►
From YouTube: Water and Sewer Board - 12 Jul 2022
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141439?handle=FC314A673C8D427FBC4EAA52538A1724
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141438?handle=00DBD119C05E40D790547B03E860C6DF
1. Chair Moore approved the agenda
2. Call to Order
3. Approval of Minutes
a. Minutes of the Water & Sewer Board from – 14 Jun 2022 Meeting
4. Public Forum
a. This is an opportunity for the public to address the Water and Sewer Board. There is an expectation that the presentation will be conducted in a respectful manner. The Water and Sewer Board may ask qu...
5. New Business
a. Englewood Customer – Variance Request The property owner of 3106 S Acoma St will present a customer variance request to City Code section 12-1B-7-A for an exception to separate an existing duplex prop...
Award of a Contract for Services with Blackeagle Energy Services for Water Main Replacement Construction Deputy Director Stone will present a recommendation for a Contract for Services with Blackeagle...
Award of a Professional Services Agreement with Eidos Architects, PC for Architectural and Engineering Design Services. Utilities and South Platte Renew Director, Pieter Van Ry will present a recommen...
6. Old Business
a. City Ditch Contract Users Reimbursement – Follow Up
7. Staff's Choice
South Platte Renew Open House Invitation
Utility Management Conference Presentation Director Van Ry and Deputy Director Stone will give a presentation that was delivered to water industry colleagues during the 2022 Utility Management Confere...
In-Person Board Meetings Status
8. Adjournment
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141439?handle=FC314A673C8D427FBC4EAA52538A1724
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141438?handle=00DBD119C05E40D790547B03E860C6DF
B
D
F
G
F
H
C
C
H
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
hello,
everyone.
My
name
is
jeff
gieson
and
I
am
the
owner
at
3106
and
3110
south
tacoma
brenda.
If
you
can
advance,
I
just
want
to
give
you
a
little
history
about
what
we're
trying
to
do
here.
So
this
is
a
duplex
property.
Obviously
you
can
hit
it
again
brenda
and
so
I've
owned
this
property
for
about
11
years
I
bought
it.
I
updated
it.
I
added
garage
added
storage
fixed
it
up
from
where
it
was.
H
It
was
actually
a
foreclosure,
and
so
I
established
essentially
a
quality
rental
option
in
the
area
I
rented
it
out
had
the
same
tenants
until
just
recently
for
11
years.
I
had
this
probably
well
maintained,
it's
very,
very
well
known
in
the
neighborhood.
It's
it's
got
sprinkler
system
and
bush's
plants,
it's
a
very
nice
property,
and
so
next
brenda,
as
you
can
imagine,
owning
that
property
from
2011
established
a
lot
of
equity
in
that
property.
H
And
so
I
was
talking
to
some
advisors
and
financial
folks
trying
to
figure
out
what
to
do
with
that
equity
and
we
decided
that
it
was
best
to
to
sell
the
property.
And
so
I've
been
looking
at
options
on
on
what
to
do
and
I've
been
working
with
red
tea
homes
on
some
other
investment
opportunities,
not
unlike,
what's
going
on
in
a
lot
of
parts
of
mangle
wood,
where
we're
building
two
and
three
and
four
unit
townhomes.
H
So
I
was
talking
to
them
about
some
of
the
options
for
the
property
and
what
they
advise
is
they're
actually
doing
similar
to
what
they're
doing,
with
with
scrape
options
but
they're,
creating
ownership
opportunities
in
other
areas,
so
parceling
out
splitting
up
the
property
and
then
selling
the
units
individually,
so
they're
serving
as
cert
star
of
marketplace.
So
we
decided
to
look
into
actually
doing
that.
H
So
you
can
go
next
brenda,
so
we
began
working
with
the
city
in
november
of
last
year
and
having
some
conversations
and
exploring
this
and
so
working
back
and
forth
with
red
tea.
Red
tea
has
done
this,
so
they
they've
been
working
with
the
city
pretty
closely
and
we
ended
up
putting
together
a
proposal.
We
we
went
and
surveyed
put
a
new
survey
together
proposed
a
splitting
of
the
property
put
together
a
party
wall
agreement
with
covenants
and
restrictions,
and
throughout
that
process
there
was
no
perceived
obsession.
H
Excuse
me
objections,
so
we
kept
moving
forward
the
process
once
we
submitted
the
final
paperwork.
We
ended
up
having
an
objection
and
at
the
time,
given
that
we
had
no
perceived
objections.
I
I
started
working
on
upgrades
roof
structural
electrical
upgrades
currently
ready
for
internal
upgrades
next
brenda,
but
through
that
submittal.
Obviously-
and
that's
why
we're
here
tonight,
you
guys
should
have
seen
that
water
and
sewer
board
had
said
all
right.
H
H
So
this
is
an
aerial
view
of
the
property
and
you
can
see
that
it's
a
it's
a
front
back,
duplex,
that's
slightly
offset
and
the
green
lines
are
showing
the
existing
water
and
existing
sewer
lines.
So
you
can
see
it
comes
in
the
south
side
of
3106
the
front
and
then
it
go.
The
sewer
goes
out
the
south
side
of
3110
there.
H
So
if
you
advance
one
more
brenda,
here's
a
picture
of
the
front
yard,
so
this
is
essentially
channeling
right,
where
we'd
have
to
put
the
water
line
across
all
that
yard.
You
can
see.
This
is
well
maintained,
got
my
rose
bushes
that
were
there
when
I
bought
the
property
and
it
somehow
managed
to
survive,
but
obviously
we
have
to
dig
up
a
large
portion
of
the
yard
in
order
to
make
this
happen.
H
H
We
have
on
the
left
side,
we
have
our
shed
there
and
that
goes
for
seven
eight
feet
over
the
property
line,
so
you
can
see
in
order
to
put
the
water
or
the
sewer
line
in
we'd
have
to
dig
up
all
that
cement
part
of
that
step
and
potentially
that
porch
there
and
go
out
back
to
where
that
step
is
back
there.
The
second
picture
is
me:
standing
on
that
step
turned
45
degrees.
H
Now
we've
got
that
large
tree
there,
that's
in
the
way
large
established
tree
as
well,
so
I
don't
know
digging
up
the
yard.
What
that'll
do
to
that
tree
if
that'll
kill
that
tree
or
not,
so
you
can
see,
we've
got
established
property
here,
that's
you
know
coming
in,
and
digging
up
would
be
quite
quite
the
disturbance,
so
brenda.
If
you
could
go
one
more
so
bottom
line,
we're
requesting
an
exception
to
this
ruling
that
we
need
to
add
the
water
sewer
brenda.
H
H
I
understand
if
this
was
new
construction,
if
we
did
a
scrape,
for
instance,
we
would,
we
would
absolutely
be
looking
at
putting
in
the
new
water
and
sewer,
but
in
this
case
we
don't
really
see
that
the
situation
is
any
different
than
what
I
had
as
a
rental
landlord.
If
I
wasn't
paying
the
water
bills,
neither
of
my
tenants
would
get
water.
H
We
also
that
you
know
doing
this.
Work
is
gonna,
add
a
couple
months
to
our
effort
here.
So
if
we
didn't
have
to
do
that,
we
got
quicker
time
to
market.
We
can
create
an
ownership
opportunity
in
this
in
this
market
range
sooner.
You
know
before
the
rates
rise
again,
which,
as
we
have
heard,
will
will
likely
happen
and
then
also
you
know,
like
I
said
we're
aligning
with
you
know
the
other
property
that's
out
there.
That
seems
to
have
done
this
without
any
need
to
put
in
the
water
sewer.
H
D
J
Thank
you!
Okay,
so
I'll
just
give
a
little
bit
of
background
of
staff's
research
into
this
application
or
variance
request.
Up
to
this
point,
the
property
owner
did
submit
a
minor
subdivision
permit
to
the
city
of
englewood
in
march
2022
to
split
the
property,
as
you
can
see
here,
on
the
map
that
splits
it
between
between
the
duplex
and
the
water
line
is
shown
in
blue,
going
to
the
front
of
the
property.
And
then
the
sewer
line,
single
sewer
line
service
is
shown
going
to
the
back
of
the
property
in
green.
J
So,
following
that
review
of
the
permit
utility
staff
did
not
approve
it.
As
there
was
just
the
single
service
lines
to
the
property
and
per
city
code,
we
do
not
allow
for
a
single
service
line
to
multiple
properties.
So
I've
I've
highlighted
the
relevant
relevant
language
from
city
code,
section
12-1,
b-7-a
that
talks
about
the
single
or
talks
about
needing
a
single
service
line
to
each
property
and
that
extension
of
service
cannot
be
from
another
property.
J
And
then
the
exemptions
to
this
requirement
can
be
granted
by
the
city
manager
and
by
the
water
sewer
board.
So
that
is
what
we're
talking
about
tonight.
So,
following
submittal
of
the
variance
request,
staff
did
take
a
look
into
the
example
and
that
occurred
in
2018,
where
that
pr
property
was
allowed
to
be
served
off
of
two
properties
were
allowed
to
be
served
off
of
one
single
line.
At
the
time
that
was
approved,
we
did
not
have
record
of
why
that
was
approved.
J
That
engineer
is
no
longer
with
the
city
and
it's
not
a
current
practice
of
the
utilities
department
to
allow
a
single
service
connection
to
multiple
properties
at
this
time.
So
staff
recommends
denying
this
request
as
there's
an
option
to
add
a
sewer
line
and
a
water
line
to
each
unit
of
the
duplex.
J
There
would
also
be
required
to
have
some
kind
of
shared
maintenance
responsibility
between
the
two
property
owners
for
any
section
of
the
service
line,
that
is
on
private
property.
This
isn't
industry
standard
and
it
really
creates
a
legacy
problem
that
that
utility
would
have
to
deal
with
for
for
years
to
come.
So
our
recommendation,
staff's
recommendation
is
to
deny
the
request.
E
H
Of
both
it's
it's
about
a
forty
five
thousand
dollar
endeavor.
I've
also
got
a
sprinkler
system
in
there.
That
will
have
to
be
totally.
You
know,
I
mean,
obviously
it
would
be
damaged
by
the
water
line
coming
in,
but
would
have
to
be
totally
reconfigured
to
be
run
off
too.
So
all
that
the
expense.
The
time
is,
the
motivation
here
correct.
K
H
So
the
agreement
calls
for
both
owners
being
responsible
for
fifty
percent
of
each
of
the,
if
anything,
that's
shared,
so
there's
essentially
you're
putting
together
an
association
that
has
to
fund
an
account
to
pay
for
those
those
items
monthly,
as
as
well
as
any
kind
of
maintenance.
There
are
easement
agreements
in
the
party
wall
agreement
for
the
properties,
so
that
so
that
utility,
so
maintenance
can
be
done
it
would
have
to
you-
would
have
to
talk
to
two
owners.
H
F
B
Hi
there
this
is
gavin
with
red
tea
homes.
I'm
actually
pulling
up
the
review
comments.
We
did
go
through
zoning.
I
know
that
that
was
the
first
thing
we
checked
with,
because
we
were
also
concerned
about
that
and
the
zoning
was
reviewed
and
approved
in
our
initial
submittal
for
condominium
condom
minimization
I'll
work
on
pulling
up
that
exact
note
from
the
city
reviewer.
J
E
Yeah
I
had
a
question
for
sarah.
I
was
just
curious
if
there
have
been
much
other
interest
in
these
types
of
duplex
subdivisions
where
there's
not,
you
know
complete
scrapes
happening
and
if
so,
has
the
city
considered
discounted
system
development
charges
since
I'm
guessing
you
know
it
would
be
similar
usage
on
both
sides.
I
So
if
you
were
to
do
a
scrape
you'd
be
putting
in
two
new
duplexes
two
new
sets
of
services,
so
the
the
fortunate
situation
about
this
circumstance
is
you
don't
have
to
scrape
the
house,
but
we,
but
it's
a
bad
practice
to
have
homeowners
subservient
to
other
homeowners.
It
just
creates
a
problem
not
just
for
the
utility,
but
for
the
for
the
like
for
the
owners
of
the
properties,
because
it
doesn't
give
them
their
own,
their
own
dedicated
service
for
water
and
sewer,
which
is
a
primary
function
required
by
the
utilities
department.
I
I
This
is
something
this
is
why
we
made
the
recommendation
from
a
from
a
service
perspective,
as
it
relates
to
tap
fees,
I
think,
on
tap
feeds.
We
would
have
to
go
back
and
evaluate
that,
because
I
think
there
is
there
is
an
argument
to
be
made
that
says
that
the
demand
does
not
change,
because
it's
not
putting
two
new
two-story
two-story
duplexes
on
it.
It's
the
same
size,
duplexes,
it's
the
same
water
demand,
it's
the
same,
sewer
demand,
so
in
reality
the
demand
on
the
system
doesn't
really
change.
I
That's
defensible
for
for
the
utility
to
stand
on
to
say
that
the
even
though
we're
splitting
it
into
two
services
there's
a
there's,
the
the
perceived
demand
on
the
system
or
the
actual
demand
on
the
system
or
potential
future
demand
does
not
increase.
So
that's
something
I
think
we
could
work
with.
I
think
is
again
back
to
the
physical
infrastructure.
It's
it.
It
sets
it's
a
bad
precedent
and
it
sets
up
a
a
long-term
challenge
for
not
just
the
utility
but
the
homeowners
themselves.
E
Thanks
peter
yeah,
I
agree.
Definitely
it
seems
like
it
makes
sense
to
have
separate
services.
I
guess
then,
that's
that
other
slippery
slope
too.
If
you
discount
it,
then
what
happens
if
at
some
point
down
the
line
it
does
get
taken
down,
then
you
know:
do
you
have
to
reevaluate
that
tap
size
again
if
there's
two
services,
so
I
know
that
you
know
there's
a
lot
to
consider
with
with
that
programmatically.
I
I
Really
what
you'd
have
to
do
is
you'd
have
to
stick
a
note
associated
with
the
plat
or
a
note
associated
with
the
some
kind
of
record
on
it.
That
says
that
if
this
property
is
to
redevelop
a
a
tap
fee
must
be
paid,
but
then
which
one
do
you
assess
it
to?
Do
you
assess
it?
You
know,
does
one
get
assessed,
but
the
other
one
doesn't
get
assessed.
A
We
have
a
couple
questions
about
that.
I
guess
the
first
one
being
that,
typically,
when
we
set
up
these
party
walls,
they
are
set
up
in
a
way.
So
a
management
company
handles
all
of
the
diving
of
payments
that
are
due
to
utilities,
so,
typically
that
managing
entity
would
wear
the
burden
of
managing
those
utilities
is
with
payment
with
regards
to
those
utility
companies.
A
So
we
believe
that
bernie
would
actually
rely
on
that
management
company
and
not
only
individual
utilities
to
keep
up
with
those
shared
services,
and
then
the
second
bit
was
if
we
were
granted.
This
variance-
and
let's
say
the
future
of
this
property-
were
to
be
redeveloped
scraped
and
rebuilt
as
weird
we're
theorizing
in
that
system.
I
So
I
I
think
I
can
respond
to
the
the
second
one
first,
and
so
the
code
says
the
code
establishes
pretty
clearly
this
right
now
and
you're
you're,
redeveloping
the
property
you're,
not
necessarily
tearing
the
buildings
down
and
and
putting
in
new
new
houses
and
new
duplex,
but
you're
you're.
In
that
moment,
right
now,
which
is
why
the
the
code
is
in
place
to
address
exactly
the
issue
that
you're
pointing
out
a
future
a
future
entity
should
resolve.
I
So
I
think
the
the
the
reason
why
the
code
is
established
is
to
to
allow
for
with
this
property.
You
are
dividing
it
into
two
distinctly
separate
properties
with
two
with
a
property
line
that
runs
right
down
the
middle
from
one
from
the
front
property
line
to
the
back
property
line,
so
you're,
essentially
creating
two
single
family
residences
and
those
two
single
family
residences
from
a
from
a
matter
of
practice
and
a
matter
of
of
of
code
requires
separate
water
and
sewer
services.
I
B
And
I
was
curious,
I
guess
is
that
something
that
you
guys
have
in
the
code
currently
for
town
for
times
or
or
something
like
that
or
condos.
I
mean
since,
as
you
mentioned
before,
we're
not
really
changing
the
demand
or
anything
like
that,
and
if
it
is
an
issue
of
having
you
know
two
lines
because
there's
two
separate
people
living
in
two
separate
places,
one
wouldn't
wouldn't
a
townhome
style
agreement
work.
I
So
I
I
can't,
I
can't
address
that
right
now.
I
can
address
the
request
and
the
code
as
it
states
right
now.
I
also
can't
address
what's
approved
in
other
cities.
I
can
go
off
of
what
the
city
of
englewood
code
is
and
we've
highlighted
those
provisions
in
the
code-
and
that's
that's
essentially
where
we're
at
right
now
is-
is
you're
requesting
to
split
it
into
two
distinctly
different
properties.
I
They
do
share
a
common
wall
because
they
were
set
up
as
a
duplex
and
the
code
states
that
they
require
separate
water
and
sewer
services,
which,
frankly,
is
an
industry
standard
practice.
It's
not
it's
not
an
abnormal
practice
and
it's
a
good
long-term
practice
for
the
two
individuals
who
are
going
to
be
owning
those
properties
well
into
the
future.
G
Thank
you
for
joining
taking
the
time
to
hear
what
I
have
to
say.
I
I
sadly
have
to
say
jeff
that
I
actually
knew
of
a
person
that
went
through
the
exact
scenario
we're
speaking
about,
and
it
was
so
unfortunate
because
when
the
property
was
sold,
they
end
up
having
a
huge
debate
at
the
court
because
they
were
like
who
is
in
charge
of
this
and
then
they're
like
having
arguments
about
this.
You
know
you're
in
the
front.
It
is
in
your
front
yard,
and
this
is
this
and
then
they
had.
G
It
was
a
huge
big
ordeal
for
this
individual.
So
I
can
totally
see
sarah's
and
and
peter's
argument
about
this-
that
the
the
the
peace
of
mind
a
a
residence
needs
to
have
in
the
future.
We
can't
just
kick
this
cam
down
the
road
and
then
just
hope
that
somehow
ends
up
in
a
safe
place
and
you
never
know
what
the
people
are
just
getting.
So
I
have
to
say
I
can't
completely
can
see
peter's
and
sarah's
point
of
view,
so.
D
Thank
you
I'll
raise
my
hand,
I'd
like
to
I'm
always
concerned
about
board
precedent
and
both
with
respect
to
this
2018
variants.
That
apparently
was
granted
as
well
as
other
times
where
we
haven't
granted.
So
let
me
let
me
start
with
that
latter
one.
Do
we
have
a
board
history
of
denying
requests
like
this,
or
is
this
literally
number
two
that
we've
faced.
D
J
J
Under
the
the
original
review,
the
the
engineer
was
able
to
review
it
and
provided
it
under
that
initial
losing
the
the
right
term,
the
the
plat,
not
the
plat,
the
permit.
Excuse
me
the
subdivision,
permit
they.
It
was
the
purview
of
the
staff
to
review
it
as
a
part
of
the
city's
process.
There
wasn't
a
specific
variance
request
that
came
to
the
board.
I
I
We
agree
100,
which
is
why
we
brought
this
one
to
you
again.
This
2018
is
is
a
legacy
period
for
this
utility
and
it's
things
that
we
are
the
processes
that
weren't
always
followed
to
the
letter
of
the
code
and
so
we're
trying
to
ensure
that
those
types
of
situations
don't
recur
so
that
we
don't
have
situations
where
we're
trying
to
explain
why
a
decision
was
made
or
not.
There's
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
true
documentation
of
how
the
decision
was
made.
E
I
D
D
D
D
I
We'd
have
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
code,
I'm
not.
I
don't
want
to
speak
to
what
it
says,
because
I
don't
know
that
part
of
the
code
inside
and
out,
but
we
can.
We
can
definitely
go
back
and
verify
that.
I
think
this
is
a.
This
is
a
little
bit
different
because
we're
we're
basically
establishing
two
distinctly
separate
properties.
D
Yeah,
the
one
thing
I
I
mean
I
do
I'm
sensitive
to
is
it's
kind
of
like
that.
Where
don's
question
was
too,
I
think
earlier,
which
is
I
mean,
they're
still
not
they're,
not
two
single-family
homes
in
the
full
sense
of
the
term,
in
terms
of
you
know,
setbacks
on
all
four
sides
of
the
property.
It's
still
it's
designed
to
be
a
duplex,
and
it's
designed
I
mean
we've
allowed.
G
G
G
H
D
A
Yeah-
let's
two
things,
so
I
guess
we'll
start
with
the
most
recent.
We
understand
the
best
cost
to
install
the
these
services,
but
we
don't
think
it
should
be
weighed
against
what
jeff's
potential
profits
are
for
the
property
for
owning
it
for
11
years
had
he
bought
it
said
yesterday
and
we
were
going
through
this
process.
He
would
have
zero
equity
and
be
tasked
with
the
fee
of
45
to
50
000
worth
of
improvements.
So
we
don't
want
to
let
that
get
skewed
that
you
know.
A
A
If
we
go
back
to
the
party
wall,
the
party
wall
is
in
place
before
a
single
property
goes
under
co,
and
so
before
each
per
potential
new
owner
of
this
duplex
purchases,
their
half
of
the
duplex,
they
will
know
exactly
what
they
are
required
to
maintain
exactly
what
they
own
as
their
property
and
exactly
what
is
responsible
for
the
shared
improvements.
Whether
it's
utilities
open
space,
shared
walls,
shared
roofs,
etc.
A
So
we
believe
we
hear
that
it
was
an
unfortunate
situation
that
the
legacy
project
that
we're
talking
about
went
through
a
contentious
resale,
our
party
law,
the
way
that
we
draft
them
will
prevent
that
from
happening.
So
we
can
clearly
identify
responsibilities,
percentage,
ownerships
and
how
those
payments
will
be
processed
through
a
management
company.
E
E
How
do
you
feel-
or
I
think,
there's
areas
where
they
cannot
provide?
What
the
the
utility
and
the
the
city
would
like
to
see
like
there's,
no
way
that
the
city
will
ever
get
data
for
each
individual
unit?
Despite
how
comprehensive
the
the
management
plan
is,
has
there
been
any
conversations
about
how
you
know
you
would
be
able
to
look
at
individual
usage
if
the
city
was
was
interested
with
that
or
or
if
the
city
you
know
eventually
moves
to
to
full
real-time
data
monitoring?
E
A
That's
a
really
great
question.
To
be
honest,
I
wasn't.
I
hadn't
heard
that
you
guys
were
looking
for
data
on
this,
but
I'm
wondering
if,
if,
if
we
have
effectively
one
tab
with
one
service,
we
would
know
what
the
usage
is
of
that
tab
and
then
the
management
company
would
either
be
divided.
50
50
or
they
pro
write
a
share
based
on
how
it's
determined.
A
E
I
was
just
thinking
more
in
in
terms
of
you
know:
you
have
that
that
front
front
lawn,
that
jeff
showed
you
have
someone
that's
going
to
be
watering
heavily,
and
then
you
have
the
back
side
of
the
property.
That's
pretty
much
xeriscape!
So
you
know
a
50.
50
breakdown
doesn't
give
give
us
much
and
then,
in
terms
of
data
you
don't
really
know
you're
not
really
able
to
allocate
who's
using
what
for
what
purpose?
A
E
D
I'll
ask
another:
the
board
of
adjustment
appeals
has
a
what
pretty
strict
four-part
criteria
for
granting
variances
things
along
the
lines
of
hardship
and
self-imposed
and
all
kinds
of
stuff.
In
terms
of
this
board's
consideration
of
variances
based
on
the
code
sections
in
front
of
us,
it
seems
very
there's
not
a
lot
of
direction.
I
E
D
Yeah,
I
would
let
me
brainstorm
here.
I
mean
I,
I
think,
there's
I'm
reading
pretty
strong
concerns
about
not
dividing
up
the
water
lines,
but
I
know
I
personally
would
like
to
make
sure
that
we
know
how
I
would
like
further
confirmation
that
this
board
didn't
address
the
18
sewer
line,
I'm
still
kind
of
surprised.
We
don't
have
other
examples
to
look
at
and
and
would
like
that,
and
then
I,
I
think,
also
having
having
input
about
our
the
way
we
should
evaluate
these
requests.
D
You
know,
I
think
well
somewhere
in
the
presentation.
I
can't
remember
if
it
was
by
mr
gee
center
if
it
was
in
our
own
stuff,
but
the
idea
of
hardship
there's
clearly
what
looks
like
a
hardship
in
the
sense
of
there's
a
lot
of
destruction
that
has
to
happen
to
make
you
know
to
make
that
you
know
to
achieve
this
ideal
of
two
separate
water
lines,
but
you
know
the
again
what
goes
before
the
board
of
adjustment
appeals?
Are
things
like
well?
D
D
So
I
would
be
welcomed
for
a
little
additional
input
before
we
actually
went
to
a
decision
on
this,
and
I
I
assume
that's
our
prerogative
to
hold
back
on
the
vote,
gather
more
information
and
and
readjourn
or
reconvene
later,
whether
that's
next
month
or
a
special
session
to
the
side
I
mean
maybe
peter
sarah
can
confirm
that
is
that's
one
option
before
the
board.
If
the
board
wishes
to
go
that
way.
Today,
that's
correct.
I
From
okay,
that
is
one
of
the
options
that
we
that
we
presented
an
opportunity
for
us
to
go
back
and
answer
some
of
these
questions
to
your
question
about
disruption.
A
lot
of
times
when
we
we
do
replacement
on
water
lines.
We
do
a
directional
bore
which
ultimately
results
in
a
four
foot
by
four
foot
cut
in
the
street,
and
then
they
directionally
bore
it
straight
to
the
house.
So
you
can
eliminate
any
of
the
disruption
to
any
of
the
surface
treatments.
D
D
I
Okay,
I
think
what
she
was
saying
was
that
we
could
table
this
to
the
next
meeting
and
then
bring
up
a
motion
on
it
at
the
next
meeting.
I
think
it's
just
more
of
a
formal
process
of
tabling
the
issue
until
the
next
meeting
and
then
we'll
we'll
bring
it
up
to
consideration
at
the
next
meeting
is:
is
that
correct
victoria.
C
D
E
Yeah
john,
I
I
was
just
wanted
to
comment
on
what
you
were
saying
about
getting
some
more
info
on
this.
Personally,
I'm
not
sure
that
anything
from
the
2018,
even
if
the
board
did
discuss
it,
would
would
change
my
perspective.
Knowing
we
have
different
staff
recommendations
at
this
point
and
I
think
are
pretty
aware
of
the
precedent
we're
trying
to
set.
I
just
wanted
to
get
my
perspective
out
there
as
a
board
member
on
where
I'm
at,
with
with
tabling
this
or
reviewing
more
info.
D
E
E
D
D
D
D
Okay,
the
motion
to
table
carries
we'll
ask
staff
for
the
additional
just
to
help
us
with
the
additional
discussion
items
we
had
or
informational
items.
We
requested
mr
geese-
and
I
I
know
this-
you
probably
right
like
resolution,
but
I
really
appreciate
your
time
and
your
patience
as
we
try
to
get
this
right.
It's
a
big
issue
for
you
and
it's
a
big
issue
for
the
city.
So
with
that
I'll,
we
will
resume
on
this
issue
next
next
month.
D
D
H
D
D
I
J
Okay,
I'll
quickly
address
the
request
for
modern
water
line
replacement
construction.
So,
following
the
master
plan,
there's
been
a
program
put
together
an
annual
water
line
replacement
program.
The
first
year
is
this
year,
where
we've
identified
installing
new
hydrants
and
mains
in
seven
sites
across
the
city
that
would
that
have
been
focused
on
water
quality
and
fire
flow.
So
kind
of
what
that
means
is
these
areas
shown
in
blue
here
are
really
dead
ends,
so
we're
looking
to
close
loops
which
improves
water
quality.
J
J
I
I
Yeah
we
we
actually
have
inspection
of
their
work,
so
that's
part
of
the
of
of
what
we
do,
sometimes
that
will
be
conducted
by
the
actual
design
engineer.
Sometimes
that
will
be
the
in
our
in-house
inspection
cruise,
which
is
typically
done
through
public
works.
As
we
start
to
implement
our
our
capital
program,
we
are,
we
will
be
hiring
our
own
capital
inspector,
that's
scheduled
for
late
this
year
early
next
year,
so
we
do
verify
that
the
work
is
being
installed
correctly.
D
Okay,
let's
see,
can
I
get
a
motion
to
recommend
city
council
approve,
buy
motion,
a
contract
for
services
of
black
eagle
engineering
in
energy
services
for
water,
main
construction
and
the
amount
of
1
million
one
hundred
twelve
thousand
dollars,
including
approval
to
execute
any
change
orders
if
necessary,
to
extend
a
ten
percent
staff,
managed
managed
contingency
amount
of
a
hundred
eleven
thousand
two
hundred
dollars
for
a
total
project.
Authorization
of
one
million
two
hundred
twenty
three
thousand
two
hundred
dollars.
J
D
G
J
I
Okay,
this
we
can
make
this
one
quick.
So,
if
you've
been
down
to
the
allen
water
treatment
plant
lately,
lately
you'll
see
that
there
are
a
number
of
trailers,
as
we
have
staffed
up
the
utilities
we
have
had
to
bring
in
trailer
resources
to
adequately
staff
the
management
and
operational
staff
at
the
at
the
allen
treatment
plant.
I
However,
at
the
allen
plant
we
do
have
needs
relative
to
operations
and
maintenance
staff,
our
water
treatment
manager
and
and
just
the
the
way
this
plant
was
originally
built.
There
was
not
a
lot
of
consideration
for
office
space.
We
actually
have
a
unique
area
on
along
the
top
of
the
filters
that
we
think
it's
pretty
seamless
and
easy
to
well
all
right.
I
We
we're
we're
approaching
this
in
a
as
a
as
a
carve
out
from
that
larger
project.
Edos
is
our
architect
on
the
on
the
larger
project.
We've
pulled
this
out.
This
is
a
a
contract
to
complete
design
services
through
design
and
construction
management
services.
Through
the
completion
of
the
project,
we
will
be
proposing
this
project
as
a
construction
management,
general
contractor
delivery
approach,
which
is
a
common
approach
used
for
when
you
are
working
in
existing
systems.
I
D
I
get
a
motion
to
recommend
that
city
council
approve
by
motion
an
optimal
source,
professional
service
agreement
with
edos
architects,
pc
for
architectural
and
engineering
design,
services
for
our
office,
space
improvements
at
the
allen,
water
treatment
plant
and
the
amount
of
199
thousand
six
hundred
seven
dollars,
including
approval
to
execute
any
change
orders
if
necessary,
to
extend
a
10
staff,
managed
contingency
amount
of
19
967
for
a
total
project.
Authorization
of
219
637.
D
I
Okay,
really
quickly
on
this,
there
was
a
question
a
few
months
back
when
we
looked
at
the
the
city,
ditch
users
agreement
and
how
we
divvied
up
the
the
cos.
The
proportion
share
of
maintenance
and
one
of
the
questions
was
there's
unallocated
volume,
that's
associated
with
denver
waters,
rights
to
run
water
through
the
through
the
ditch.
We
went
back
in
research,
it's
pretty
explicitly
clear
in
those
agreements
that
we
cannot
charge.
Maintenance
costs
against
those
against
that
unallocated
water
and
so
that
we
had
burghill.
Our
water
resources
attorney.
I
I
will
run
through,
I
can
run
through
quickly.
The
first
is
south
flight
renew
open
house.
We
would
like
to
welcome
anybody
any
and
all
to
come
to
our
open
house.
We
haven't
had
in
a
couple
years,
it's
on
august
10th,
it's
from
three
to
six.
It's
over
at
south
platte,
renew
it's
great
opportunity
to
come
and
see
the
plant
and
and
come
see
the
work
there.
I
I
I
I
However,
one
of
the
things
that
angela
really
worked
in
there
angela
was
here
for
two
years,
much
like
similar
to
steve
and
in
that
two
years,
what
angela
really
focused
on
seemed
like
the
entire
time
she
was
hiring
and
in
in
that
hiring.
What
she
was
able
to
do
was
establish
bench
strength
in
utilities
that
we
have
not
had
for
a
long
time,
so
we
have
josh
roach
who's
been
here
for
a
year
he's.
The
josh
is
on
the
on
the
line
here.
I
So
he
is
our
was
he's
our
distribution
collections
manager.
He
has
stepped
in
as
interim
deputy
director
of
o
m.
For
the
time
being,
while
we
recruit
for
that
position,
additionally,
josh
came
to
us
from
missouri
and
recruited
away
one
of
his
key
staff
from
his
utility
back
in
missouri
who
started
this
month,
so
adding
some
bench
strength
within
operations
and
maintenance.
Additionally,
we
hired
a
a
water
treatment
manager
who
was
a
24-year
veteran
of
denver
water,
zach,
alabasti
and
ty.
I
You
might
know
the
name,
so
zac
started
with
us
just
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
he
brings
a
tremendous
amount
of
expertise
and
knowledge
which
will
help
stabilize
the
operations
of
the
elm
plant,
so
even
with
angela's
departure,
we're
able
to
to
backfill
with
highly
qualified
personnel
to
move
operations
and
forward
operations
maintenance
forward,
which
two
years
ago
we
would
not
have
been
able
to
say
we
could
do
if,
if
she
departed,
so
it's
a
testament
to
the
work
that
she
did.
She
did
a
lot
of
great
work
for
a
couple
years.
I
I
Both
steve
and
angela
went
to
consulting,
and
so
we
are
in
a
challenging
environment
as
it
relates
to
competition,
both
not
just
from
the
public
sector,
but
also
in
the
private
sector,
and
so
it's
in
it's
somewhat
of
a
new
dynamic
as
it
relates
to
as
it
relates
to
retaining
and
filling
key
positions,
really
the
rest
of
the
the
the
rest
of
the
department.
We
actually
don't
have
a
a
substantial
amount
of
vacancies,
so
we're
I'm
less
concerned
about
that.
I
So
with
that
another
announcement
is
sarah.
Stone
has
agreed
to
step
in
as
interim
deputy
director
of
engineering,
in
addition
to
her
deputy
director,
do
role
duties
as
business
solutions
deputy
director.
So
I
want
to
thank
sarah
for
stepping
up
so
between
josh
and
sarah.
I
think
we've
been
able
we'll
be
able
to
we'll
be
able
to
weather
the
storm
on
this
for
the
next
few
months,
as
we
attempt
to
recruit
for
these
positions.