDER or ONVINER or arty contractor or material supplier of their responsibility for any defects in materials or workmanship of such improvements. 8. In construing this Agreement, it is inulerstood that either party may be more thvi one per ;son and if the context so requires, the singular pronoun shall be taken to mean and inchule the phu•a1, the masculine, and neater, and that generally all graanmatical changes shall be made, assumed and implied to make the provisions hereof apple equally to a single or several individuals. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance REC'OBDEN"O REQUESTED By CITYOPY ArKWRVILLE WHEN RECORDED RETURN To (ITP OF AT] ENGINEERING DEPT. 14343 Civic DR. VICTORVILLE CA 92392 LPN SUBDIVISION AC=REEIWEINT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City oi' Victorville, hereinafter referred to as "City", and hereinafter referred to as "Subdivider", both of whom mderstarid as follows WITNESSE1`II IMJIEREAS, Subdivider has presented to City 1'or approval a final subdivision or parcel map (hereinafter called "Map") eutitled aid h1FIEREAS, Subdivider has requested approval of the map prior to the construction and completion of the Improvements required by the city Planning Commission, inchuling all streets, highways or public ways and public utility facilities which are a part of, or appnrtemit to, the subdivision (hereinafter called "Subdivision") designated in the map, all in accordance with the plans and specifications for all or any of said improvements in, a.ppnrtenant to, or outside the limits of subdivision, which phuis and specifications are now on file in the office of the CSty Engineer of Ci by, miid AN711EREAS, this agreement is executed pursnmt to the provision of the SidAi0slon Mal) Act of the State of California and Ompter, 17 of the Victorville Municipal c+ode: NOW THEREFORE, for and iu consideration of the approval of the Map and of the acceptance of the dedications therein offered, acid in order to iusure satisfactory performance by Subdivider of Subdividers obligations ituder said Subdivision Map Act and said Chapter 17, the paa•ties agree as follows: 1. Performance of -"701.1i Subdivider will do and perform, or cause to be done and performed, at Subdivider's own expense, in a good and workmanlike marmer and furnish all required materials, all under the directiou and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of Cite, all of the work aid improvemernfs required by the Ci y Planning Commission for this subdivision in accordance »*ith the plaals and specifieatiom on file as herein specified, or with any changes required or ordered by said Engineer, which in his opinion are necessary or required to complete the work. Any sewer work or water supply wo•Ic shall be subject to the approval of the respective special districts having to do A�2th the said t)Tes of work. 2. Ihork: Places and Grades to be Approved by Engineer All of said work is to be done at the places, of the materials, in the manner, and at the grades, all as shoe upon the plans and specifications therefor, heretofore approved b), City Engineer and which are now ou file in his office, and to the satisfaction of said Cite Engineer. The actual work of sluveyiug shall he performed b)' the Subdivider's engineer. 3. Specifications The work embraced herein shall be done in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Specifications of the State of California, Business acid 't)-mv I)o•tatiou Agency, Department of Trausportatiou, current edition, insofar• as they may apply, aild the City of Victorville Standard Specifications for Public. Improvements, hereinafter referred to as the Standard Specifications. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance V♦'lenever ill the said State Standard Specifications the following terms are used, tile)' shall be miderstood to mean the following: a) State, Department of Transportation, Cit) or Owner: City of Victorville California b) Director: The City Engineer of the Cit)' of Victorville c) Engiueer: Whenever not qualified, shall mean the City Engineer of flip City of Victorville California acting either directly or through his properly authorized agents, each agent acting only lvitlrin the scope of' ill(' authority delegated to hint. d) Laboratory: Mlle laboratory to be approved by flip City of Victorville to test materials and work involved in the construction provided for under this agreement, In case of conflict between the Sf.lte Standard Specifications and the Standard Specifications fol' I'arblic Improvements of the City of Victorville, the Standard Specifications for Public Improvements of the City of Victorville shall prevail. In ease of conflict between the State Standard Specifications, the Standard Specifications for Public Improvements of the City of Victorville, and flip phuls and dais agreement, the approved plans and this agreement shall take precedence over aril be used in lien or such coul'lictiug portions of the State Standard Specifications or Standard Specifications for Public Improvements of the City of Victorville. I. Work: Time for Completion City hereby fires the time for the completion of said work to be within two yems after the date of approval oi'tbe final or parcel map for recordatiou with the County Recorder of Baal Bernardino County. At least two (2) calendar days prior to the commencement of work hereunder, Subdivider shall notitb City Engineer of the date fixed by Subdivider for conn11el ppmeut tberpof, so that city Engineer shall be able to provide services of inspection. 5. Time of Essence - Extension Time is of the essem•e of tms agreement; provided, that in the event good cause is shown therefor, the City Council may extend the time for completion of the improvements heremider. l�ry supb extension may be granted without notice to the subdivider's surety, and extensions so graalted shall not relieve the surety's liability on the bond to secure the faithful performance of this agreement. The CRY Council shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause bas been shown to entitle Subdivider to an extension. 6. Repairs and Replacements Subdivider shall replace, or bave replaced, or repair, or have repaired, as the rase may be, all pipes amd monuments sbollol on the 111,11) which have been destroyed or damaged, card Subdivider shall replace or have replaced, repair, or have repaired, as flip case may be, or pay to talc owner, the entire cost, of replacement m• repairs, or aaly and all property dammed or desfaveyed by reason of mly work done hererulder, whether such property be owned by the IIuited States or any agemy therpol', or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the City or by any public or private corporation, or by any person wbomsoever, or by any combination of such owners. Any such repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, aald subject to the a1proval, of the City Engineer. 7. Permits: Compliance with Law Subdivider shall, at Subdivider's expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of such improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by limy. i. Superintendence by Subdivider Subdivider shall give personal superintendence to the work on said improvement, or have a competent foreman or superintendpnt, satisfactory to the Cita° Eugineer, on the work at all times during progress, 11ith alltbority to act for Subdivider. 10 A Snecessfid Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance 9. Inspection by City Subdivider shall at all times ma.intati11 proper facilities, and provide safe access for inspection by City, to all pups of the work, amp to the shops wherein the work is ill preparation. 10. Contract Securitv Concurrently with the execution hereof, Subdivider shall furnish a bond ill all amonntconal to at least one humdred percent of the approved Engineer's estimate as security for the faithful performance of this a-1'ee1ll en t. Similarly, Subdivider shall fill•nish a bond ill an auioimt equal to at least fifty percent of the said price as security for Clic payment of all pelsolls performing labor and flu-nishiug materials ill the constrnetiou of this tract, inchlding any claims to which reference is made ill Title 15 (commencing with Section 3081) of Part 1 of Division 3 of the State Civil Code. The said bonds shall be ill cash, letter of credit, or bonds provided by a. surety satisfactory to the City, or in such other form as maybe provided for by law. The said bonds shall be worded and dated to become effective innnediately upon failure of the Subdivider to complete the work slll jectto tit(' bonds within the one-year period allowed or ally extensions thereof allowed by the City. 11. Hold-Ilarmless llereelluent Subdivider hereby agrees to, and shall, hold City, its elective and appointive boards, commissims, officers, agents aml employees, barn>less from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, inclining death, as well as from claims for property damage which maty arise from Subdivider's or Subdivider's contractor', subcontractors', agents', or employees' operations under this agreement, whether such operations be by Subdivider or by any of Subdivider's contractors, subcontractor,, or by ally olle or more, persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for Subdivider or any of Subdividers contractor, or subcontractors. Subdivider agrees to, and shall defend City and its elective and appointive boards, commission, officer, agents and employees from any snits or actions at la.w or fu equity for damil6es caused, or alleged to have been caused, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations; provided as follows. It) That the aforesaid hold-havialess agreement by Subdivider shall apply to all damages and claims for damages of every land suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, ffered, by reason of ally of the aforesaid operations referred to ill this paragraph, regardless of whether or not. City has prepaard, supplied or approved of, plans and/or specifications for the subdivision, or regard]ess of whether or not any of the insurance policies described herein shall have beell determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. 12. Subdivider's Insurance Subdivider shall not commence work under this agreement until Subdivider shall have obtained all iusiu•ance requtired uulder this paragraph, nor shall Subdivider allow any contractor or subcontractor to colnmeuice work on his contract or snbconta;act until all 'similar insurance required of the contractor or subcollfractor shall have been so obtained and approved. All requirement~ herein provided shall appear either in the bode of the iusuuranee policies or as elldorements and shall specifically bill(] the insurance carrier. a) Compensation illsurance Subdivider ~ball maintain, during the life of this agreeruent, «'orlilllell's Coil 1pensation Insnrauce for all Subdividers elluployees employed at tit(' site of improvement, and ill cats(' any m work is sublet, Subdivider shall require ally contractor or subcontractor similal•ly to provide Worken's Compensation Illsuraalce for all colltractol's or subcontractor's employees, mules~ such employees a.re covered by the protect.ioll afforded by Subdividen la case any class of employee, engag('d ill work under this agreement at the site of the project is not protected under any u Worlaen's C'ompensatioll Law, Subdivider shall pu•ovide, an and shall cause each coutractcu• and sbcoutralctor to provide, adequate iusnrarlce for the protection of employees not otherwise protected. Subdivider A Successful Program To Secure Snbdivisiolt Compliance 11 hereby indemnifies Cit.), fm• an.), damage resulting to it from faihire of either Subdivider or any contractor or subcontractor to take out or maintain suclu insurance. b) Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance Subdivider shall tahe out and maiiltaill during the life of this agreement stieh pubic liability and property damage insurance as shall insure city, its elective rill(] appointive boards, colmuissions, officers, agents, and employees, Subdivider and any contractor or silbcontractor pe19'orming worli covered by this agreement from claims for damages for personal injury, including death, as well as frolll claims for property damage which may apse from Srnbdividel's or any contractor's or sllbcontractol's operations herenilder, whether such operations be by Subdivider or any contractor or subcontractor, or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by either Subdivider or any contractor or subcontractor. c) Contractual Liability Insurance Subdivider shall talce out and maintain during the life of the agreement all insurance policy insuring City, its elective and appointive boatels, conmlissioils, officers, agents and employees, Subdivider and all' contractor or subcontractor performing work covered by this agreement against damages sustained by reason of any action or actions at law or ill equity, and/or any claims or demands by reason of any breach or alleged breach of any contract, or provision thereof, or by reasoll of, ally contrachlal liability or alleged contractual liability on any contract, entered into by Subdivider and/or any of Subdivider's contractors, aubcou tractors, agents and/or employees. In the event that an'' of the afoTesaid instiram'e policies provided tor herein insures any entity, person, boaxil or colnnllssion other than those mentioned ill this paragraph, such policy shall contain a standard form of cross -liability endorsement, iosurlllg oil such policy City, Its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents and employees, Subdivider alld ally contractor or subcoutractor performing work covered by tills agreement, 13. Title to Improvements Title to, and owneiship of', all street improvements and sewers constricted hereunder by Subdivider shall vest absolutely ill City, npou completion alld acceptance of such improvements by City. Title to water works shall vest ill the special district 14. Repair or Reconstruction of Defective Worh If, within a. period of one Year after final acceptance of the work performed under this agreement, ally structure or part, of ally structu re furnished and/or installed or coustriucted, or caused to be installed or u constrcted by Subdivider, or ally of the wort. done under this agreement, fails to fulfill ally of the regu111'emellt�s of this agreement or the specitica.tiolls referred to her'enl, Suubdlvider shall without, delay and without any cost, to City, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise lunsatisf'actory part or parts of the worh or structure. Should Subdivider fail to act promptly or ill accordance with this requirement, or shollld the eiigellcies of flue case require repairs or replacements to be made before Subdivider can be notified, City lnay, at its option, male the necessaa•y repairs or replacements or perform the necessary worh and Subdivider shall pay to City the actalal cost of Stich repairs plus fifteen percent (15%). 15. Sulbddivider not Agent of City Neither Subdivider nor any of Subdivider's agents or contractors :are or shall be considered to be agents of City in connection vuAh the perf'ormaalce of Subdividel's obligations ander this agreement. 16. Cost of Eugiueerim, and Inspection Subdivider shall pay to City ill accordance with Chapter 1i, Victorville Municipal Code, for all engineering, inspectiou, aid other services fuuauished by City ill connection with ill(, subdivision. 1� A Successful Progrmn To Secure Sutbdivision Compliance 17. Notice of Breach acid Default If subdivider refuses or fails to obtain prosecution of the work, or any severable part thereof, -with such diligence as will insure its completion withiD the time specified, or any extensions thereof, or fails to obtain completion of said work within such time, or if' the Subdivider should be adjudged a bankrupt, or Subdivider should make a general assigmnent, for the benefit of Subdivider's insolvency or if Subdivider, or any of Subdivider's contractors, snbcontra.ctors, agent~, or employees, should violate any of the provisions of this agreement, Cite Engineer or City Council may written notice writtenotice upon Subdivider and Subdividers sm-ety of breach of this agreement, or of any portion thereof, and defaarlt of Subdivider. 18. Breach of Agreement. PerformaOce by Surety or City In the event of any such notice, Subdivider's surety shall have the duty to take over ;rid complete the work and the improvement herein specified; provided, however, that if the surety, within five (5) days after the serving upon it of such notice of breach, clops not give City -written notice of its intention to take over the performance of the contract and does not counneace perfor•mmce thereof witMD five (5) low N's after notice to My of such election, City nra�� take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method City ma,y deem advisable, for the account and at, the expense of Subdivider, and Subdividers surety shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages occasioned City thereby; aaul, in sueh event, City, without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing w g the ork, such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to Subdivider as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefor. 19. Completion Upon completion of .dl the work described in the said Agreement aard upon the City Council authorizing a, written Notice of Completion and Acceptance of said work, the City will release all hold and any claims to 80%of the amount specified above. for faitlri'nl performance. 19re remaioiDg 20% shall be held by the City for a period of one (1) year after the date of the Notice of Completion as a. guarantee bond to secure the performame of Section 14 of this Agreement and shall tbereafter be released. The amount specified above for labor and materials, shall be held pry us for a period of six (6) months after the date of final acceptance of the improvements specified iu the said Agreement and thereafter shall be released upon preseotatioD of a City Draft, as per the provisions of Section 66490.7 of the State ofCalifornia alifornia Government Code, 20. Notices All notices herein required shall be in writing, and delivered in peusou or sent by registered mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to Cite shall be addressed as follows: Cite of Yictorville Attention: Cit i° Engineer P.O. Bos 5001 14313 Civic Drive Victorville, CA 92393-5001 Notices required to be given to Subdivider shall be addressed as follow~: Provided that aiay party or the surety may change such address by notice in wi-iting to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 21. Binding Effect of Agreement This agreement shale be binding our and inure to the benefit of the pa] -ties to this Agreemeut aaail their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assign. DATED this day of 20 A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance 13 Extract from the MuDicipal Code of Champagne, Tlldnois SUBDIZ'ISION REGULATIONS ARTICLE II PIiO(EDUELS _1\TD PLAT REQ IR] XENTS Sec. 37-29. ('ourhnction of required ingnownionts. (a) LuprovennentS required and'or regulated bY this chapter shall be constructed in accordance with appr-m'ed engineering plans sand ,,pt,cii'ientiuus, the strundnrds, requirements and reguIll tions set forth in this chapter, and other applicable ordinances of Int, City. (h) If in flit, course of coustrnction the subdivider wi,,her to modil)' the size, t)Te, qualih', quantity and/or location of any or all of the improveuneutx regnired or regulated by IIIese regrIll tioas, the snbdiv]ders engineer shall Is it written change request to the City Eugincer for vv ieyv and written approval prior ill proceeding with installation of* the aodificd impr-ovenuvnt. (c) Tia' subdivider or subdividers engineer shall notify fife Cil.' Engineer of tliv n conunenceumt, suspension, or rt,eunnpu tioof wort at least one dap- prior to the Cououeixrment, snspeusion or resnngltion of such work. This regnirement shall not ifph' fo Ncorl: suspended due to adveitie weather conditions. II' the subdivider or anbdivider s engineer fail to comph, with this relniremeut, the Cit} Engineer is ]hereby authorized to hike whalover ahgls uuq be nocersan �� to iusnrt, thrnt. work perl'ornnerl complier with approved engineering phos and tipocifications, the standards set forth in Ihese regulations, and other applicable m7linanees of' tile ('it). (d)Collstoctimnofimprovementsrequiredorregulatedbythischaptershallnotcommenceuntilthe(U.N.Eugineerhasapproved, in writing, engineering plans and specifications for said improvements, hydrologic design studies, if required bYsection and the Snbsidia I draimnge plat ill accordance Nith section 31-t28. (e) Achnal imlrovemoufs shrill be inspected anal approved by life Cit;v Engineer and a nurintenaunce bond filed thea ou prior to approval of the final plat nupess a construction hood has been filed in accordance with section 31-32. Sec. 31-30. Inspection of impwavonnente. (a) Actoal construction of all innproveanents required and/or regulated ln*- this chapter shall be illspecteb,- l rl competent inspector, approved b�- the ( U.N. Engineer, and eunploYed fp- and ruder the diroctioll of the Snr bdivider'engineer and shall he pert'ornned in accordance with section 31-29. Such inspection shall be adequate to assure that all wont complies with the approved ougimeeing plalls and Specificatiorrs and this chapter Qn) Tests required bY this chapter shall he performed Solely bY independent testing labovalovies, the subdividers engineer or qualified peivonuel ennplo}'ed b�' the snbdivider's engineer, and '11:111 be performed at flit, subdividei'S expense. The subdivider Shall direct that the resnlfs ol'regnired tests be mailed or delivered to the ('its' P:ngineer inunediatel.N' on completion and that uo test results he withheld 1Sonn the OtY Engineer. Sec. 31-31. Approval 01' improvements. (a) Upou completion of couvt•uctiou of improvements required and/or regulated by this, chapter, Use subdividet:s vngincer Shall deliver to the City Engineer: (1) All required test data not previonah' forwarded to the City Eoginver ill accordance with section 31-30 above. (2) Two (2) complete rets of* ";Is built" plans each steel of which is cleaul)' marked "ass built" in the (ower right corner. "As built'. ])];Ills shall depict achml constraction on the date of subnnitial of tine plans. (3) The folloming signed aril Sealed "Engiueer:s Certificaly" (b) within four(1) weehs of* receipt of all material., rrgnirt,d in the preceding snbsecton, the (11). Engineer ,,flat] conduct a final inspection of the improvements regnired auudlor regndaf 'd by Ilnis chapter and shall approve in writing all iall rovenaeuts which coofornn to the approved eugineerillg plans and specifications and this chapter and shall give written notification of the approval to tine subdivider, the Planning Director and the City (Teck. 11' a const•nction bond was filed in accordance with section 31-32, the City Eugineer shall notify- the Cit' Clerk of the percentage of iuiprovemouls approved and/or the anarnnt of the bond which nuns be released ill accordance with section 31-3? and the anoaut ol'the nmiutenanee bond which sho ld be filed. (c) The City Engineer is authorized to reiect am construction which fails to confornn to the approved plans and specifications and this chapter. (d) The ('its ('perk shall bill the subdivider for the cit,'ti cost for ally subsequent inspections necessitated b tine snbdivider's failure to construct improvenueutr ill accordance with approved eugiueeriag plans and specifications and this chapter. Such costs shall be bared on it schedule of fees established by flit, City Council. Sec. 31 -Ta . Snhdivision imprrn-emert perfornill nce blmd regnired. Tile owner shall execute a performance bond in Favor of ille Cit which gnnrntees tient all sabdivision improvements required by Ibis Code to he built by owner shall be collate acted and maintained as regnired in thi., ('ode. The owner shall use the performance homl form approved bj the I'ity Ahornev. "Subdivision inipro vinvol" is auj and ail] iugroyenuents required fit Ilk' constricted by these regalatioos or as a condition of final plat approval of Ilw anbdivisioo. 14 A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance Sec. 31-33 Tune period for coosh•acfnou The owner shall complete coostrnetioo of ;ill subdivision improvenemts in accordance Pith plans and specifications approved by the C'ily Engineer with two (ter) yeas of the date the ('ity approve, the fiunl plat of the sabdiwision. At the owner's request, the City Council nilly c�teud the time period in which to co nplete the construction fir an additional two Q2) yeas if the Council finds that. such fin e-Ntensioll is consistoot with the public welfare. Sec. 31-3-1. Time period for maintenance. (n1) The owner shall maintain all sobdiwisiom illlprovemeots free I'voun defects fora period of one Year after the date the ('ity Engineer issme,:1 written notice of acceptance of nll the subdivision improvements. (b) if the Cit;w Engineer accepts pm•t but not all o1' till' subdivision iugnovements, the part accepted nmstbo maintained five of defects unfil the expiration o1' the nmliuhmamce period for all sobdivisiou iofprovenenIs. (c) A defect which umybe repaired is fin.), (1) Failure of a subdivision iugirovement to operate in comf'oranance with this ('ode during the nmintenauce period; or (12) The oppearllee (it' ane defect ill a subdivision ingnuvenent N% Ili(-]) is discovered daring an inspection of the improvement made bN.y ('ity personnel within a reasonable period of time after the owner's request for till- release of the maintenance bond or at ally time prior to that inspection; ill - (3) r(3) The failcue to design and coustroct a subdivision improvement required by these regnlatioms and not previoaslY waived, the need I'or which is di,covered prior to Ito end ol'the maintenance period. "Fred of detect ' nneans that all subdivision improvements an, hit ciioning in oecordance with the purpose I'll)- which Uu-y were designed and that the improventeuts have not deteriorated other than to the c_Xteut of oornml wo ear. Aon -designed cracks n pavement or sidewalk naw not be coosidored normal wear. Svc. 31-35, Snbdiwision improvement perl'ormmcce bond auanmt", allowed redactions. (n) 'Tho initial amount of the subdivision improvement performance hoed ,hall be one hundred (1011) percentof the estinmlted cost of, consti•action, tis determined by the owner's engineer find approved by the ('it' Engineer, of all subdivision improvements not Yet accepted by the ('itv phis fifteen (15) percent of the estimated cost o1' construction of all subdivision iinprovemeuts dedicated by the owner and accepted by the City for which the maintenauco period has nit bvvu completed. (b) The aummnt of the subdivision improvemneut performance bond enc be reduced duel- (3) times prior to acceptance of all required improvements. C) Eoch redaction allowed will be in the anrolut of the e,timnted cost of the port of' tile subdivision impriveaents accepted in writim„ by the City Engineer. In no event shall the bond be les, than (went' -five (�5) percent of the estimated cost of constroctiou of subdivision iofpr>wemeots amlil al] improvement, are necepted. In oo event,11n11 the mnoant of ane reduction be les, Uam one hundred Ihon,llind dollar, (S1(I0,1300.011) or twentI-five (25) percent of the origionl amount of the flood, o9nicheveris greater. (d) Upon acceptance o1' all improvements, the owner nmY reduce the amount of the bond to fifteen (15) percent of the estimated cost of, con,troction ol'sobdiwision iIn] nuwenavnts. (l-) .1 request for reduction in bond nurounts mnYbe made no more Irogmmth Uma ewory Ihirty (30) days; v -wept that reduction to the fil'own (15) percent required during the maintenance period is allowed ally time:1heracceptance of fill ialproveuents. Sec. 31-36. ('ity Enginevi s acceplfince o1' ;111 improvements, (a) Upon completion o1' conshuction of lilt subdivision improvements, the owuor shall seek final acceptance of the inlpriwements In. the ('it;v Engineer on behalf of the ('itv by submitting n written request firficcephaee to the ('itw 14,11ginee1. 7'hl- ('itv b,ngillol-r shall provide it form for this regae,t. (b) If' the ('itw Engineer ordesignl-e finds that 1111 required imnproveuents,ue in confmauanee with the requirenents of this ('ode and that all tests find phos required to he snflmlitted by the owner have been received and are accepbible in m-voldlmce with the requirements of this ('ode, the CRY Engineer or dvsignel- shall issue to the owner written notice (it' the acceptance of the ingnnwenent, by the ('il;w. Sec. 31-31. Cit)- Enloiuem's authorit_w to accept part of the required ioil roveuent,. (a) Atthe request of the owner, if the City Em,riueer finds that all of the sanitary sewer and storm sower and other drainage improwenrents I'or n subdivision haw been coustr•ncted in accordance wiU1 the rcviniroment, of the Code ;11111 fill tests and plans for the sanitary sewer nod storm sewer and other drlinnge improvement, have been submitted by the owner and Iv a nin accor41mro with the regoirenents of this( 'ode, the ('ity Ell"'invvr shall issue if written notice of 111e acceptance if all these improvements om behalf of tie ('itv. (b) .11 the request of the owner, if all the public impnrvenents in a distinct contiguous porion of the subdivision have been conshucted in accordance with the ('ode and ;111 tests 1md phi ns helve been submitted by the oo'nvi. 11141 av io amordlumr with the mgairoll amts of the ('ode, the ('itg Eugineor shalt issue 1i written notice of acceptance of those public innproverueuts io that p;1•t o1' the subdivision. Sce. 31-3ti_ Subdivision ingmovenent perforummce bond securit. A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance 15 Mach subdivision improvement hert'ormance bond required by this Code shall be secured ill favor of' tile City by one oi' the following methods or it combination of Oil. following nmthods: (a) Cash, money order o• cashiers check which shall be deposited in it segregated City account dor perar•numce bonds and auv interest earned shall be relaiued in the account fm• use by the City should a det'andt in anv perl'ormance bond occur and released to the owner only upon complete release of theperd'o•nuonce bond; (b) Corporate sorety licensed and authorized to do business in the State o1' Illinois as surety; (c) Certificates of deposit parable to the t'ih; (d) United States Goverun ent-Savings Bonds, payable to the Cit)'; (e) Irrevocable letter of credit in a form approved b.V the City Attorney. (l) Deed in trust or escrow conveying real estate to the City. Such real estate Sita]]] be appraised at the owrner's or Sill dir'nlel's expense by an independent appraiser selected by the City. The Cit). Attorney shall approve the form of any s]u•ety involving a deed in trustor escrow. The security shall be in at least the same anamnt as the required bond. Sec. 31-351. Duty to maintain improvements. For a period of one.Veal• alter acceptance in writing of all the subdivision improvements by the City Engineer, the owner slia ll maintain file sobdivisiom inrproven]eak tree iron defects. The owner shall prompt]}' Correctany defied of which the owner has notice o• which the City discovers, whie•h defect occurs prior to the release of the maintena neo bond. ']'It(, Cit.)' Engineer or designee shall notil'y the orrrrer of anc defects discovered by the City which occurred daring this period and the owner shall promptly remedy Ole same. See. 31-39..7 Fimil release ot'snbdivision improvement perfornrarcebold and seearitrnpon acceptance ol'imin•ovenrents. (a) Upou satisfactory completion of all maintenance work on subdivision improvements required by these regnIAoils, upon request oi' the owner, the City Engineer shall release the subdivision improvement peiTor mance bond and its security in its entirety. (b) Tire release of any or all of the bond and its seenrity shall be ill writing on 1'ornrs approved by the City attorney and signed by the City Engineer. Sec. 31-39..2 Pen9'o•nmoce by the Ci t;v of owners obligations. Should the owner fail to perl'or m the owners obligation to construct and maintain public improvements as required by these regulations, the City may liquidate any perl'o•mance security in the C'ily's possession and use the proceeds to construct or maintain the improvements in whole o• in pint as tine City in its sole discretiou deems appropriate. 16 A Successful Program To Seem -e Subdivision Compliance SUBDIVISION IMPROVEI\1EIN"J'8 PERFOR11It1\TCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN 13Y THESE PRESENTS That we, as Principal, and , a corporation, duly licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF , a. Municipal Corporation, as Obligee, in the penal sum of Dollars, for which payment, well and tnily to be made, we bind ourselves, om- ficins, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. Whereas Principal and Obligee have entered into no Subdivision Agreement for Completion of Subdivision Improvements (the Agreement), dated , whereby Principal bas agreed to install and complete certain designated public improvements, as a condition to approval of Plat which Agreement is hereby referred to vril made a part hereof, and lhinereas Principal is required tinder the terms of the Agreement to t'Ilrnislu a. guaranty for the faithful performaanee of specified improvements, which the Obligee has deternniued most be completed once work has commenced, mil are described as follows: Now therefore, if I-Yincipal shall well and truly, at, its owrn cost and expense, at or within the time required under the Agreement, faithfully install and complete. the public improvements, in substantial compliance with the plaans and specifications for such improvements, then Ibis obligation sball be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect, subject to the following conditions: 1. In the event Principal shall fail to complete the improvements within the time allowed by the Agreement, or any extension thereof, as may be granted by the Obligee, then the Suretyshall cmnplete the improvements and deliver them to the Obligee for approval or, at the election of Obligee, Surety shall teuder to Obligee the amount necessary, in no event to e-xceed the penal sum hereof, based upon estimates provided by the Obligee, to carvy out completion of the improvements, it being forther nndeustood that upon completion of the improvements, my lmeapended funds shall be returned to Sun-ety. 2. This bond shall be continuous in effect mud shall remain in full force and effect until (a) the improvements have been installed awl accepter) by Obligee, or (b) the release and surrender of this bond by Obligee; whichever sball first, occur. 3. It is further understood tlnat, ten percent (101) of the face ainonnt of this bond shall remain in effect and continue after completion and acceptance of the improvements by the Obligee for a period of one yen- from the date of acceptance to gnaraauty the improvements against any defective word: or labor done, or defective materials furnished, is the performance of the improvements. I. Sm -et y hereby stipulates and agrees that no cbwge, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreeuent, or to the worn to be performed there under, or to the specifications relating to the improvements shall, in any way, affect its obligation on this bond, and Surety does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement, or to the work or to the specifications. 5. As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the penal suns specified hereunder, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred by Obligee ill successfully enforcing smell obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. 6. No right of action shall accroe heretunder to or for the Ilse of any pennons, i'irnr or conl>oration, other than Obligee. The rights and obligations ander this bond are for the exclusive benefit of Obligee and may not be assigned, hlJrothecated or transferred for ally purpose, unless consenter) to, in writing, execrated by Principal and Surety. A Successhil Program To Seemv Subdivision Compliance 17 7. Surety waives any defense related to the impossibility, illegality, incapacity, banlmiptey or receivership of Principal in convection with the obligatim of Principal hereunder aid Surety further expressly waives any defense to the extent that. it may require the creditor to proceed against the I Tincipal as a condition precedent to any claim or demand hereon. witness my hand and seal this daY of PRINCIPAL: SZTRETY: By: By: Attorney -in -Fart 14 A Successful Prograin To Secure Subdivision Compliance DEPARTH AUNT OF THE TREASURY h'ISCAL SERVICE (Dept. Circular 570; 2001 Revision) COMPANIES HOLDING CERTIFICATES OF jWTHOIM'Y AS AC'C'EPTABLE SURETIES ON FE DERAL BONDS AND AS ACCEPTABLE REINSURING CO1\,IPANTIES Effective July 1, 2001 This Circular is published a.nnnally, solely for the information of Federal bowl -approving officer and persons required to give bonds to the United `states. Copies of the Circular and interim changes may be obtained directly from the interne. or from the Government Prvltiug Office (202) 512 1800. (Interi) changes are published in the FEDERAL REG ISThJE card on the internet as they occur.) Other information pertinent to Federal sureties uuly be obtained from the U.S. Department of the Treasnr),, Financial Management Service, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East West Mghway, Room 6F04, Hyattsville, I\'ID 20782, Telephone (202) 871-6850 or Fax (202) 874-0078. The most current list of Treasury authorized companies is always available through the Internet at htt)1://��rn.i'ms.treas.govlc570�inde�.htm1. Ill addition, applicable laws, regalatious, and a.pplicatiou information are also available at the same site. Please note that the underwriting limitation pniblished herein is on a per bond basis but this does not limit the amount of a bond that acompany can NNTAe. Companies are allowed to write bonus Avith a penal sum over their Underwriting hlmtatlou fps long as they protect the excess amount ll7th reiuswi]@lnee, r coinsurance or other methods as specified at 31 CFR 223.10-11. Please refer to footnote (h) at the end of this publication. The following companies have complied with the law and the regulations of the U.S. Depart] ne]]t of tile 'h-easlll'v'. Those listed ]n the ]Tont of this CirClllar al -e acceptable as sureties and reinsurers on Federal bonds wader Title 31 of the United States Code, Sectious 9304 to 9305 [See Note (a)]. Those listed in the back an, acceptable only as reinsurers oil Federal bonds lender 31 C'FR 223.3(b) [See Note (e)]. if we cal] be of any assistance, please feel free to contact. the Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-6850 Judith R. '1511nan As,istant Commissioner Financial Operations 1111ancial Management Service 11 Su•cessfal Progrmil l'o Secure Subdivision Compliance 19 A -At BEST COMPANY Aurbest Boad, Oldwich, NJ 08858 • (908) 439- 2200 • Fns: (908) 339-3296 Version 100101 A M BEST The Insurance Information Sources SECURE BEST'S RATINGS A++ and A+ (Superior) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, superior balance sheet strength, operating per- formance aril bnsiness profile when compared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Company. These companies, in onr opinion, have a very strong ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders. A and A— (Excellent) Assigned to companies which bave, or balarx•e, excellent balance sheet strength, operating per- formance and business profile when copared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Company. These companies, in oar opinion, have a strong ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders. B++ and B+ (Very Good) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, eery good balance sheet strength, operating per- foinance and business profile when compared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Company. These companies, in our opinion, have a good ability to meet their ongoing obligations to poli cyhol d ers. VULNERABLE BEST'S RATINGS B and B— (Fair) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, fair balance sbeet strength, operating perform- anee and business profile when conpared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Company. These conpanies, in onr opinion, have an ability to meet their current obligations to policyholders, bnt their financial strength is numerable to adverse changes in underwriting and econonie conditions. C++ and C+ (Marginal) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, marginal balance sheet strength, operating per- foranance and business prof5le when compared to the starxlards established by the A.M. Best, Company. These companies, in ou- opinion, have an ability to neet, their curaent obligations to policyholders, but their financial sti•ength is vidnerable to adverse changes in underwriting and economic conditions. C and C— (Weak) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, weal; balance sheet strength, operating perform- ance and business profile when compared to the standards established by the A.NI. Best Coupany. These companies, in onr opinion, bave an ability to meet their current obligations to policyholders, but their financial strength is eery Nailnerable to adverse changes in underwriting and economic conditions. D (Poor) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, poor balance sheet strength, operating perform- ance and bnsiness profile when compared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Conpany. These companies, in onr opinion, nra.y not have an ability to meet their cnwrent obligations to policyholders and their financial strength is extremely vnInerable to adverse changes in nnder-i\o-iting and economic conditions. E (Under Regulatory Supervision) Assigned to companies and (possibly their sub- sidiaries4iffiliates) that have been placed by an insurance regulatory authority nnder a signif- icant form of supervision, control or restraint, whereby they are no longer allowed to conchrct normal on-going insurance operations. This would inchule conservator -ship or rehabilita- tion, but does not include liquidation. It may also be assigned to companies issued cease and desist orders by regulators outside their home state or country. F (In Liquidation) Assigned to companies which have been placed under an order of liquidation by a court of law or whose owners have voluntarily agreed to liquidate the company. Definition of Best's Ratings, FPR Ratings and Not Rated Categories (NR) NOT RATED CATEGORIES (NR) NR -I (Insufficient Data) Assigned predominantly to small companies for which A.M. Best, does not hayc snf3'icient financial information required to assign a rating opinion. The infoniatior contained in these limited repots is obtained from several sources, which include theindi6dnal companies and the National Association of Insurance C'ommissiorers (MAIC). The data received from the NAI(', in some cases, is prior to the 20 A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance completion of their cross checking and validation process. NR -2 (Insufficient Size and/or Operating Exper-ience) Assigned to companies that do not meet A.M. Best's miuinnun size and/or operating experience requirements. NR -3 (Rating Procedure Inapplicable) Assigned to companies that are not. rated by A.M. Best, because our normal rating procedures do not apply due to their muigne or nnnsnal business features. NR -4 (Company Request) Assigned to conupaauies that request that their rating not be published. NR. -5 (Not Formally Followed) Assigned to conupaauies that are not formally evaluated for the purposes of assigning a rating opinion. S (Rating Suspended) Assigned to mated companies that have exper- ienced sudden and significant events atfi,etiug their financial position or operating perl'ornuauce whose rating implications caavnol be evaluated due to a lack of timely or adequate information. SECURE FPR RATINGS FPR 9 (Very Strong) Assigned to companies which have, ou balaauce, very strong balance sheet streugth and operating performaauce when compared to the standards established by the A.M. Best Compauy. These companies, in our opinion, have a strong ability to meet their ongoing obligations to polili eyhol dell. FPR 8 and 7 (Strong) Assigned to companies which have, on halance, strong balance sheet strength and operating performance when compared to the standards established by the A.11. Best Company. These companies, in onr opinion, have a good ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders. FPR 6 and 5 (Good) Assigued to compa-Hies which have, ou balance, good balauce sheet sta•eugth and operating per- formauce when compared to the staudards established by the A.M. Best Compauy. These companies, in onr opinion, have au adequate ability to meet their ongoiug obligations to policybolders. VULNERABLE FPR RATINGS FPR 4 (Fair) Assigned to companies which have, on balance, 1'air balance sheet strength and operating per- formauce when compared to the standards established by the A.M. Best C'ompa.uy. These companies, in our opinion, have au ability to meet their current obligations to policyholders but their financial strength is ruhuerable to adverse changes in undei=writing a,ud economic conditions. FPR 3 (Marginal) Assigned to companies which have, ou bahuuce, marginal balance sheet strength and operating perl'ormauce when compared to the staudards established by the A.M. Best C'onupauy. These companies, iu our opiuiou, have au ability to meet their correct obligations to policyholders, but their finaueial strength is vnhuerable to adverse changes in underwriting and econounie conditions. FPR 2 (Weak) Assigned to companies which have, ou balance, wea.li balance sheet strength and operating per- formance when conupar-ed to the standards established by the A.M. Best Compauy. These companies, in om- opinion, have an ability to meet tbeir cu rreut obligations to policyboldeus, but theirfintmcial strength is very N-uiluerable to adverse changes in imderwuitiug and economic condi ti ons. FPR I (Poor) Assigned to companies which have, ou balance, poor balance sheet strength and operating per- formance when conupawd to the staudards estab- lished by the A.M. Best Company. These com- panies, in our opinion, may not have au ability to meet their curi,eut obligations to policyholders aaud their financial strength is extremely viduerable to adverse changes in uuderuu,riting and economic conditions. www.ambest.com A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance 21 .Iuh• 2004 Two Coutpaiiies with it siugte anthition— exc•ellence ill the delivery of suret.)• homis. 'I9tis is The lusco/Dico Group. The Foundation of our business is one of the utost specialized underhtkittgs io this narrow field, subdivision bonds—the hoods used to guaranty the completion of puhic iutproventents related to the sabdivisioo of land. The Ipsco/Dico (croup was created by .t group of real estate developers for that purpose. They were deterutiued to fill a void created its nta.ny of the larger, uuttti-lice eoutpiuties retreated front what they cousideccd to he it coutplicated and risky line of bttsittess. The Insco/l)ico (rronp not only served this ntacicet, but diel so with flourish, becotuhig the uatiou's roost prominent writer of snhdivision honds. Today, with over $76,600,000.00 ill assets, The Inseo/Dico (troop offers the full range of surety products. I3ttt we have ower lost sight of the niche market that latutclted our hnsiuess. Subdivision bonds have cousisteutly heen oto' mainstay, representing nearly forty percent of the business we write. Performance Driven Tile prestige of being the foretuost writer of subdivision bonds eoutes with respontiibilit.\. Market sbu•e has never been oto• solitat;v goal. Central to our success has been ttudernritiug standards that convey out- own confidetwe in the developer's ability to deliver dual ity performance, on time, Mud on budget Aud even if we are wroug, we place equal importance oil our head-on approach to resolving probleuts when they occur. The Iusco/Dico Group lots the capahilit}' to put it project hitck ou track and deliver the iutprovemeuts with the laud of efficiency that has woo praise from public agencies throughout the conutry. Statistical Information For the year 2003, rakiugs published by the Surety Association of America identified ,Phe Insco/Dico Group as the fotu•teeutb largest triter of surety bonds ill the United States. Tlhe operating companies of Tile Iusco/Dico Groep are each certified as acceptable sureties by the Utiitell States Trettsnry Dept rtutcit. The underwriti ng liutihttious assigned to the c•ompauies as of July 1, -',2004 a t•e: ® Dev(,lopersSuret,N' iutd [ttdeoutit� Coutlrtuy: $2,6iY),500.00 ® l.ndeuutity Company of Cithforuia: $626,500.00 ® Couthiued: $113,256,000.00 The 1_usco/l)ico Group is rated A- (Excelleut) fimntcial categot-y V1 by :�\i 13cst Coutpauy. Reinsurance You call tell it lot ahrntt a company h,y the coutpauy it keeps. SItrety eau he a particularly volatile litre of insurance, which detuauds solid relationships with quality reillsnrers. Ln relationships that lla.ve sprouted 20 years, the Iosco/l)ico (coup has received this vital support fi•om two of the strong_ est, most reputable, reinsurance c•ontpanies serving the surety market: ® Auterican Reinsurance Coutpzuiy, with an AM Best rating of A+ (Superior) «V and it U.S. Treastary Department listing of $223,003,000,00 provides the primary reinsurance support for The Iusco/Dico (roup. a X-1, Reinsttrauce Anterictt, with au A+ (Superior) ter rating by AlI Best Company and a U.S. Treasury Department listing of $100,554,000.00, also provides wiusurtutce support for The [usco/Dico Group. Strong t-cinstu•ance support is critical in the analysis of it surety company. The confidence expressed ill us by these two leading underwriter, has stceugthe ped the overall fouadatiou upon which rite Iusco/Dico Group has become an industry leader. i 2 A Successful Program To Secure Subdivision Compliance VH9 INSCO INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. insc%jcp Underwriting Manager for: Developers Surety and Indemnity Company Indemnity Company of California 17780 Fitch, Suite 200 • Irvine, California 92614 • (949) 263-3300 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT we, and business and under and by virtue of the laws of the State of licensed to conduct surety business in the State of are held and firmly bound unto as Obligee, in the sum of for which payment, well and truly to be made, jointly and severally firmly by these presents. BOND NO. , as Principal, a corporation organized and doing and duly as Surety, ($ ) Dollars, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and successors, THE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT: WHEREAS, the above named Principal, has agreed to construct in Subdivision, in _ following improvements: the NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such, that if the above Principal shall well and truly perforin said agreement or agreements during the original term thereof or of any extension of said term that may be granted by the Obligee with or without notice to the Surety, this obligation shall be void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the seal and signature of said Principal is hereto affixed and the corporate seal and the name of the said Surety is hereto affixed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney -in -Fact, this day of , YEAR W BY: ID -1006 (REV. 1101) Principal Attorney -in -Fact INSCO INSURANCE SERVICES, INC, insc%1CUnderwriting Manager for: l� 0 1 Developers Surety and Indemnity Company Indemnity Company of California 17780 Fitch. Suite 200 • Irvine, California 92614 + (800)-782-1546 www.InscoOlco.com WARRANTY BOND KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: TIIAT we, and and by virtue of the laws of the State of business in the State of as Obligee, in the sura of Bond No. Effective Date: as Principal, a corporation organized and doing business wider and duly licensed to conduct surety as Surety, are held and firinly bound wito ($ ) Dollars, for which payment, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and successors, jointly and severally firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THE -OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT: WHEREAS, the above named Principal entered into an agreement or agreenhents with said Obligee to: WHEREAS, said agreement provided that Principal shall guarantee replacement and repair of improvements as described therein for a period of year(s); NOW, THEREFORE, if the above Principal shall indemnify the Obligee for all lass that Obligee may sustain by reason of any defective materials or workmanship which become apparent during the period of year(s) from the effective date of this bond, then this obligation shall be void; otherwise to remain in fiill force and effect, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the seal and signature of said Principal is hereto affixed and the corporate seal and the name of the said Surety is hereto affixed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney -in -Fact this (Principal) ID- 1799 (\ arninty-Nn Pert'onnwice) (5f 10) day of --ve at= (Surety BY: Attorney -in -Fact I 2 E t: ci Li Q. I 2 ci Q. I 2 A" 4 r. E E O 0 CL co x 0 Z r L•J f� 0-9 cu N 0 Q 0 L Q co .0 C N N O L 'a N C v 30 i c� N t 13 ,a 0 L V E d CL L O cu C: N cu L •� c a� N Im L = � ca O C •_ . W W L C r ,, U U O a O L a 0 4- .N O t L' ®❑ U❑ U Q Q C. J U U D m Y Ile O c� cnco m U co E Ez O O to F- Q `•AL -J �n ,a. E 0 U _ _ cc L) m 0 Q. Q. CD L) c� 4T CD m 13 u N 0 0 _ N _ 0 CL 0 a) E m N a� s L 4-- 4- 0 m L L CD Q. L N C W Al Al j s c� I- CL a m .Q V _ L Q E u N 0 .CD L 0 L V _ .Q Qi N n IN 0. A r: A A WE L a 0 A E E O v L O 0 0 .N a� CL 0 tm cn 0 C. E '. t v .M CL L O m E 0 N N O O O. cn N Q = U ® U 0 L � L 3 L as L Y o = Y CZ a E a U � T v _ E _ a L L cn = � as L L cu -lid O W n ® U. '"' a H n m to I-- 1 4- 0 E 0 Qi 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- 0 W Lei 0 �rJ (XI 0 0 r 0 C) 0 r- 0 ZI (Aj 0 9 0 X" (Xi N O A O 0 LO T- 0 O E 2 cm O CD 0 (n cn x 0 co E L. 0 O Fol Lw - 0 CL O tm N0 W MN L s L 0 s 4- 0 0 0 a� L s ^L^ C 0 L A, u [i olu u 0 O � +' CL O O O ®C CL :� a) a)Z in O 0 r E U CD s. O -JCLccs O c p ° �. N U) �- 0 EO Co ® CL CD 75 v Y N cu L v O .c E d s 0 � 0a U= C 'a.O . + 'a O c O L 4— O a) O > G ;� O 3 3 >4 O a O co- N O � �. = Q •� Q 0 L CL a� o a LJL 7 O .0 a-+ .Q L 4- 0 0 V U) U CD s V 0 L CL L 0 E a� 0 cu v E L- 0 0 c O s 4-� 0 E 0 L RE ��, E V a N (1) o s a C � o L � s � � U) m () L N 4- D � L co T v .� _ CL U) o 2. CUU) v L � o � � � � N � � o E E a - N � o A- a) c 0 E >, o cn cu a) o E > a U) s s 0 0; 0. >, E o U 0 r a) I® ca ILI L Rf L •a to +� cnc > O _ 'a co (� F® O ® O : O '� O y- Q _ EO O L L O 'a r i O O O CL U) m L_ O 0 O. 40 O a' O A O c _ i O 0 = .� N v 12 CL N O to .ca Q� L m 'a Qi cm ® 0 M cn CL ® Q N 0 Oi �S = 4m= 0 O V v O N> .E..+ Q 0 -a 0 Q •E O E C E Q LQ.. m CL •E N O = 7a L .Q CM Q A a-+ N Q O E Q E m a) Qi CL Q m L N •_ CL O L - Gi O ,+O-+ C a) O N L CD 0ow i = 0o 00tm O = 'a 0 G _ ca s� IP � > L O �=0 0 '?gym M � O CD -0 CDO V N C = >++ 0 m C t� . _ 0 E E E 0 � ?% 0 a) 00- 0 Q: 10 > �+ O O 0 ® N = d= 0 N Cc3 O O 00 ,Fi O' 04— r O 4-• E. 0,6 O 00 mm O C i E44.4 Ov 0 �O O� 'a;1_+ .moo Ms - t�0 405 4- r_.c �+�. — 4cu 0. co > a)= tow .O L O N �"� :.: 0o a)0 �1 /1 >1 L Qi L C L -a L L L �yE. 'L O M E 0 (n cn0 cnE Ua L.�0 0 0� ■ ■ ,,q ® O ai N 0 ® � N Q. O � Q. a) CL OCL � N - O E 0 -Y cv N L m cn O 0 v� • 0 -0CL 0 = ° CL rU m E 0 0. 0 m o O >CL cn O ® ° N c s ° > L v -° w O •� -O .� + M cv ° 3 ° > CL 0 ,C s c o L 4 2 ca > N O .s _ .c ) o s L +� L Q �.i (� O L Q L) o L 4oLO L O Q O >+ L 0)T O Q U)^ O ® N s O C O .Q L Cl) �1 L '� U) Q L OO 0 Q L Q Qi O Q '� w O ui ® N t� L C � Q a Q 0 ._ U) L Q r ,� ++ � Rf O r (n O >+ L Q L O y - s -W .a O � O N N E O CL c �' i .N m V L C m 3 Q N E E L N Q. O CD it c.Q ® = (n �'^. cn N O V O N m E v m .toL ,� �, co m m w cn O d u � 'O ® O E O N 0 � CL cn -a G O � .ar 0 N N .N 0 L ca i Q. E E ® a� a) `0 2) a) �' CC o L n 10 N O CL 0 .o E c 0 0 U d m N c c ro- N in c c U a) O E u E o N O NO U p U 0 Z V- N � a) 'U a C C ro ro � Y � O U 3p Z R c c LL 0 a O O C, N ac Z (aL i c i � o O c c C O c 3o aa)) oma ' O O O C N 2 O YZ C N 'r - ,N O 00 DoE E } ro C0 O l0 C 6 c Q U U LL 0 .o E c 0 0 U d m N c c ro- N in c c U a) O E u E o N O NO U p U 0 Z V- N � a) 'U a C C ro ro � Y � O U 3p Z R c c LL 0 a O O C, N ac Z (aL i c i Q C,.. 0 �Tv � �J� U U N N LL C p O C p v) � V W ' O YZ C N 'r - ,N O 00 a a) j J C C ro C0 O l0 C 6 c Q U c N c 6 i6 ami .s'!- a �cjv N C N N y mai o• Z 'N �� O 9 a 0 O • N 'a.a rod �W �-% N N l6 c �— o ro"NO W �W(L o Q Q IL N _ 0 c c o3 c �' a) 3 o o 0 w as a C-4 Q) N.u) x-- W V N Q ro o6 EO� ro N Q p d a(q ro 7 U ! 2 I y a Q C,.. 0 �Tv � �J� U U N N LL C p O C p v) � V W if L N T ++ N L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro L ro N L ro L ro L ro N L ro L ro L ro N L ro L ro L ro ro0 i1 1+ ^ i1 i1 >N 5, 3 4 N r r r r r r r N r r r N �- �- N C C 0 0 m N N 0 0 N `� L 3 0 M O N N L o 0 3 \° o \° O \° o \° o S S C p \° 0 \° 0 \° 0 \° 0 O \° 0 0, 0 \° 0 \° 0 \° 0 \° 0 O O N N O O O O p O p p O N to O O O Lo 0 0 tp U) r N 0 0 Z L L L 80, L r r N r r N r r r r r r 3 = 0 Z �' 0 Z 0 Z 00 r 0 Z N Y � � ro E z u r c N N m N C v O m O \ O \ O \ O \ O \ O \ L 7 i 7 O \ O \ O \ 7 O \ 'L 7 O \ O \ 0 O \ O \ O \ O \ O \ L 3 O O m E O to to Lou a' 0 to 0 0 O 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In Lo O N N N N T- r m N N O p r to O 0 N No �- Ct d r r r r r r4� r r c= r r r p r r r r r 41 r r pp a (A Z Z Z Z Z d L 3 fA U 6 U C L ,N L 41 41 Q d ro 0 Q 0 3 co Q C = roC72p-= m N �� U D 0 O c d a a 3 — o N ro LL 0 0 c 0) 0 c 4 m E E C c m e 7 QUz(Dzmz0Y�F a 0 �m020in0mm�cnin L N T R a) m O U C O(n p 0 O o: a) o U c i o C 0 o LO E � o p cc a o `c' o� a) o o o c=v u CNW CD0 p �� U L. M � p p 69- LO O p r C O as C Q- 6 CSO 0 O 11 (f} OO C II O U >+ -0QN �d ( 6 o N d +a ®o N �O 0 69- p p C C 0 +� U) U) M o o I I C C LO p •= cu L 'o Q) (L a) a) _p o p d O O C p«_ U-) N : U) C I. n o a) c: O 0o C N O �' U m M C U to p 11 69- a U UT s� c C C E p L Co(0 p iI c6 C c6 p O C to w+ _ () Q `t o p E cu U c6 p� 0 des 'L a) p U N 'L () 4— � p> >O cu C w O 0 O E O f - U O E cu L ;a n W W U m �p � >U W d U m C n Q ❑ o n ou o m L) 0 0 0 o � C �_ O a) ,. _ Cf C N U a) p o t0 O Q _ II v i ate+ O p 'O C C C O =3r O E u) 00 O U) LO Q O O O x O 6 N + > r� Q Q Q Q lV` U p p L II C •� -,z -se L NN •� = a) O �.� WU O O O C N W N U) p N �' !Y Q' p �-' X O E 0 p 0 L70 cu p O 4 U C L U O 0 ... C y, o 0 0 o 0 O + O> p o a) u O O N0 p a) n. +' C) D X C N C >Q LO q C) p m6n. U O O p UO ULj C C O 0 C+ I I C) C + U U� U N C "O Lo E 6-0 p (6 p Q O X ,OL_ U) (a N � Q o a) C >(L6 c C) C-0 O II Lo C II 0 Lo O C U U 4- O O O E N C a) L L- a) 0) O 0_ + >>L O O `J p fA O O O fA N C O v C F!} C C C O 4- 4- t6 X (6 c6 O +� a) O L ® Q o U C U a) EA ("6 O U 0 Un Un Un 4- Y C 0 '� C 0� w a � v p tp O p U a) O p �wa_wC) V > N p L Li! Q ■ ■ ■ ■M LU r) U �Fp— U ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ > z U w 0 Lq 4- O 0 3 CL �0.+ E0 r X E O N N N N N N J O O O O O O L LC LO l0 lO lfl LO a 0 0 ® 0 0 0 .r+ N N N N N N r-1 rl rl rl fH iii C i� iii ifl U d1 O O L J O O O O O O LO O N M ,Oj ® N O rt In rl O N O y„ > O Q N O to O tm>� N O O O O O O O O G G 4J O O O O O O Ln = 4A N In rl W N 0: -W in - -W ifr ifs iii O � 41 ® 4J -0 � • O O 4J O O O CD N O N co O O O O O O C d.N.. vv coC1 O 74 C1 d' co O ri eV o ri O fA ifi L re rl N > ® O O O O O O o 0 0 O O O O ® O O CO r1 N M 0 O 0 In 0 In iA- 0 N N N N O "ii N M eq .6.+ rl M 0 Cl O N rl O O ® ® ® ® O O O ® O O O 4) LnO O M O Ill O O O ri N In N O a In rq Ln 0 In E % N ii! N iA n FA N 0 a� M _ O m 4- O 0 N O 41 0 LO I, - VZ VZ c Os- ip +� 0 Q. rn 0 = tC r r, O� m � E L Q. E O� � 3 a� 41 0 N N N N N N r -I r♦ v� +i rl rl i M M M M M M Wul 000000 }a rl rl ri *i *i ri r-1 rl rl rl rl rl 0 i� iii ifl d1 O O L J O O O O O O LO O N eD 4- > O Q N O to O N a1 Ln N co Ln rl N In rl W N 0: -W ifi rl iii iii ii} 0 41 4J 0+ -W {O + 4J Wt co + m coC1 O 74 C1 d' co a ri eV o ri fA ifi L re rl N iii• i� � O > O O O O O O 0 m oO 0 O 0 un 0 O 0 In In c N N N m O "ii N M eq rl M 0 Cl en N rl O O O O O O O C oO O O O O O O O O O O In rq Ln 0 In > O % N ii! N iA n FA ii.. E m 40J 'a a'el c v tq 2orOp W � ry G� Na3 0 W 4o �Oo g d€ z° S �S4 O P o a N f CLW t� i 0 N O° ■ Q G L- CL a , w W > •^ i.n L s O L x VU W 40J 'a a'el c v tq 2orOp W � ry G� Na3 0 4o �Oo g d€ z° S �S4 P o a N f 0 , w ao �a r t2 4 I�0 „ € o A � o_ J o Zi o 'r° �c V1 c l Z 0 ��o c z o O 2 'd' ash u y Ea o N 0 a v o z € F O o z L/ w 0 N LU 1u O (7 z x o eN., w a r a J L Z O o z a F' C x 4� u a o o N r O F 1 D Nw ai w a z W m O M x Iz a oCf z � Z 0 1 o o � � o o C`Q T O � x z W a o w z } 0 z tc M D O u� x :3 o U o0 o O� d a z a x O N U 0 0 J E co 1 M x o JGA��a°u A✓ n J N baa baa 0 a1a J ao s y y o 0 Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 8D PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Works: New Street Lights for School Walk Routes MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: $E PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Public Works: Discussion on Proposed Master License Agreement with Ada County Highway District for Regulation of Downtown Sidewalk Areas MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS BY THE COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 20807 BISTERFELDT, CLEGG, EBERLE, JORDAN, SHEALY AND THOMSON A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MASTER LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) AND THE CITY OF BOISE, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION FOR THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, FOR THE REGULATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALK FACILITIES IN THE GREATER DOWNTOWN AREA; GRANTING AND PASSING DOWN TO THE CITY OF BOISE THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE AND CONTROL THE SIZE, PLACEMENT, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWSSTANDS, ATM's, SIGNS, PLANTERS, BENCHES, FOUNTAINS, FENCES, STREE'T'LIGHTS, SIDWALK CAFE'S, OUTDOOR EATERIES, AND SIMILAR COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC STRUCTURES, OBJECTS AND USES ON ACHD SIDEWALKS IN THE GREATER DOWNTOWN AREA; AUTHORIZING' THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID MASTER LICENSE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Whereas, ACRD is a single county -wide highway district organized and existing under the laves of the State of Idaho, with the jurisdiction over public rights -of --way; including sidewalks, in Ada. County;. and Whereas, Boise City is a municipal corporation with police power to regulate and control encroachments and activities upon sidewalks within the city's boundaries; and Whereas, Idaho Code § 67-2332 provides that public agencies may contract with one another to perforin any governmental service, activity, or undertaking that each public agency entering into the contract is authorized by law to perform; and Whereas, ACHD desires to grant, and the City of Boise seeks to accept, ACHD's grant to the City a limited license to regulate and control the size, placement, operation, and maintenance of movable and non-movable structures and objects upon ACHD sidewalks for the purpose of ensuring the safety of patrons and visitors to downtown Boise and to improve upon the aesthetics therein, and to set forth the purposes, powers, rights, objectives and responsibilities of each party. R-50-10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF )BOISE CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the Master License Agreement, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, be, and the same is hereby, approved as to both form and content. Section 2. The Master License shall serve as a. grant of authority from ACID, to the City of Boise, to regulate and control the size, .placement, operation gild maintenance of all newsstands, ATM's, signs, planters, benches, fountains, fences, streetlights, sidewalk cafe's, outdoor eateries, and similar commercial and public structures, objects and uses on ACRD sidewalks in the Oreater Downtown Area; and Section 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized to respectively execute and attest said Master License Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Boise City. Section 4. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Boise, Idaho, this 16th day of February, Nov APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Boise, Idaho this 16th day of February, 2010: APPROVED: ATTEST. David H. Bieter MAYOR MASTER LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR REGULATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALK FACILITIES IN THE GREATER DOWNTOWN AREA THIS MASTER LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR REGULATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALK FACILITIES IN THE GREATER DOWNTOWN AREA ("Agreement") is entered into this 16th day of February, 2010 (the "Effective Date"), by and between ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT, a body politic and corporate of the State of Idaho ("ACHD") and the CITY OF BOISE, an Idaho municipal corporation ("City"). RECITALS . A. ACHD is a single county -wide highway district organized and existing under the laws of the State of Idaho, with the jurisdiction over public rights-of-way, including sidewalks, in Ada County. B. City is a municipal corporation with police power to regulate and control encroachments and activities upon sidewalks within the city. C. ACHD and Valley Regional Transit ("VRT") entered into a Cooperative Governmental Agreement, dated July 1, 2007 granting a limited license to construct, install, maintain, repair and control transit structures, benches, signage and other related structures and improvements in the City of Boise public right-of-way ("VRT Agreement"). D. Idaho Code § 67-2332 provides that public agencies may contract with one another to perform any governmental service, activity, or undertaking that each public agency entering into the contract is authorized by law to perform. E. The parties desire by this Agreement that ACHD will grant to City a limited license to regulate and control the size, placement, operation, and maintenance of movable and non-movable structures and objects upon ACHD sidewalks for the purpose of ensuring the safety of patrons and visitors to downtown Boise and to improve upon the aesthetics therein, and to set forth the purposes, powers, rights, objectives and responsibilities of each party. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are made a part of this Agreement and not mere recitals, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. License Grant. ACHD hereby grants a license to City ("License") to (i) regulate and control the size, placement, operation, and maintenance of all newsstands, ATM's, signs, planters, benches, fountains, fences, streetlights, sidewalk cafes, outdoor eateries, and similar commercial and public structures, objects, LICENSE AGREEMENT - 1 and uses, regardless of whether the same are or are not affixed to the ground (collectively, the "Facilities") on the sidewalks within the public rights-of- way depicted on Exhibit A (collectively, the "Greater Downtown Area"), (ii) provide for and maintain the necessary and/or desired landscaping and streetscaping upon sidewalks within the public rights-of-way for the Greater Downtown Area, and (iii) sublicense the rights and obligations set forth in (i) and (ii). City shall have no right, title, or interest in or to the public rights-of- way other than the right to use the same pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and pursuant to the authority granted in Idaho Code. This Agreement does not extend to City the right to use the public rights-of-way to the exclusion of ACHD for any use within its jurisdiction, authority and discretion or of others to the extent authorized by law to use the public right- of-way. ight- ofway. If the public right-of-way has been opened as a public Highway (as used in the Agreement, the term "Highway" is as defined in Idaho Code § 40- 109(5)), City's authorized use is subject to the rights of the public to use the right-of-way for Highway purposes. City's authorized use is also subject to the rights of holders of easements of record or obvious physical limitations upon inspection of the public right-of-way, and to the statutory rights of utilities to use the public right-of-way. This Agreement is subject to and shall not supersede or conflict with license or rights granted under the VRT Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit B. This Agreement is not intended to, and shall not preclude or impede (i) the ability of ACHD to enter into other similar agreements in the future allowing third parties to also use the public right-of-way, provided that written notice is provided to the City, and such use does not unreasonably interfere with . City's rights regarding the Facilities as set forth in this Agreement and contained in Idaho Code, or (ii) the ability of ACHD to redesign, reconstruct, relocate, maintain and improve the public right-of-way and Highways as authorized by and in accordance with state law. Where ACHD's retained rights, as stated herein, affect the City's authorized placement of Facilities upon the sidewalks, ACHD and City will work in good faith to resolve any conflicts. a. With reference to any Facilities located in the Greater Downtown Area, ACHD will use best efforts to terminate all ACHD License Agreements for any existing Facilities in the Greater Downtown Area. During the term of this Agreement, ACHD shall not authorize, permit or license any Facilities to be located in the public right-of-way in the Greater Downtown Area. b. ACED and City agree to freely and promptly exchange information reasonably necessary to comply with the terms of this Agreement, including the provision to City, by ACHD of all records, documents, databases, or information relating to known and authorized Facilities licenses in the Greater Downtown Area, whether terminated or not. 2. Compliance with Laws; No Waste or Nuisance City, in the performance of its rights and responsibilities under this Agreement, shall (i) comply with, and shall take reasonable action to ensure that any sublicensee comply with, all applicable federal, state LICENSE AGREEMENT - 2 and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, including the Ada County Highway District policies and ordinances ("ACHD") and the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") (collectively, "Laws") and (ii) commit no waste or allow any nuisance on the public rights-of-way in the Greater Downtown Area. 3. Maintenance and Repair. City shall be responsible for and shall regulate and control the size, placement, removal, operation, maintenance, and repair of all Facilities which it or ACHD authorizes, licenses, or sublicenses to be placed in the Greater Downtown Area, except to the extent any repairs are necessitated by damage caused by ACHD, its agents, contractors or employees, which repairs shall be the responsibility of ACED. City agrees to keep or require the operation, maintenance, and repair of the Facilities in good repair and in compliance with all Laws. If, in ACHD's reasonable discretion, City fails to comply with its obligation herein such that a Facility poses a danger to the public or a Law is not being complied with, the same may be removed or repaired by ACHD at any time, without notice to the City and without liability for any damage to the Facility when so removed or repaired. Removal or repair of Facilities not posing a safety hazard shall require reasonable notice to the City prior to action to repair or remove on behalf of ACHD. City shall reimburse ACHD for reasonable costs associated with the removal or repair of such Facilities when such removal or repair is necessary for safety reasons or to comply with any Law. Without limiting the City's obligation to comply with the foregoing and to reimburse certain City costs associated with the removal or repair of such Facilities, nothing contained herein shall be construed to substitute City in the place of ACHD or property owners for the construction, replacement, or reconstruction of sidewalks as may be provided for by local ordinance, law or by ACHD policy, rule, or regulation. The intent of this Agreement is to provide a master license to the City to authorize it to regulate and control the size, placement, removal, operation, and maintenance of all Facilities noted herein upon the public rights-of-way located in the Greater Downtown Area. 4. Indemnification. City will defend, indemnify and hold harmless ACHD and, as applicable, ACED's directors, commissioners, managers, employees, contractors, agents, and representatives (collectively, "Related Parties") from and against any and all claims or actions for loss, injury, death, costs, damages, mechanics and other liens, liabilities, losses, costs or damages (collectively, "Losses"), including attorneys' fees, incurred by ACHD or its Related Parties resulting from (i) the failure or neglect of City, its agents, contractors, employees and sublicensees (a "City Party") to properly maintain and/or regulate the Facilities, (ii) damage to any sidewalk within any right-of-way in the Downtown Area caused by any party other than ACHD or its Related Parties, and (iii) a City Party or any Facilities user's non-compliance with any Laws. 5. Liability Insurance. City shall require any of its sublicensees, to carry general liability insurance in a sum equal to the statutory limit set forth in Idaho Code § 6-926 (currently $500,000) as may be adjusted by the Idaho legislature from time to time. City agrees to provide notice to ACHD of such coverage(s), with ACED as an additional insured, on an annual basis. LICENSE AGREEMENT - 3 6. Future Changes. if, in the future, City desires to alter the physical layout of, construct improvements upon, or allow by license or sublicense, the addition of Facilities to the sidewalks within the rights-of-way which constitute the Greater Downtown Area ("Future Changes"), all such Future Changes shall comply with Laws. If ACHD determines that a Highway on and/or adjacent to the public right-of-way in the Greater Downtown Area requires widening, realignment, redesign, improvement and/or reconstruction as would necessitate the relocation, modification or other adaptation of any Facilities, the City, or its licensee or sublicense, at its sole cost and expense, shall be responsible for relocating, modifying or otherwise adapting the affected Facilities to such widening, realignment, relocation and/or .reconstruction as required by ACHD and in compliance with Laws. ACHD shall give City at least ninety (90) days prior written notice of the need for any such relocation, modification or adaptation by City. In response to such notice, City may also elect to remove an affected Facility in lieu of any such relocation, modification or adaptation. 7. Facilities Revenue. Throughout the term of this Agreement, City shall not be obligated to pay ACHD a fee for the authorization to use the public right-of-way. All revenue from the Facilities as a result of City's regulation and control of the Facilities, and the licensing and sublicensing thereof, within the Greater Downtown Area shall belong to City subject to the conditions that: (1) all such revenue be expended for administration, and improvements and maintenance costs within the public right-of-way; and (2) the City provide an Annual Report to ACHD detailing all revenue generated and expended in the public right-of-way within the Greater Downtown Area. 8. Term of Agreement. The initial term of this Agreement commences on the Effective Date and shall continue in effect for a period of five years (the "Initial Term"). The Initial Term automatically will be extended for successive one-year periods (each a "Renewal Term") unless either party notifies the other at least 30 days before the expiration of the Initial Term or any Renewal Term, as the case may be, that it does not wish to extend the Agreement. The Initial Term and any Renewal Terms are collectively referred to as the "Term." Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be terminated (i) by either party upon 30 days written notice or (ii) by ACHD upon S days notice to City, if in ACHD's reasonable discretion City has failed to allocate sufficient resources and/or funds to ensure the Facilities are properly maintained. 9. Waiver and Estoppel. City acknowledges and agrees that the authorized use granted herein is temporary, non -transferable (subject to Section 13.3), and merely a permissive use of the public right-of-way pursuant to this Agreement. City further acknowledges and agrees that it specifically assumes the risk that the access right that is granted pursuant to this Agreement may be terminated as provided herein before City has realized the economic benefit of the cost of installing, constructing, repairing, maintaining, or authorizing any use of the Facilities, and City hereby waives and is estopped from asserting any claim that this Agreement is in any way irrevocable because City has expended funds on the Facilities and this Agreement has not been in effect for a period sufficient for City to realize the economic benefit from such expenditures. Any LICENSE AGREEMENT - 4 and all costs and expenses associated with City's use of the public right-of-way, or the repair and maintenance of the Facilities, shall be at the sole cost and expense of City except as otherwise provided herein. 10. Default. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default of this Agreement except upon the expiration of thirty (30) days from receipt of written notice from the other party specifying the particulars in which such party has failed to perform its obligations (or breached any of its representations or warranties) under this Agreement unless such party, prior to expiration of said thirty (30) day period has rectified the particulars specified in said notice of default; provided, however, that if the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) days period, the commencement of the cure within such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period. 11. Force Majeure. Performance by either party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default where delays or defaults are due to war, insurrection, strikes, lockouts, walkouts, riots, flood, earthquakes, fire or other casualty, the elements or acts of God, or other causes, other than financial, beyond a party's reasonable control. 12. Special Provisions. 12.1 Third Party Construction. If, as a result of any construction, improvement, repair or maintenance by or caused by a third party (such as, by way of example and not limitation, third party new construction or third party relocation of sewer or utility lines), it is determined by ACHD that relocation, modification or other adaptation of any of the Facilities will be required, ACHD shall require that the third party, at such third party's sole cost and expense, be responsible for such relocation, modification or other adaptation, as ACRD deems to be appropriate under the circumstances. 12.2 Good Faith and Cooperation. It is agreed by ACHD and City that it is in their mutual best interest and the interest of the public that the Facilities be located within the public right -of =way as herein contemplated, and, to that end, the parties shall in all instances cooperate and act in good faith in compliance with the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement and each shall deal fairly with the other. 13. Miscellaneous 13.1 Authority. The parties hereby warrant that the person executing this Agreement on behalf of each party is, at the time of its execution, duly authorized to do so by its governing body, and is fully vested with the authority to bind that party in all respects. 13.2 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remainder shall be construed to conform to the intent of the parties, and shall survive the severed provisions. LICENSE AGREEMENT - 5 13.3 Assignment. Either party shall be entitled to assign this Agreement to an entity which is either statutorily authorized to be its successor or is an entity controlled by the assigning party, provided that such assignee assumes all the obligations, warranties, covenants and agreements of the assigning party herein contained. Otherwise, neither party shall be entitled to sell, assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement or any of its rights hereunder without the prior written consent of the other patty, which consent will not be granted unless such, assignee or transferee assumes all the obligations, warranties, covenants and agreements of the assigning party herein contained. 13.4 Representation and Warranty. City warrants and represents that its codes and ordinances do not conflict with the terms of this Agreement. 13.5 Further Assurances. Each Party shall cooperate fully with the others and execute such further instruments, documents and agreements and give such further written assurances, as may be reasonably requested by the others to better evidence and reflect the transactions described herein and contemplated hereby, and to carry into effect the intents and purposes of this Agreement. 13.6 Captions and Headings. The captions and headings in this Agreement are solely for reference purposes, and shall not affect the interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 13.7 Third Parties. This Agreement is not intended to create, nor shall it in any way be interpreted or construed to create, any third party beneficiary rights in any person not a party hereto. 13.8 Successors and Assigns. The terms and conditions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective parties, their administrators, executors, successors and assigns. 13.9 Attorney. Should either party find it necessary to employ an attorney for representation in any action seeking enforcement of any of the provisions of this Agreement, to recover damages for the breach of this Agreement, to resolve any disagreement in interpretation of this Agreement, or to obtain assistance in any litigation, the unsuccessful party in any final judgment or award entered therein shall reimburse the prevailing party for all reasonable costs, charges and expenses, including attorneys' fees expended or incurred by the prevailing party in connection therewith and in connection with any appeal, and the same may be included in such judgment or award. 13.10 Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Idaho. 13.11 Exhibits. All exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if the exhibits were set forth in their entirety in this Agreement. LICENSE AGREEMENT - 6 13,12 Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitute the full and entire understanding and agreement between the parties with regard to the transaction contemplated herein, and no party shall be liable or bound to any other in any manner by any representations, warranties, covenants and agreements except as specifically set forth herein. 13.13 Acknowled m�and Modifications. No acknowledgments required hereunder, and no modification or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or consent to departure therefrom, shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the parties. LICENSE AGREEMENT - 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above. City of Boise =2/16/10 David H. Bieter Mayor ATTEST: tMJ ' o 11 Wendy B rrows-Johnso Deputy City Clem EXHIBITS ACHD: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 1 ' i, =IMP Exhibit A Aerial Map of Greater Downtown Area Boundaries Exhibit B VRT Agreement LICENSE AGREEMENT - 8 EXHIBIT A (Aerial Man of Greater Boise Downtown Area) 7 � ✓ �a � 2 �� 'TN 1 _ j-. '��t• , s,�t' r ,II�J��... s ly�t , . x 'Yids 'b�'' I S S. z ;� �•fi�y� 1 r �� y e � } � !r y syr �s { ., II NI�'r ` 1 P'♦ {`I ` j,., } ,� Y };'1_: � t7•Q'�+ '� ^' 1 y � t 4 "�F'" � f 1 �' '•��lf�-''1 R{. ,'{ f ,` ` N •„x �t .. k..`e.?c . �,�rfn„(1� 5 :.,. 7 t x'14 iC , L 71 'r I rt � 1�� f`• I RV j �,�•."L J 1 1 ,a + �1� r 4' }t, i�tPh'k• �`` �Y t i.1 M • ��a Tt t"• j N,�✓a.'4}11 � ��1� y � :' �' • . f � *, �"j�Y� ��A�ri?� i��a�;tiers 9 J f ri'tir� 'z; I_, qq t':! •i.,S�,kti Q'` 71 4 T-1 i�Ql t' !r.�qi? t +� �2t; LOU ';� � ::}St ��, f1 ,,rY'_v:. t v� y .. ''rf�{+P4 t { }:ar .:nit i 1i p 1, •: ,. ✓�S.L fC�\ 11Ct+w1.rF:. 1 d- r ,C`:t(� F s.. ;}�:_ y r% ��,i�'--4 -.if` r C ..�c"""-.�k r” °c!?J► b}Itlp ux< a�,id=.,rE �fif " ;. r�l J .. ' k �„`�1. `�I,� �� \ � I >< , I I� p';�'• ai,��y� - I t ' ,.,�; rV`} S f J " ' - ^- I I ' ,:l; • ,�Jq Li➢9D' ,I� i, Al W�/4 1 (��1�{\4.•�. LR91: Ik?.Ll:n)t. k YEA,I IL �, I ° I , f, I i,, „ s sl 1 , �' •>: `�i` .l .Illi �', Y' �..., If �•--2Ri1 "t'7' � - 11 ��SS.r '`Tdc r �+�" gYi'-` �` ly t �.. t �ri�i� 'i� '. m i p915� � r •� l t � �l{kS c��} < � i'V �[ `1 t�!'� �r�•;�'Ic��rrs• ',, II �1, 7.ti a� `r. �' "y ; � ,t� �h�� ''i�t , •91. �' 12 �' . ��, t. ! I•. f�II,S.�l �� rE.J-a�• .�_ F� fi��.; i.� �}a�,i�i. P! ' � � ��1 . �� P �0 Lam',•• a INs ',� (I 1.. 1 �j i ,kii�' � ,� r-.- i y.1� �j�iS�';�F , ..� (:r1 �` y_� ""i`y „a •x •ter I.•° t � { P � �,,, r , , `� ? „.' ,�' . i boil „rl °I l 1 } I. jr P I 1 u' ,..'' �,�4 ry � � , '� _ ,, (t 3 �{ r ( l � �1 • A�l 1C.�Y'•r n .,: ry `.. +iy hr�IM r �i,�lt Yui r �!, it � 1 KI. ,;r �. � �•., 44�' ,,+�xy, f ;,� , 5^ ?? N' I Y _ I �: , iY rC1 S, .... S c \ ti• i � a , .-: ,. Frl � ;, y �'L Fuji 'I c f�—'IW � I, �I v �R�a}� I �` �, �.i `+; �l lf�• �y � ...y ��". ii . � t I, [� .j�l i �^•>�' ,Fj� �r ,i t � .J.S c; t � r, �: ;. a"{r., ,i>` 1. •y 'l� ��1. �1I 4 I ;; �}az 1L ri� 31� �,�' r' r }l� '�i i;:�i [c�- �r;�3 o>t�rurJ,�� 1.e�'iFr: .•:•k 'i. � ,fii.,1 + >t r kf, � a _,. EXHIBIT B (VRT Agreement MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE RESOLUTION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH ACHD — TRANSIT STRUCTURES INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A BUS STOP SYSTEM IN THE BOISE SERVICE AREA RESOLUTION VMC07-004 BY THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT, WE DO HEREBY APPROVE VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT TO ENTER INTO THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH ACHD TO PROVIDE AUTHORITY TO VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT FOR THE -INSTALLATION -AND MAINTENANCE OFA BUS -STOP SYSTEM IN THE BOISE SERVICE AREA: WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 21, Title 40, and as a result of the approval of the voters of Ada and Canyon Counties on November 3, 1998, a regional public transportation authority (now known as "Valley Regional Transit") was created to serve Ada and Canyon counties; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 40-2109(1) confers to Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity, exclusive jurisdiction over all publicly funded or publicly subsidized transportation services and programs except those transportation services and programs under the jurisdiction of public school districts and law enforcement agencies within Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, ACHD is the single county -wide highway district in and forAda County, Idaho, created pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 14, Title 40; and WHEREAS, the parties desire by this Agreement that ACHD grant to VRT the right to construct, install, maintain, repair and control transit shelters, benches, signage and other related structures (collectively, the "Transit Structures") in ACHD rights-of-way forthe purpose of enhancing VRT's transportation services and programs, pursuant to the terms and conditions as set forth in the attached agreement Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 40-2109(7) provides that Valley Regional Transit may enter into cooperative agreements with other authorities under the provisions of Idaho Code 67-2328; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 67-2328 expressly authorizes public agencies to enter into agreements with one another for cooperative action for purposes within the power, privilege, or authority of said agencies; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 40-2108(2) and (5) provide that Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity has power to raise and expend funds as provided in Idaho Code Chapter 21, Title 40 and to make contracts as may be necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Regional Public Transportation Authority Act; and VMC07.004 WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 40-2109(5) provides that the Board of Valley Regional Transit may adopt resolutions consistent with law, as necessary, for carrying out the purposes of Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code and discharging all powers and duties conferred to ValleyRide Pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40. WHEREAS, the Board of Valley Regional Transit has created a Management Committee, conferring specific authority upon it to discharge its powers, pursuant to Resolution 2003-002; and WHEREAS, the Board of Valley Regional Transit on May 23, 2005, delegated the authority to the Management Committee to finalize the Cooperative Agreement with'ACHD to provide authority to Valley Regional Transit for the installation and maintenance of a bus stop system in the Boise service area (Resolution VBD05-014). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT: Section 1. That the Management Committee authorizes the VRT Board Chair to sign, on behalf of the Valley Regional Transit Board, the Cooperative Agreement with ACHD for transit structures — Exhibit 1, Section 2. That this resolution shall be in full force and effective immediately upon its adoption by the Management Committee of Valley Regional Transit and its approval by the Committee Chair. ADOPTED by the Management Committee of Valley Regional Transit, this 18th day of June, 2007. APPROVED by the Committee Chair thisday of , 2007. ATTEST: ezc ri, 12-�-- SECRETARY VMC07-004 APPROVED: diAIR OF MANAPMENT COMMITTEE COOPERATIVE GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN VALLEY REGIONAL 'TRANSIT AND ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT FOR TRANSIT STRUCTURES THIS COOPERATIVE GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into this 1St day of July, 2007, by and between VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT, the regional public transportation authority ("VRT") and ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT, a pubiic'body, corporate and politic ("ACEI©"). RECITALS A. VRT is the regional public transportation authority created to serve Ada and Canyon Counties, pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code, and as a result of the November 3, 1998 public referendum. VRT provides publicly funded or publicly subsidized public transportation services and programs in Ada and Canyon Counties, B. ACHD is the single countywide highway district in and for Ada County, Idaho created pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 14, Title 40, and has exclusive jurisdiction over the public right-of-way. C. ACHD is dedicated to reducing traffic congestion and improving air quality by providing alternative public transportation and entering into cooperative agreements with VRT. D. Idaho Code § 40-2109(7) provides that VRT may enter into cooperative agreements with the state, other authorities, counties, cities and highway districts under the provisions of Idaho Code § 67-2328, which expressly authorizes public agencies to enter into agreements with one another for cooperative action for purposes within the power, privilege, or authority of said agencies. E. VRT desires by this Agreement that ACHD grant to VRT the limited right to construct, install, maintain, repair and control transit shelters, benches, signage and other related structures and improvements (collectively, the "Transit Structures") in the public right-of-way for the purpose of enhancing VRT's public transportation services and programs, pursuant to the terms and conditions as set forth below. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of foregoing recitals, which are made a part of this Agreement and not mere recitals, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. Access to Public Right -of -Way. -1- ACRD hereby (i) agrees that VRT may construct, install, maintain, repair and control all Transit Structures located or to be located, from time to time, at the various stops on VRT's established and operating public transit routes, in such locations within the public right-of-way as prior approved by ACHD in writing in accordance with this Agreement, and (ii) grants to VRT, it agents, contractors and employees, the right to access and enter such public right-of-way for all purposes reasonably related thereto. Such Transit Structures must have a reasonable and operational nexus to the public transit system. This Agreement does not extend to VRT the right to use the public right- of-way to the exclusion of ACHD for any use within its jurisdiction, authority and discretion or of others to the extent authorized by law to use the public right-of-way. If the public right-of-way has been opened as a public Highway (as used 'in the Agreement, the term "Highway" is as defined in Idaho Code § -40-109(5)), VRT's authorized use is subject to the rights of the public to use the right-of-way for Highway purposes. VRT's authorized use is also subject to the rights of holders of easements of record or obvious physical limitations upon inspection of the public right-of-way, and to the statutory rights of utilities to use the public right -of --way. This Agreement it is not intended to, and shall not preclude or impede (i) the ability of ACHD to enter into other similar agreements in the future allowing third parties to also use the public right-of-way, provided that such use does not unreasonably interfere with VRT's rights regarding the Transit Structures as set forth in this Agreement, or (ii) the ability of ACHD to redesign, reconstruct, relocate, maintain and improve the public right-of-way and Highways as authorized by law. ACHD agrees during the term of this Agreement not to allow any bus benches within the public right-of-way without the prior consent of VRT; provided, however, that with respect to those certain bus benches owned by third parties that are located within the public right -of way and are subject to ACHD License Agreements (the "Licensed Bus Benches"), notwithstanding anything to the contrary elsewhere in this Agreement, the following provisions shall apply: (a) With reference to any Licensed Bus Benches located within Boise City, ACHD will terminate all ACHD License Agreements for such benches based upon Boise City's ordinance that will cause such ACHD License Agreements to be invalid. (b) For any Licensed Bus Benches located outside. of Boise City (or other underlying jurisdiction without an ordinance that would cause the ACHD License Agreements for such benches to be invalid), the ACHD License Agreements for such benches will remain in full force and effect unless ACHD, in its sole discretion, determines to terminate such ACHD License Agreements. Should ACHD determine to terminate any such ACHD License Agreements for any such benches, following notice of such termination from ACHD and the failure of the third party to remove the bench, VRT may remove the benches if determined appropriate by VRT. Either party may, but shall have no obligation to, remove any such benches. If VRT determines to discontinue use of any structures in the public right-of-way for its system, VRT agrees to discontinue and remove such structures from the public right-of-way within ninety (90) days of such determination of non-use. VRT's right of access to the public right-of-way is limited to structures owned by VRT and used for its bus transit system. -2- 2. . Maintenance and Repair. VRT shall be responsible for all maintenance and repair of all Transit Structures placed by VRT in the public right -of way, except to the extent any repairs are necessitated by damage caused by ACHD, its agents, contractors or employees, which repairs shall be the responsibility of ACHD. The installation or construction of Transit Structures by VRT shall be accomplished in accordance with designs, plans and specifications approved in advance and in writing by ACHD as required to satisfy applicable laws, ACHD policies and good engineering practices. In approving such plans and specifications, ACHD assumes no responsibility for any deficiencies or inadequacies in the design or, construction - of the Transit Structures, and the responsibility and liability therefor shall be and remain in VRT. Subject to the foregoing, VRT agrees to keep all such Transit Structures in good repair. As determined by the outside consultant retained by the parties pursuant to this Agreement, VRT shall make all ADA required pedestrian access improvements as are directly attributable to the Transit Structures, including, without limitation, construction of pedestrian ramps and/or truncated domes. ACHD shall be responsible for all other ADA compliance requirements that are not directly attributable to the Transit Structures. 3. Fee. Throughout the term of this Agreement, VRT shall not be obligated to pay ACHD a fee for the authorization to use the public right-of-way, but shall reimburse ACHD for all authorized out-of-pocket or consulting expenses incurred as a result of this Agreement. 4. No Title. VRT shall have no right, title, or interest in or to the public right- of-way other than the right to use the same pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 5. Consultant Safety and Feasibility Study. It is expressly agreed that the grant of rights in Section 1 shall be subject to the completion and review of an initial study by an outside engineering consultant mutually acceptable to both ACHD and VRT (the "Initial Consultant") to determine whether it is safe, legal, and otherwise feasible ("Safety Review") to install the Transit Structures at the locations in the public right-of- way ight-ofway as proposed by VRT. VRT shall pay the Initial Consultant's costs associated with this initial study (except for the amount of $4,961.14, which shall be paid by ACHD in reimbursement to VRT for services paid by VRT to ACHD for bus stop data collection in fiscal year 2005). ACHD and VRT shall agree upon the scope of services to be provided by the Initial Consultant. The contract with the Initial Consultant shall be a three -party contract between the Initial Consultant, ACHD and VRT and shall be entered into pursuant to such bidding procedures and requirements as are compatible with the needs of both ACHD and VRT, and if the contract has been determined by both ACHD and VRT to be economically feasible (the "Initial Consultant Contract"). It is acknowledged and agreed that since VRT will responsible for all payments under the Initial Consultant Contract, and since VRT's major funding source for same will be federal funds, the bidding procedures and requirements for VRT shall include any applicable federal funding requirements. -3- S. Future Route Changes. If, in the future, VRT proposes any change in or addition to its transit routes that would require a change or addition to the location of any Transit Structures within the public right-of-way, such change or addition shall be subject to (i) the written approval of ACHD as set forth in Section 1 and (ii) a subsequent Safety Review by an outside consultant, on a case by case basis, with the cost thereof paid by VRT. Such subsequent Safety Review shall be conducted either by the Initial Consultant under the Initial Consultant Contract (provided that the Consultant Contract has anticipated the same and has established the cost thereof) or by an outside consultant mutually acceptable to both ACHD and VRT (which may include the Initial Consultant) and chosen pursuant to the same terms as set forth in Section 5, 7. Advertising and Advertising Revenue; Location of Transit Structures. 7.1 Advertising. Advertising allowed by VRT to be displayed upon the Transit Structures shall be in compliance with all applicable state, county and local laws and regulations. All revenue generated from the display of advertising on any Transit Structure shall belong to VRT. 7.2 Location. VRT shall be entitled to locate its Transit Structures only within the public right-of-way as permitted under this Agreement, and shall remove, at its sole cost and expense, any of its Transit Structures, if any there be, as may be located elsewhere in the public right-of-way. Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 1, to the degree that any Transit Structures owned by other parties are subject to ACHD License Agreements, upon its execution hereof, ACHD shall either terminate or not renew any such ACHD License Agreements and shall direct such other parties to immediately remove their Transit Structures, During the term of this Agreement, ACHD shall not authorize, permit or license any Transit Structures to be located within the public right-of-way except for VRT Transit Structures and, as more specifically set forth in Section 17.3, shall cooperate with VRT and governmental authorities with jurisdiction regarding enforcement of applicable regulations concerning unauthorized Transit Structures in the public right-of-way. In any of the locations that VRT is permitted to locate its Transit Structures, VRT may remove, at its sole cost and expense, any Transit Structures placed by there by other parties. 8. Relocation of Improvements. ACHD utilizes an annually updated five- year work plan process with respect to the widening, realignment, redesign, improvement and/or reconstruction of Highways. On a regular basis, ACHD shall advise VRT of any anticipated widening, realignment, redesign, improvement and/or reconstruction of Highways as would be likely to cause a relocation, modification or other adaptation of any of VRT's Transit Structures, and the parties, to the extent reasonably possible, shall agree to a priority schedule regarding same. The parties intend that this enable the parties to cooperate with respect to planning and coordination as related to any such relocation, modification or other adaptation of any VRT Transit Structure. If ACHD ultimately determines that a Highway on and/or adjacent to the public right-of-way requires such widening, realignment, redesign, improvement and/or reconstruction as would necessitate the relocation, modification or other adaptation of any VRT Transit Structure, VRT, at its sole cost and expense, shall -4- be responsible for relocating, modifying or otherwise adapting the affected Transit Structure to such widening, realignment, relocation and/or reconstruction as required by ACRD, which shall be accomplished by VRT according to designs, plans and specifications prior approved by ACRD in writing. Any such relocation, modification or adaptation shall be subject to the provisions of Section 6, essentially the same as if it were a change in location thereunder. ACRD shall give VRT at least ninety (90) days prior written notice of the need for any such relocation, modification or adaptation by VRT. In response to such notice, VRT may also elect to remove an affected Transit Structure in lieu of any such relocation, modification or adaptation. 9. Term- of Agreement. The term .of this- Agreement -shall be for an initial term of ten (10) years from the date of full execution of this Agreement, with automatic renewals for successive periods of ten (10) years each; provided, however, that either party, upon at least one hundred eighty (180) days prior written notice to the other, shall be entitled to earlier terminate this Agreement. VRT, at any time, shall be entitled, upon written notice to ACRD, to remove any Transit Structure from the public right-of-way and vacate such location. Any such individual removal shall not terminate this Agreement. VRT, at any time, shall also be entitled, upon written notice, to remove all of its Transit Structures from the public right-of-way, and upon such removal this Agreement shall earlier terminate. This Agreement may also be earlier terminated as otherwise specifically provided herein. Subject to the foregoing, upon termination of this Agreement, neither party shall have further recourse hereunder except with respect to liabilities incurred prior to such termination, except as set forth in Section 10. 10. Termination Obligations. Unless otherwise agreed in writing between ACHD and VRT, upon termination of this Agreement, VRT will promptly remove (if not already removed) all its Transit Structures and restore the public right-of-way to at least a condition comparable to that which existed when the Transit Structures were installed, normal wear and tear excepted. Should VRT fail to remove and restore as aforesaid, such failure shall be grounds for declaration of a default pursuant to Section 13. Following expiration of the notice and cure period under Section 13, and the continuing default of VRT with respect to such removal and restoration, VRT shall have no further right, title or and interest in and to any remaining Transit Structure, and ACHD shall be entitled to (1) complete the removal and restoration and VRT shall reimburse ACHD for its reasonable out of pocket expenses actually paid in completing the same, or (ii) at the option of ACHD, to assume ownership of all or any part of the Transit Structures not removed. If VRT has installed any landscaping or irrigation in connection with its Transit Structures, VRT shall not be required to remove the same upon termination of this Agreement if a third party is under a continuing obligation to maintain and repair same. If ACHD earlier terminates this Agreement for any reason other than the default of VRT, ACHD shall pay VRT an amount equal to one-half (1/2) of the amounts that would be assessed by the Federal Transportation Authority ("FTA") against VRT for the early termination of this Agreement assuming a useful life of 10 years for all Transit Structures. Additionally, ACHD shall repay VRT any sums assessed by FTA for any -S- concrete pads remaining on the public right-of-way that have not been completely amortized. If this Agreement is terminated by ACHD because of the default of VRT, however, ACHD shall not be obligated to pay any amounts under the two immediately preceding sentences. 11. Waiver and Estoppel Statement. VRT acknowledges and agrees that the authorized use granted herein is temporary, non -transferable (subject to Section 18.7), and merely a permissive use of the public right-of-way pursuant to this Agreement. VRT further acknowledges and agrees that it specifically assumes the risk that the access right that is granted pursuant to this Agreement may be terminated as provided herein before VRT has realized the economic benefit of the cost of installing, constructing, repairing, or maintaining the Transit Structures, and VRT hereby waives and is estopped from asserting any claim that this Agreement is in any way irrevocable because VRT has expended funds on the Transit Structures and this Agreement has not been in effect for a period sufficient for VRT to realize the economic benefit from such expenditures, other than agreed to be paid by ACHD as set forth in Section 10. Any and all costs and expenses associated with VRT's use of the public right-of-way, or the repair and maintenance of the Transit Structures, shall be at the sole cost and expense of VRT except as otherwise provided herein. 12. Compliance With Law; No Waste or Nuisance. In connection with VRT's use of the public right-of-way, throughout the term of this Agreement VRT covenants and agrees to (i) comply with and observe in all respects any and all applicable federal, state and local statutes, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations, and (ii) commit no waste or allow any nuisance on the public -right -of way. 13. Default. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default of this Agreement except upon the expiration of thirty (30) days from receipt of written notice from the other party specifying the particulars in which such party has failed to perform its obligations (or breached any of its representations or warranties) under this Agreement unless such party, prior to expiration of said thirty (30) day period has rectified the particulars specified in said notice of default; provided, however, that if the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) days period, the commencement of the cure within such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period. 14. Force Majeure. Performance by either party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default where delays or defaults are due to war, insurrection, strikes, lockouts, walkouts, riots, flood, earthquakes, fire or other casualty, the elements or acts of God, or other causes, other than financial, beyond a party's reasonable control 16. Indemnification. VRT hereby indemnifies and holds ACHD harmless from and against any and all claims or actions for loss, injury, death, damages, mechanics, and other liens, arising out of the failure or neglect of VRT, its agents, contractors and employees to properly and reasonably make authorized use of the public right-of-way or properly repair or maintain the improvements thereon, or that otherwise result from the use and occupation of the public right-of-way or it Transit K Structures by VRT, and including any attorney fees and costs that may be incurred by ACHD in defense of such claims or actions indemnified against by VRT hereunder, except to the extent caused by the willful or grossly negligent act or omission of ACHD, its agents, contractors or employees. 16. Liability Insurance. VRT agrees to carry liability insurance in a sum equal to the statutory limit set forth in Idaho Code § 6-926 (currently $500,000) as may be adjusted by the Idaho legislature from time to time, VRT agrees to provide notice to ACHD of such coverage, with ACHD as an additional insured, on an annual basis. 17. Special Provisions. 17.1 Third Party Construction. If, as a result of any construction, improvement, repair or maintenance by or caused by a third party (such as, by way of example and not limitation, third party new construction or third party relocation of sewer or utility lines), it is determined by ACHD that relocation, modification or other adaptation of any of VRT's Transit Structure will be required, ACHD, to the extent permitted under its statutory authority, shall require that the third party, at such third party's sole cost and expense, be responsible for such relocation, modification or other adaptation, as is appropriate under the circumstances. 17.2 Good Faith and Cooperation. It is agreed by ACHD and VRT that it is in their mutual best interest and the interest of the public that the Transit Structures be located within the public right-of-way as herein contemplated, and, to that end, the parties shall in all instances cooperate and act in good faith in compliance with the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement and each shall deal fairly with the other. 17.3 Regulation and Enforcement. ACHD and VRT acknowledge and agree that regulation and enforcement regarding signs, benches, advertising and related issues are matters within the underlying jurisdiction and control of the cities and/or counties in which the Transit Structures are located. ACHD will cooperate with any other jurisdictions in Ada County enacting sign ordinances. 18. Miscellaneous. 18.1 Authority. The parties hereby warrant that the person executing this Agreement on behalf of each party is, at the time of its execution, duly authorized to do so by its governing body, and is fully vested with the authority to bind that party in all respects. 18.2 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remainder shall be construed to conform to the intent of the parties, and shall survive the severed provisions. 18.3 Entire Agreement. Except as provided otherwise herein, this Agreement and any attachments hereto constitute the entire Agreement between VRT and ACHD concerning the subject matter hereof, -7- 18.4 Further Assurances, Each Party shall cooperate fully with the other and execute such further instruments, documents and agreements and give such further written assurances, as may be reasonably requested by the other to better evidence and reflect the transactions described herein and contemplated hereby, and to carry into effect the intents and purposes of this Agreement. 18.5 Captions and Headings. The captions and headings in this Agreement are solely for reference purposes, and shall not affect the interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 18.6 Third Parties, This Agreement is not intended. to.createt nor shall_it in any way be interpreted or construed to create, any third party beneficiary rights in any person not a party hereto. 18.7 Assignment. Either party shall be entitled to assign this Agreement to an entity which is either statutorily authorized to be its successor or is an entity controlled by the assigning party, provided that such assignee assumes all the obligations, warranties, covenants and agreements of the assigning party herein contained. Otherwise, neither party shall be entitled to sell, assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement or any of its rights hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent will not be granted unless such purchaser, assignee or transferee assumes all the obligations, warranties, covenants and agreements of the assigning party herein contained. 18.8 Attorney Fees and Costs. In any suit, action or appeal there from to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs incurred therein, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 18.9 Successors and Assigns. The terms and conditions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective parties, their administrators, executors, successors and assigns. 18.10 Survival. The terms, covenants and conditions set forth herein shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 18.11 FTA Rules and Regulations. FTA rules and regulations in effect at the time of the execution of this Agreement shall control the interpretation and implementation of this Agreement throughout the term of the Agreement. Any Transit Structures purchased with FTA funds shall be used only as permitted under said FTA rules and regulations. 18.12 Constitutional Debt Limitation. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to obligate either party to any indebtedness or liability, in any manner, or for any purpose that would be in violation of the yearly debt limitation imposed by Article VIII, Section 3 of the Idaho Constitution. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above. -8- K K Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 8F PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: Budget Amendment for Mayor's Office for Mayor's Office Internship for Amount Not -to -Exceed $2,775.00 MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS W c to 0 > (1) c E .2 0 N 0) 42 0 D c: E c: _0 E L Q) U) CL 0) 0 a) 777 E 0 0) 0 1 —171 1 0 to c: z W CL x n (D > a) 0-0.0 c u m c jr-75 "t5 0 to 0 .5; 0 c [z D 04- 0 .2 0 :3 m 0 E ui > L) 0 a) m 12 N c U) a) N 0 _0 4 m 0 Uy N 0 tLY Cr E 'a o - (D 0 0 N _0 _0 to LI) > 0 to 13 qw, QL a) > 1: CA 0) c -0 0 c: L) Cr 0 a)0 X) >, M 0 U N CA 0 to 2) s E T c r - D 0 U- Cr 0)CO E 2) W s4 -0c 0 .aa 4- 01 to a a)0 CA L4 0 2 CL Lli C) 0 a) 4E 3: 0 (D c L 0 a) -c =1 2 0) to 0) E 4 - LL .— C (D s- -0 o 0 -0 0 0 D to LLJ _0 0 :3 U) 0 0 C a) c :E jq) -2 > C f- m !7- a ._?.0 U- 4- 0 E ID Q) -c 10 0- :E 0 E C N 4D 2 a - (D 0 4-H 0 U) 0 ca N 0) �s w d) 4j E CA r- tD 0 0 0 C 0 E a iC 4-- m 0 &. c u m 0 0 t7l t) w pt 0 a CD 0 0)4 - C EM iti .c CL 0 ViM- c 0 M r- 0 EF E m 0 0 4-- > v m a 0 > m E (L) v m 02 q 75 0 E 0 0 E M to E t w CA a 4) CL V M > 0 z -c w cl ca u 10' O 0 CL LL 4- 0 L. cu m E m Z z w o LLJ _j 0 CL E jo - ro cn CD YL0 E -0 o E m (D41 cn "a m = m rn i % o > U— 3: 0 0 0 CO > 0 0 m 0 CL '0 A :s E 0 U 0 E) E je E t5 S 67 co E E < < < c 3: -Le 2 =3 6 cu i3 E jo - ro cn CD YL0 E -0 o E m (D41 cn "a m = m rn i % Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 9A PROJECT NUMBER: AZ 08-007 ITEM TITLE: Ordinance No. // - )y The Shops at Victory by DMG-Eagle & Victory, LLC Located at 3210 S. Eagle Road: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C -C (Community Business) Zoning District IT, I:I =111111,Les ki [oil 0�1 CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS ADA COUNTY RECORDER Christopher D. Rich AMOUNT .00 ! BOISE IDAHO 04/13/11 11:42 AM DEPUTY Lia Baft RECORDED BREQUESTOF III lill�IIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Meridian City 111030735 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. - 1&0 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, HOAGLUN, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA AN ORDINANCE (AZ 08-007 SHOPS AT VICTORY) FOR ANNEXATION OF A PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM RUT IN ADA COUNTY TO C -C (COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" are within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and re- zoning by the owner of said property, to -wit: DMG Eagle & Victory, LLC. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re -zoned from RUT in Ada County to C -C (Community Business District), in the Meridian City Code, SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re -zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. ANNEXATION — SHOPS AT VICTORY (AZ 08-007) Page 1 of 3 SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Cleric of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to -wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this day of Qj2t, 2011. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /a4+—day of , 2011. OV- M *YOTf IkAMMY de WEERD S SEAL - L j/lttttfui ritt'titi��" ATTEST: JAYCJ�_ L. HOLMAN, CITY ANNEXATION — SHOPS AT VICTORY (AZ 08-007) Page 2 of 3 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 1 D day of A r., \ , 2011, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and JAYCEE L. HOLMAN, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. 0060060 (SEAL) ,�C3` ``• a � s s a 4 NOT PUBLIC OR IDAHO RESIDING AT: W6,1010M kb MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: )v 1 , r `i ANNEXATION — SHOPS AT VICTORY (AZ 08-007) Page 3 of 3 March 14, 2008 Project No, 07167 Anumiation and Rezone DMG Real Estate Partners 4.79 Acres LD THE ZAN) Oaour, INC. Exhibit "A" A tract of land for annexation and rezone purposes situated in a portion of the Northwest One Quarter of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Vaddian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: BEt ROM,Q-�Rt a foto brass cap momumendng the Northwest Corner of said Section 28 on tato intersectiion of theoemterline of Fast Victory Road and the centerline of South Eagle Road; Them following the northerly line of the Northwest One Quarter of said Section 28 and the centerline of said East Victory Road, South 89035151" East a distance of 530.00 feet to a point, which bears North 89035'51" West a distance of 2,127.05 feet from a found brass cap monumeuting the North One Quarter Comex ofsaid section 28; Thence Ieaviag sand Mace nd said oE outh 00°31'02" West a t-imah sttance of W a set S/8 -inch steel pin; tauce of 2to a set 5/8•inch steel pin; ance of 1to a set S/8 -inch steel pin; ance of 9 a set 5/8 inch steel pin; Tharee South 00°31'02" West a distance of 73.7S feet to a set 5/8 -inch steal pin; Thence North 89°31' 13" West a distance of 92.85 feat to a set 5/8 -inch steel pin on the easterly right-of-way line of said South Eagle Road; Thence following said easterly right-of-way, South 00028111 " West a distance of 34.86 feet to a set &s -inch ateel pin; Thence fallowing said easterly right-of-way, North 30003146" West a distance of 29.53 feet to a set 5/8 -inch steel pin; Thence leaving acid easterly right-of-way line, North 89°31148" West a distance of 33.00 feet to a point on the westerly line of said Section 28 and the centerline of said South Eagle Road; Thence following said westerly line and said centerline, North 00028111" East a distance of 5 18. 12 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. 462 B 36ore Delve, Sa.100, pAg3e, MAO 83616. P 208.939AC41 P 2W39 .4445■ :\�01�07t67�Admit�U�g�eUt07167_0803t4 AtevelA.d°aexMioadoe A,•.. ddMk i THR LAND GROUP ING Tho above-described tract of land contains 4.79 acres, more or loss, subject to all existing easements and rights -of way. This description is intended for annexation purposes only and shall not be used for the purpose of conveyance. Prepared By; l li$ LAM GROUP. INC. 462 E. SHORE DRIVE, surra loo EACGL$ IDAHO 83616 208-9394041 208-939AM5 (FAX) 60 ••49V / 2 +A+Ahd" •.{bPAW aug •Gr#* Caar dx&y 462K Stan Dove, gm 100. RA8k 1&M 83616 • P 208.939A041 F 2M939.i445 • rYk2WA01167\namtnirb\r,Wt67 o8a314_r,tctu uiomda Situated In a portion of thi Northwest 114 of the Northwest 114 of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range I East, B.M., Ada County, Idaho FOUR BRASS CAP NW CORNER SECTION 28 CY,&F.No. 94002908 FOUND BRASS CAP 1/4 CORNER SECTION 28 20 91 E. VICTORY ROAD N PER CMF Na 97003907 N89'35'51 *W —20.o0' 21 ,2s 2s 20 S89-35 '5rE 06, S8935'51"E 2127.05' 81128223075 CURRENT TAX Dmm RUT PROPOSED TAX BUMCr.- GC. Cd 4.7%AC. 0n 11 31t kL1 to GOLDW EAGLE C) Z C • N89*31'13"W 90.01, 0'2W ?465 ll 0 N30'03'46"W T CA 29.5S 5 29. 5 89'31'13" • W.85 SO"28!11"W 34.86 • • N89'31'4WW 26 28 33'00! 0 FOUND Sle STEEL PIN N 1/15 CORNER F GOLDWEAMS WATHS 0 2 - GOLDW EAGLE C WTAM 124590 ll -SO*31'02"W or 73.75' Legend row BRM W 9 FOUND 6/e STEEL PIN 0 SET 51e STEEL PIN FOUND 1/2* STEEL PfN CA MIXED POINT BOUNDARY LINE SECTION LM PRO= INFOWTUJ - -------- -- -- EMMIT T MUM Parcel $1128223075 �NO. 0711 M1 Annexation and Rezone 'I OF 1 NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 11--� 4-@ PROVIDING FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting annexation and zoning for a portion of the Northwest One Quarter of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. This parcel contains 4.79 acres more of less. Also, this parcel is SUBJECT TO all easements and rights-of-way of record or implied. As surveyed in attached exhibit "B" and is not based on an actual field survey. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadg0M Le,Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the 11 day 2011. City of *radian EA 0 Mayor and City Council By: Jaycee L. Holman, City CI e fit'' s�c; oo �VNT1 First Reading: A a D Adopted after first reading by suspension of the Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902: YES NO Second Reading: Third Reading: --` STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 11- 14 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. 11- (Q � 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 �`/day of 41, 2011. 8,9 Z. "T William. L.M. Nary City Attorney ORDINANCE SUMMARY - SHOPS AT VICTORY (AZ 08-007) Meridian City Council Meeting DATE: April 12, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 10 ITEM TITLE: Future Meeting Topics PROJECT NUMBER: MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS