►
From YouTube: Water and Sewer Board - 09 Aug 2022
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143337?handle=9E9F64FBCB994A65BD11EB4A28158DF2
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143336?handle=6F9A11EEE95843D2A99B21064B026219
1. Chair Moore approved the agenda
2. Call to Order
3. Approval of Minutes
a. Minutes of the Water & Sewer Board from – 12 Jul 2022 Meeting
4. Public Forum
a. No Public Comment.
5. Old Business - Action Items
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...
b. Motion : Move to recommend City Manager deny the variance request for proposed property separation at 3106 S Acoma St.
6. New Business
a. Electrical, Instrumentation, and Control (EI&C) Improvements at Water System Facilities Deputy Director Stone will present a recommendation for the Board’s consideration of the contracting approac...
b. 2023 Budget Proposal and Updated CIP for Water, Sewer and Stormwater Enterprise Funds Pieter Van Ry, Utilities and South Platte Renew Director and Maria D’Andrea, Public Works Director will present th...
7. New Business - Information Items
a. Water Efficiency Plan Director Van Ry and Deputy Director Stone will present the proposed City of Englewood water efficiency plan.
8. Old Business
9. Staff's Choice
10. Adjournment
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143337?handle=9E9F64FBCB994A65BD11EB4A28158DF2
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143336?handle=6F9A11EEE95843D2A99B21064B026219
A
C
A
A
E
A
5A,
sorry,
I'm
flipping
between
the
minutes
and
the
agenda
under
5a.
We
actually
there
was
a
motion
by
tai
to
deny
the
variance
request
that
happened
before
the
tabling
of
that
motion.
So
I
just
would
like
to
record
to
reflect
that
that
additional
motion
is
there
any
any
before
we
vote.
Is
there
any
more
discussion
around
that
and
and
whether
there's
any
concerns
about
that
adjustment
before
we
vote.
A
A
A
A
A
No,
no
public
forum,
all
right
so
with
with
that
I'd
like
to
take
us
to
old
business.
Fi
item
5a
we
last
last
month
we
asked
the
staff
for
some
additional
information
on
the
variance
request
on
3106
south
tacoma
I'd
like
staff
to
present
the
additional
information,
and
then
mr
easton
will
give
you
a
chance
also
as
well
to
add
any
additional
input
that
you
may
have
so
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
sarah
stone.
G
E
G
G
So
again,
here's
the
background
for
the
specific
variants
request
before
you
tonight.
There
was
the
request
at
3106
south
akoma
street,
to
allow
for
a
single
water
and
sewer
service
line
to
serve
two
properties.
So
the
proposed
property
line
is
shown
in
red
and
then
the
existing
water
service
line
is
shown
in
blue
and
goes
to
the
front
of
the
property.
G
So
taking
a
look
at
the
2018
property
example,
this
was
referenced
as
a
similar
situation
to
this
property
on
on
a
coma
street
in
2018,
the
city
approved
this
property
as
a
duplex
conversion,
and
the
address
was
3202
south
sherman
street,
and
this
was
separated
into
two
condo
units
city
records
do
not
indicate
that
this
was.
This
request
was
brought
to
the
water
sewer
board,
but
it
was
approved
with
conditions
indicating
that
the
utility
bill
would
be
addressed
to
an
established
condominium
association
or
hoa
or
management
authority.
G
But
this
was
approved
in
this
configuration
shown
on
the
screen,
which
shows
the
dark
blue
area
around
the
the
duplex
and
and
the
garages
here.
On
the
right
hand,
side
in
light
blue,
the
darker
blue,
is
common
property.
So
the
single
water
and
sewer
service
line
in
in
this
example
was
common
property
and
managed
by
an
hoa.
G
G
G
We
also
took
a
look
at
a
minor
subdivision
plant
platform
proposed
duplex
construction
and
that's
shown
on
the
screen
here
and
in
this
example,
you'll
see.
There's
the
blue
line
is
water
service
lines
and
it
goes
to
each
property
there's
an
individual
meter
for
each
individual
unit
and
then
the
service
lines
for
the
sewer
service
come
in
in
the
back
on
the
the
green
shown
in
this
figure.
G
G
Staff
reviewed
the
code
for
specific
criteria
that
could
be,
or
that
defined
how
the
water
sewer
board
could
consider
variance,
requests
and
didn't
have
specific
criteria
that's
been
identified,
so
we
took
a
look
at
the
inglewood
board
of
adjustments
and
appeals,
and
this
criteria
related
to
a
zoning
variance
could
be
useful
for
the
board
as
they
consider
this
request
so
I'll
be
happy
to
pull
this
up
during
discussion.
I
won't
read
through
all
these
at
the
moment.
G
G
The
city
also
does
not
have
the
ability
to
bill
the
individual
property
owners.
If
the
two
units
aren't
served
by
a
single
water
service
line,
the
property
owners
would
also
be
required
to
share
in
the
responsibility
for
maintaining
the
water
and
sanitary
service
lines.
And
again,
as
you
know,
as
on
the
example
picture.
From
from
this
property,
that
proposed
property
line
does
split
where
part
of
those
service
lines
would
either
be
crossing
the
proper
line
or
on
all
one
property
and
individually
owned.
A
Thanks,
sir,
this
john,
let
me
just
jump
in
real
quick
that
well,
if
the
board
has
any
clarifying
questions
for
sarah,
can
ask
those
now
we'll
have
a
fuller
discussion
after
we
have
the
motion
back
on
the
table
to
vote
in
a
little
bit
and
then
again
after
this
we'll
also
turn
to
the
applicant.
So
but
any
questions
for
sarah
in
her
presentation,
ty
would
like
to
go
ahead.
H
C
That's
to
replace
the
service
line,
the
sewer
line,
if
they're
replacing
the
whole
server
sewer
line,
that's
even
harder
because
you
have
to
dig
those
up
so
that
could
I
mean
it's,
I
think
it's
minimum
of
six
or
eight
thousand
dollars,
probably
anywhere
up
to
twenty
thousand
dollars,
something
somewhere
in
there.
It's
not
an
insignificant
cost
for
either
one.
I
G
Yeah
so
that
that
can
be
done.
That
is
done
in
some
of
the
review.
We
did.
We
looked
at.
You
know,
a
property
that
had
multiple
units
where
the
service
line
you
know
came
up
to
a
point
and
then
a
private
line
was
run
to
each
individual
unit.
So,
yes,
we
could
put.
You
could
put
a
meter
then
on
each
of
those
private
service
lines.
G
A
J
A
F
K
Here
we
go
so.
The
first
thing
we
just
wanted
to
kind
of
reiterate
is
that
we
did
reach
out
to
the
city
of
englewood
and
talk
to
staff
members
originally
before
we
started
this
process
that
would
have
been
back.
In
november
december
of
last
year,
we
spoke
with
inglewood
staff
member
will,
charles
he
was
in
community
development
or
planning
it.
He
was
the
person
we
reached
out
to.
K
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
our
h
or
our
party
water
won't
recover
everything
that
would
needed
to
be
cover
covered
so
that
homeowners
were
taken
care
of,
and
so
that
the
city
was
taken
care
of.
He
approved
that
just
real
quick
as
well
as
saying
that
it
would
absolutely
be
possible
to
split
this
and
said
that
our
our
project
would
be
very
similar
to
the
the
subject
property
over
on
sherman.
K
K
K
K
Potentially
you
know
talking
about
that
same
issue
of
where
we
would
tie
in
and
then
for
the
this
is
just
essentially
our
survey
showing
the
the
different
lengths.
So
this
is
a
little
less
than
six
feet
from
the
property
line
to
the
rear
unit
south
facing
foundation
wall
which
pushes
again,
I
think
we
have
a
total
of
13
and
a
half
feet.
So
we
really
don't
have
a
lot
to
work
with
once
you
tear
up
essentially
six
feet
of
that
we're
just
shy
of
six
feet
from
there
there.
K
I
K
And
then,
with
the
sewer
line,
we
have
some
even
larger
issues.
There's
an
existing
structure
right
here
on
the
north
side
of
the
property.
This
shed
it's
in
pretty
good
shape,
honestly,
there's
no
way
that
we
can
get
fi
like
this.
This
is
less
than
five
feet
between
the
shed
and
the
north
side
of
this
rear
unit.
K
So
again,
it
just
proposes
a
lot
of
tricky
things
there
again.
If,
if
we're
going
to
give
each
unit
a
little
yard
and
space
like
we're,
hoping
to
that
gets
very
tricky
with
having
nothing
cross
over
one
of
the
other
properties
and
and
then
our
our
last
kind
of
thing
we
wanted
to
mention
is
that
our
party
wall
was
approved
by
the
city,
our
party
wall
agreement.
K
Just
to
make
sure
that
you
know.
Obviously
our
goal
is
not
to
see
anybody
get
caught
off,
guard
and
and
end
up.
You
know
losing
their
water,
especially
if
they're
paying
their
half
of
the
bill
right.
So
that
is
something
that
we're
we're,
certainly
sensitive
to
and
and
we're
we're
happy
to
put
whatever
language
is
useful
into
our
our
party
wall
agreement
as
well
as,
if
it's
easier
for
the
board,
we
we
can
re-um.
K
Essentially,
re-parcel
our
site
to
look
more
like
this
sherman
street,
where
it's
all
common
shared
space,
except
for
the
literal
borders
of
the
buildings
and
the
demising
wall,
and
then
everything
else
is
just
common
ownership.
If
that
simplifies
things,
we're
we're
also
willing
to
do
that
as
well.
Just
so
that
it's
not
as
much
of
an
issue.
So
those
were
just
kind
of
the
the
things
that
we
wanted
to
bring
up
and
in
our
research
that
we
found.
F
Yeah
mind
chiming
in
real
quick
here,
so
thanks
gavin
and
once
again
thank
you
to
everyone
for
considering
this
appreciate
the
time
it
was
very
interesting
last
month,
learning
about
some
of
your
needs
and
requirements
and
some
of
the
codes
and
so
on.
But
I
guess,
when
I
look
at
this,
I
mean
it.
It
it'd
be
very
easy.
Just
say
you
know,
with
all
the
difficulties
and
expenses
to
do
this,
it'd
be
easy
to
say.
F
F
So
I
I
understand
some
of
the
arguments
that
have
been
made
by
all
the
members
here
you
know,
like
I
said
you
know,
this
is
a
this.
Is
a
large
expense
to
do
so.
It's
do
we
not
do
it
or
do
we
do
it
with
maybe
some
differences-
and
you
know
I
I
work
in
legacy
areas
and
you
know
there's
when
we
talk
about
reporting
and
trying
to
get
good
reporting.
You
know,
there's
always
exception
cases.
F
You
know
that
we
have
and
well
we
have
to
exclude
this
particular
neighborhood
or
you
know
whatever
it
is
to
get
the
right
data
and
I
get
that
you're
trying
to
get
to
a
common,
consistent
way
of
reporting
and
metering,
all
of
the
water
usage
and
so
on.
Sometimes
it's
just
exceptions,
and
so
I
guess
again
just
asking
you
to
consider
the
the
exception
here
so
as
an
opportunity
for
for
both
of
us.
So
again,
thank
you
really
appreciate
your
consideration.
A
H
F
F
E
A
F
A
Are
there
additional
questions,
okay,
I'll
I'll
I'll
slide
one
in
can
I
invite
staff?
Sarah
peter
has
any
comments
on
red
tea
presentation
and
in
particular,
they
made
a
couple
of
points
about
not
crossing
other
properties,
setbacks
the
difficulties
it
provides
on
the
waterline
side
and
it
seemed
like
even
more
so
on
the
sewer
line
side.
Do
you
have
any
any
response
to
that.
C
Yeah,
I
don't
know
the.
I
don't
know
the
the
the
question
about
how
far
off
of
how
what
the
spacing
of
water
taps
should
be.
I'm
sure
we
could.
We
could
research
that
I
think,
even
if
the
thing
with
the
water
line
is
is
these
can
be
again.
These
can
be
tunneled,
so
you
can
do
a
you,
can
do
a
directional
drill.
It's
I
mean
it's
more
expensive,
but
it
keeps
you
within
that
setback.
On
the
water
side.
C
On
the
sewer
side,
I'm
I'm
not
quite
clear
where
the,
where
the
suit,
where
the,
where
the
the
constraints
are
but
again
with
those
I
mean
with
with
either
one
of
these
there's.
I
think
there
are
technologies
that
would
allow
it
to
be
constructed
in
a
less
impactful
way.
They're
just
they
just
are
more
expensive
to
install.
A
I
would
think
too
many
90
degree
angles
on
a
sewer
line
would
not
be
a
good
thing.
It's
just
a
thought
there.
There
was
a
comment
I
I
mean
I
want
to
highlight
the
2018
sarah
presented
and
that
presented
this
earlier.
The
2018
sherman
property
was
a
condo
arrangement,
not
a
split
ownership.
You
know
two
separate
properties
that
is
in
front
of
us
now.
A
C
C
C
I
don't
know
off
the
top
of
my
head,
because
I
don't
I
don't
know
the
the
code
specifically
for
we're
talking
we're
speculating
different
potential
options.
There
could
be
something
there,
I'm
just
not
sure
exactly
without
seeing
what
is
proposed.
I
think,
ultimately,
what
we
want
to
make
sure
has
what
we
want
to
make
sure
happens
is
whether
it's
a
common
ownership
through
an
hoa
or
it's
a
it's
a
or
it's
a
it's
two
separate
service
lines
is
that
each
each
unit
should
be
able
to
be
shut
off
independently
and
should
be
metered
independently.
C
So
if
they
were
to
come
back
with
some
other
some
other
potential
form
of
of
the
question,
we
would
still
want
the
independent
media
metering
and
the
independence
shutoff.
Now,
whether
that
comes
off
of
a
single
service
line
and
or
not
that
that
would
have
to
go
research
as
it
relates
to
condos
or
town
homes,
or
things
like
that.
A
L
I-
and
I
think
that
is-
is
our
responsibility
to
make
sure
that
we're
just
not
you
know
transferring
the
risk
to
somebody
else
without
considering
their
options,
because
what,
if
they
don't
know
and
when
they're
selling,
that
I
understand
they
can
put
that
in
their
contract
and
all
of
that.
But
what
is
his
solution?
I
do
I
like
to
see
that
because
I
feel
like
he
thinks
the
questions
that
are
asked,
maybe
is
personal,
and
it's
not.
L
I
just
I
just
happen
to
know
somebody
that
went
through
that
not
only
they
had
to
deal
with
the
expenses
of
of
dealing
with
putting
the
new
line
in
there
and
dealing
with
all
the
problems
that
was
arised
with.
They
also
had
to
deal
with
the
disagreement
between
the
two
owners,
which
cost
them
a
lot
of
attorney
fees
to
reach
out
to
a
because
their
benefit
was
was
creating
a
hardship
on
their
neighbor.
So,
and
sometimes
that
was
not
that
valuable
for
neighbors.
L
A
H
Yeah,
I
guess
to
to
marjan's
point,
I'm
a
little
more
concerned
that
we're
considering
making
decisions
on
1959
infrastructure
here.
That
just
seems
that
seems
like
a
mistake.
Knowing
we
have
the
opportunity
to
to
modernize
it,
it
seems
like
we
don't
know
what
material
the
service
line
is.
We
don't
know
the
shape
of
the
sewer
main
or
the
sewer
line
running
out
of
the
house,
so
I
think
that's
worth
the
board
considering
as
well.
A
K
K
So
the
the
condition
already
exists.
The
other
way
to
make
sure
that
we
can,
I
mean
nothing
in
life-
is
guaranteed,
but
as
best
as
we
possibly
can,
we
have
a
pretty
ironclad
party
wall
agreement
that
we've
we've
used
on
literally
thousands
of
units
across
denver
for
townhome
projects.
It's
very
common
in
a
townhome
project
or
kind
of
the
whole
denver
metro,
really
where
there's
gonna
be
spaces
where
we
we
call
the
the
reasonable
access
clause
right.
K
So
someone
has
to
have
legal,
reasonable
access
to
something
that
impacts
their
property.
So,
for
example,
a
shared
drive
aisle
like
even
if
someone
else
legally
owns
that
section
of
drive
aisle
it's
not
like
they
can
come
after
someone
for
walking
across
it.
It's
the
same
kind
of
thing
here,
my
it
would.
It
would
be
a
very
similar
setup
to
if
we
had
changed
the
layout
to
mirror
the
sherman
property.
K
All
of
that
would
become
just
kind
of
common
area
and
everybody
would
have
reasonable
access
to
any
part
of
the
property,
including,
like
that's,
actually,
why
mr
geeson
went
through
the
effort
of
fixing.
The
electrical
on
the
site
is
so
that
there's
actually
reasonable
access
so
that
you
know,
god
forbid,
there's
any
sort
of
panel
issues
or
anything
like
that
that
each
homeowner
has
reasonable
access
to
their
own
situation
and
that's
again
managed
through
the
party
wall
agreement
and
that's
a
legal
document
that
we
walk
through
item
by
item
with
every
buyer.
K
The
party
wall
agreement
is
being
managed
by
a
party
wall
company
that
management
company
is
handling
essentially
being
the
media.
The
media
between
the
two
parties,
if
there
are
any
disputes
or
if
there's
any
disagreements
or
if
there's
any
questions
about
what
that
reasonable
access
looks
like
or
if
there's
any
you
know
anything
that
were
to
arise
such
as
one
person
paying
and
the
other
one,
not
again
that
can
be
handled
by
putting
in
language
that
there's
an
escrow
of
you
know
x,
amount
of
dollars.
K
M
M
I
just
wanted
to
add
one
little
piece
of
information
too
for
the
board's
consideration
before
you
make
your
vote
here,
sarah's
presentation,
which
was
pretty
thorough
and
appreciate
that
you
did
mention
that
it's
pretty
typical
for
existing
duplexes
to
have
one
line
in
service
and
that's
what
we're
looking
at
here
today
I
mean:
if
we're
talking
about
the
sewer
lines,
can't
be
determined
by
taps
anyways,
because
that
doesn't
exist.
We're
really
just
looking
at
the
front
the
water
line,
and
how
does
that
operate?
M
I
think
it's
been
noted
as
well.
There
are
some
significant
design
challenges
here,
specifically
being
the
gas
line.
It
was
noted
already
that
the
cost
to
make
any
changes
to
gas
lines
already
substantially
more
expensive
and
the
cost
to
run
a
gas
line
to
both
units
as
demonstrated,
would
be
multiple,
90
degree
angles.
It's
not
good
design,
it
isn't
best
practice.
M
So
really.
What
we're
talking
about
here
is
the
water
line,
and
I
think
there
are
already
existing
models
that
have
been
used,
whether
that's
through
the
common
area
or,
if
that's
just
running
through
the
main
line
and
having
a
separate
service
tap
that
make
far
more
sense
than
trying
to
run
two
separate.
You
know
mains
or
taps
from
each
or
sorry
two
separate
services
for
both
properties.
In
this
case,
we
have
to
kind
of
keep
in
context
too.
M
This
has
been
in
its
current
configuration
since
1959.,
so
there
you
know
this
has
been
operating
the
way
it
has
been
and
to
our
knowledge
and
to
the
city's
knowledge.
There's
no
legal
action.
That's
ever
been
taken.
No
one's
ever
got
their
water
line,
shut
off
when
they've
been
paying
their
bills.
So
just
final
consideration,
and
thank
you
for
your
time
tonight
absolutely
thank
you.
L
I
was
just
was
wondering
josh
if
you
could,
that
give
us
an
example
of
like
how
much
would
be
the
time
frame
or
what
would
be
the
the
amount
I
mean.
Let's
say
if
the
cost
of
their
their
problem
would
be
like
forty
thousand
dollars.
I
mean
what
is
this
amount
of
escrow
that
is,
is
in
this
account,
so
I
mean
what
is
reasonable
when
somebody
comes
and
purchase
the
house
and
what
would
be
the
reason
why,
since
I
don't
know
anything
about
that,
so
if
you
could
educate
me,
I
really
appreciate
it.
K
So
this
has
actually
never
been
an
issue
before
in
any
one
of
our
town,
home
or
duplex
projects.
We've
never
needed
the
escrow.
This
is
just
something
that
we
would
be
willing,
like
you
can
put
together.
I
mean
what
would
the
typical
water
bill
be
for
this
property
and
put
together
a
couple
months
worth
of
water
bills?
I
mean
that's
at
most
a
thousand
dollars
in
escrow,
like
it
wouldn't
be
much
again,
that's
not
something.
We've
ever
had
to
do
before.
It's
just
a
consideration
that
we'd
be
willing
to
make.
K
Provided
service,
where,
let's
say
someone
didn't
pay
that
party
well
management
group
would
then
have
several
months
to
track
down
the
payments
and
get
caught
up
and
make
sure
everything's
current
without
any
interruption
to
the
water
service
whatsoever.
So
it
wouldn't
be
like
an
escrow
on
a
mortgage
or
anything
like
that.
It
would
just
be
part
of
those
party
wall
management
fees.
A
H
C
C
The
the
the
question
before
the
board
right
now
is
to
split
this
into
two
separate
ownerships
and
have
those
two
separate
ownerships
be
served
by
one
water
and
one
sewer.
That's
the
question.
The
code
is
pretty
clear
on
that.
I
understand
that
this.
This
has
operated
the
same
way
since
1950,
but
we're
asking
for
it
to
be
different.
Now,
that's
the
request
is
not
to
operate.
C
The
way
it's
been
operating
is
to
operate
a
new
way
and
that's
a
split
two
new
ownerships,
and
so
I
appreciate
the
discussion
about
trying
to
to
figure
out
how
to
potentially
solve
this.
The
question
before
the
board
right
now
is
to
to
approve
this
variance
of
code,
which
is
fairly
clear
and
that
that
anything
beyond
that
is
is
really.
You
know
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
solve
it,
independent
of
what
the
question
is,
so
I
just
want
to
bring
it
back
to
what
the
what
the
question
actually
is.
A
M
Just
wanted
to
point
out
that
part
of
our
party
wall
agreement
it
is
mentioned
this
bill
can
be
addressed
to
the
manager
of
that
party
wall,
so
it
can
be
measured,
measured,
sorry,
it
can
be
mailed
to
the
manager
of
that
address,
so
it
doesn't
have
to
be
billed
to
both.
That's
where
the
escrow
account
would
take
hold.
The
escrow
account
would
cover
those
bills.
The
escrow
account
is
collected
every
month,
so
there
is
solutions
to
that.
M
A
A
A
A
A
If
I've
got
this
right
now,
the
the
motion
on
the
table
now
for
our
discussion
and
voting
and
it's
already
been
seconded-
is
that
the
the
motion
was
to
recommend
the
city
manager
deny
the
variance
request
for
the
3106
south
tacoma
property
ty.
I'm
just
gonna
ask
for
your
concurrence.
That
was
in
effect,
your
motion
last
time
right.
Okay,
thank
you.
So,
at
this
point,
let's
just
move
into
final
discussion
about
that
motion
and
leading
to
our
votes
on
that
joe,
do
you
have
another
question.
I
Okay,
thank
you
yeah,
I'm!
Actually,
I
guess
opposed
to
the
motion
on
the
table.
I'm
supportive
of
this.
I
think
we
need
to
make
it
as
simple
as
possible
to
be
converting
these
homes
that
are
in
legal
duplex
areas
into
duplexes,
and
I
think
the
party
wall
agreement
to
me
is
satisfactory,
that
that
this
will
there's
a
shared
ownership
and
over
over
the
water
and
sewer
lines.
So
I
will
be
a
no
vote
on
this
one.
E
H
Yeah
I
had
a
question
from
peter
or
maybe
sarah
on
this.
I
know
the
the
presentation
was
saying
a
lot
of
trying
to
cite
this
sherman
2018
decision
as
precedent,
but
from
what
I'm
understanding
that
seems
like
it
was
a
staff
mistake
or
oversight.
Is
that
the
official
stance
of
you
guys
at
utilities,
that
that
was
a
mistake,
a
one-off?
That
should
not
be
precedent
and.
A
And
I'm
I'm
going
to
jump
in
on
that
one
and
then
peter
said
you
can
supplement
further.
The
sherman
property
was
certainly
a
separate
zone
in
a
separate
situation,
and
I'm
not
sure
I
know
it's
not
entirely
clear
to
me
where
that
should
have
fallen
in
terms
of
this
board.
What
is
true
is
it
did
not
come
in
front
of
this
board,
so
it
is
not
boarded
precedent
and
I
I
I
think
there
aren't
enough
distinctions
in
that
situation
that
I'm.
A
G
A
And
like
town
hall
again,
we
can
go
on
and
peter
was
making
this
point.
We
can
dive
in
a
lot
of
different
ways.
Town
homes
have
one
line
coming
in
and
feeding
different
things,
but
there's
you
know,
there's
just
different
zones:
different
setups
in
the
general,
the
the
code
is
for
duplexes
if
they're
set
into
separate
ownership
as
separate
lines,
and
so
the
variance
is
against
that
fairly
black
and
white
code.
Marjan.
L
I
just
wanted
to
find
out
is
that
I
completely
agree
with
joe
that
we
do
need
a
solution
for
the
situation
that
people
that
they
have.
This
dilemma
to
be
solved.
Definitely
I
agree
with
that,
but
also
consider
the
fact
that,
well,
what
kind
of
a
guarantee
do
we
have
that
these
agreements
are
so
written,
and
I
liked
your
ideas
of
what
you're
gonna
put
in
the
your
agreements
and
between
the
two
parties.
L
L
These
are
the
questions
goes
through
my
mind
so
and
I
feel
like,
if
I'm
going,
to
make
a
decision
based
on
something
that
I
don't
have
any
kind
of
a
clue
of
what
it
was
going
to
be
included,
because
clearly,
this
is
your
first
time
as
well
as
it
is
ours.
So
how
can
you
make
a
decision
so
fast
in
in
in
considering
all
these
scenarios
that
could
possibly
I'm
sure,
you're
an
expert
in
this
area?
That's
why
I
was
asking
that
question
and
so
that
really
helps
me
to
make
a
decision.
A
And
and
marjan,
I
think
that's
a
fantastic
question.
I'm
going
to
suggest,
though,
that
we've
got
all
the
information
on
the
table
that
we're
gonna
get
for
taking
votes
tonight,
and
if
that
leaves
you
that
that's
gonna
leave
you
wherever
it
leaves
you,
but
at
this
point
I
I
I
think
we
need
to
stop
taking
additional
additional
input
and
help
the
board
members
get
to
a
vote.
Jim
are
you?
Did
you
withdraw
your
hand.
A
J
A
E
J
A
E
A
J
J
H
Yeah
so
so
I
definitely
agree
with
joe
that
we
need
more
accessible,
affordable
housing,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
we
want
to
do
that
at
the
expense
of
the
integrity
of
the
the
water
management
system,
we're
building
for
an
outsider
perspective.
This
is
something
that
I
wouldn't
see
flying
and
in
other
utilities.
H
I
know
for
a
fact
that
this
would
not
happen
within
denver
water
service
area,
and
I
I'm
just
so
nervous
that
that
making
a
one-off
decision
based
on
a
water
line
and
a
sore
line
that
we
know
are
kind
of
reaching
the
end
of
their
useful
life.
You
know
and
and
they
could
even
be
potentially
led.
So
I
just
don't
feel
comfortable
with
without
that
information,
so
I'll
definitely
be
not
approving
the
variance.
A
A
I'd
be
much
more
comfortable
and
maybe
a
solution
here,
but
it's
not
mine
defined
as
the
condo
arrangement
in
the
common
area.
I
think
that
does
make
a
distinction,
but
as
a
general
matter,
you
know
generally,
these
duplexes
are
being
scraped
and
rebuilt,
but
I
don't
think
fundamentally,
this
is
that
different.
The
bottom
line,
the
property-
is
being
split
into
two
single-family
homes,
and
I
I
struggle
that.
There's
enough
reason
to
break
the
the
code.
I
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
respond
to
a
couple
things.
I
totally
understand
where,
where
the
my
fellow
board
members
are
coming
from,
I
think
the
you
know
the
code
was
designed
for
new
builds
and
doesn't
speak
specifically
to
modify.
You
know,
modifications
to
old
properties,
and
that's
to
me,
that's
where
this
comes
in
is
this
is
all
existing
infrastructure.
That's
there
being
utilized
now
in
a
slightly
different
way,
but
I'm
I'm
satisfied
that.
J
I
This
is
a
way
this
is
a
good
way
of
using
property
splitting
an
old
property
into
two
leaving
the
infrastructure.
The
same
allows
for
that
that
cheap
home
ownership-
and
it's
not,
I
don't
think
our
code
specifically
address
duplexing
old
properties,
and
so
that's
why
I
think
this
variance
makes
sense
as
it's
the
code
was
designed
for
new
properties,
but
that's
that's
where
I
stand.
N
A
H
Yeah,
I
I
just
want
to
add-
I
think
there
are
some
mechanisms
that
that
could
exist
for
this
scenario,
where
we're
looking
at
splitting
lots,
whether
that's
doing
development
rebates,
whether
it's
setting
up
a
a
fund
that
exists
for
people
to
tap
into,
I'm
not
sure
making
a
one-off
decision
here
makes
the
most
sense
to
me.
I
think
there
are
mechanisms
that
that
could
make
sense.
I'm
not
sure
we
want
to
go
down
this
this
variance
route.
C
A
A
It
yeah
I'm
just
wanting
to
quote
quoted
if
not
all
I'll
come
close
enough,
that
we
can
work
with
that.
I
I'm
good.
You
know
what
the
motion
on
the
table
that,
where
I
am
going
to
take
votes
on
now,
is
to
recommend
that
the
city
manager
deny,
based
on
the
board's
recommendation,
the
variance
request
for
the
proposed
property
separation
at
3106
south
tacoma.
So
this
is
denying
denying
a
variance
request
to
get
by
with
essentially
single
water
and
sewer.
A
B
A
I
J
E
A
J
A
All
right
I'll
grant
you
that
my
chicken
scratch
must
have
messed
something
up
all
right,
eight
and
two
with
that,
the
the
variant
sorry,
the
motion
carries,
the
variance
is
denied
from
the
water
and
super
board's
perspective.
Thank
you
all.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
applicant
for
your
pro
your
patience
through
this
process.
M
M
A
C
A
A
A
Getting
my
agenda
straight.
I
I
just
want
to
set
a
little
bit
of
background
the
water
and
sewer
department.
The
way
things
have
evolved
now
uses
more
there's
more
contract
work
that
is
done
than
historically
more
was
done.
I
say
within
the
you
know,
with
city
staff,
the
implication
of
that
I
mean
we
do
more
contracts,
and
also
that
means
the
board
technically
is
seeing
more
contracts,
we're
moving
we're
trying
to
move
away,
move
towards
streamlining
it
a
little
bit
as
long
as
the
board
is
comfortable.
A
You
know
with
the
process
the
procedures
in
place
the
processes
in
place
for
doing
these
contracts.
You
know,
I
think
we
can
accelerate
the
amount
of
time
we
spend
on
these.
So
for
tonight
you'll
see
we
have
a
number
of
new
business
contracts
under
item
6a
we're
going
to
move
those
forward
in
one
single
motion
that
references
references,
the
the
agenda,
rather
than
spell
each
of
these
things
out
add
link
by
item
and
we're
gonna
see
if
that
kind
of
can
work
as
a
new
ongoing
approach.
G
G
Things
identified
it
and
identified
in
that
plan
where
emergency
backup
power
needs
electrical
improvements
and
instrumentation
improvements
that
really
create
a
backbone
for
some
of
the
process,
optimization
that
we
are
planning
at
the
allen
water
treatment
plant
and
they
really
focus
on
single
points
of
failure
and
reducing
risk.
So
there
are
three
distinct
fields
that
are
needed
to
address
these
improvements
and
that's
a
programmer,
integrator
and
electrician.
So
that
is
why
we
are
bringing
those
contracts
to
you.
As
a
you
know,
a
package
tonight.
G
So
we
staff
did
contractor
selection
for
both
electrical
and
instrumentation
through
a
solicitation
process.
So
I'll
start
with
the
electrical
contracts
contractors,
the
electricians
will
be
tasked
to
ensure
power
sources
adequate
and
run
the
power
control,
conduit
and
wire
to
any
instrument,
instrumentation
and
control
equipment,
so
basically
procure
and
install
any
equipment
that
doesn't
need,
programming
or
need
to
be.
You
know:
smart.
G
There
was
an
rfp
released
in
december
2021,
where
four
contractors
had
responded.
Three
firms
were
selected
based
on
their
familiarity
with
city
systems,
water
and
wastewater
sector
experience
and
then
a
fair
and
reasonable
labor
costs
and
markups
for
for
their
labor
and
equipment.
Those
three
firms
were
gilmore:
electric
mcdade,
woodcock
and
magna.
I
think,
that's
four
usa,
so
we
initiated
contracts
with
these
three
contractors
as
on-call
contractors
for
ninety
thousand
dollars.
G
Each
of
these
contractors
have
performed
under
those
on-call
contracts
and
we'd
like
to
increase
the
on-call
contract
for
each
of
them
up
to
500
000
with
a
contract
amendment.
Now
the
the
on-call
contracts
for
each
of
these
would
not
necessarily
guarantee
that
they
would
do
work
up
to
the
500
000.
We
would
just
have
the
availability
for
them
to
be
called
for
emergencies
or
other
projects,
as
as
we
are
moving
through
the
plant
and
remote
pump
station
work.
G
So
moving
on
to
instrumentation,
so
instrumentation
contractors
provide
equipment
for
programming,
they
calibrate
and
configure
the
instrumentation
and
they
procure
and
purchase
and
install
the
equipment
and
make
sure
it's
working
properly
properly
so
because
the
integrators
will
purchase
and
install
the
equipment.
There's
also
a
factory
certified
startup
and
extended
warranty
that
comes
along
with
their
contracts.
G
So
a
statement
of
qualifications
was
released
in
april
2022.
There
were
seven
contractors
that
responded
and
we
narrowed
that
down
to
three
for
an
on-call
contract
similar
to
the
electricians.
So
that's
am
west
huffman
engineering
and
timberline
electric
and
control
and
we're
recommending
a
contract
amount
for
each
of
these
contractors
for
250
000
again,
there's
no
guarantee
that
these
contractors
would
perform
up
to
that
amount,
but
they'd
be
available
through
an
on-call.
G
So,
finally,
we
have
the
programming
contractor
the
the
programmers
implement
the
control
strategy
to
the
supervisory
control
and
data
acquisition
or
scada
system.
They're.
Writing
the
code
to
to
create
the
human
machine
interface
and
communicate
with
the
elect
or
integrate
or
the
instrumentation
and
control
equipment.
G
So
we
we
have
worked
in
the
past
with
golden
automation,
so
we're
recommending
a
optimal
source.
Golden
automation
has
assisted
the
city
in
developing
its
current
instrumentation
and
control
standards.
The
city
I.t
department
supports
this
consistency
across
the
network
and
the
network,
software
and
hardware
programming
standards,
and
it's
the
contractor.
That's
used
for
south
plot
renew
and
they've
worked
with
southpaw
renew
since
2018.,
or
excuse
me
since
2008.
G
Just
to
give
the
board
context
in.
What's
in
the
approved
budget
for
2022
and
then
proposed
for
2023,
there
is
3
million
for
process
improvements
and
electrical
and
inc
improvements
up
to
3
million
for
for
this
year
and
then
in
our
proposed
budget,
there's
2.45
million,
which
also
includes
plc
replacement
at
the
plant.
J
J
G
J
What
what
was
what
was
being
proposed
by
the
contractor
was
for
electrical
was
higher
than
what
was
provided
for
in
the
agreement,
as
I
recall
looking
through
this
and
to
find
it,
you
know
in
this
powerpoint
as
big
as
it
is,
or
in
this
whole
document,
I'm
not
getting
right
to
it
sure.
So,
I'm
just
encouraging
staff
to
look
at
that
wifi
agreement
to
make
sure
that
those
numbers
work
out.
Okay,.
G
J
A
O
C
Yeah,
I
think
the
only
thing
I
would
say
is
that
we're
just
going
to
go
through
one
last
this
month,
we're
going
to
talk
through
all
the
budget
priorities
and
our
finalized
capital
plan.
We're
going
to
do
that
quickly,
because
most
of
this
stuff
is
is
what
you've
seen
already
so
we're
just
going
to
hit
the
highlights
of
what's
changed
and
then,
when
we
come
back
in
september,
we'll
bring
a
a
budget
and
a
set
of
budget
numbers
for
water,
sewer
and
storm.
C
That
would
be
recommended
for
approval
with
to
recommended
for
council
to
approve,
and
so
this
is
the.
This
is
another
step
of
just
refining
what
we've
talked
about.
If
we
had
more
time,
we
probably
spend
some
more
time
on
it,
but
it's
really
all
stuff
that
you've
seen
and
you'll
see
the
the
changes
as
as
noted.
O
Yeah
great,
thank
you
so
yeah
again,
really.
Nothing
has
changed
from
when
we
presented
on
the
stormwater
program
since
last
time,
again
we're
focused
on
delivering
our
projects
that
were
prioritized
within
our
stormwater
master
plan
that
was
completed
in
2020.
We
are
planning
two
enhancement
requests.
O
We
are
planning
a
significant
project
in
kind
of
the
southwest
portion
of
town
to
build
a
large
stormwater
detention
pond
in
the
range
of
about
23
million
dollars,
we're
also
pursuing
federal
fema
funds
for
that
that
would
likely
result
in
potentially
a
grant
from
fema.
For
that
so
we're
we
have
a
number
of
projects
lined
up
so
we'd
like
to
move
forward
with
that,
and
that
is
in
alignment
with
the
plan
within
this
master
plan
as
well
and
then,
secondly,
we're
going
to
plan
to
buy
some
compliance.
O
Software
part
of
the
program
for
stormwater
is
we're
required
through
the
state
to
administer.
What's
called
the
municipal
separated,
stormwater
system
or
ms4,
and
this
compliance
software
allows
us
to
track
all
those
activities
so
that
we
can
report
back
to
the
state
annually
on
achieving
each
of
those
measures.
O
O
We
were
able
to
secure
a
26
million
dollar
loan
through
colorado,
department
of
public
health
and
environment,
and
so
we're
set
to
close
on
that,
but
they
did
want
us
to
see
and
show
that
that
rate
increase
would
go
into
effect
on
january
1st,
so
you
can
see
there.
Our
revenue
increase
is
anticipated
about
an
additional
million
in
2023
over
the
2022
anticipated
rates
and
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
L
O
Sure
so
we
we
continue
to
pursue
a
variety
of
alternate
funding
sources,
so
we
didn't
have
a
lot
in
the
fund
originally
about
four
years
ago
and
we've
increased
the
rates
steadily.
We
completed
a
rate
study
in
2019
and
have
raised
the
rates
annually
in
accordance
with
that
plan,
but
we
are,
we
do
continue
to
pursue,
pursue
grants
and
loans
where
possible
so
that
we
don't
have
to
issue
debt
from
the
city
in
order
to
fund
these
very
large,
highly
costly
projects.
O
G
O
As
I
mentioned,
we
had
a
state
revolving
loan
fund,
which
is
26
million
dollars
as
a
loan.
So
we
would
have
to
pay
that
back
with
interest,
but
they
write
it
down
on
the
interest
for
us.
So
I
believe
we
locked
in
at
two
and
a
quarter
percent
so
which
isn't
bad,
but
then
we
are
still
pursuing
for
that.
One
very
large
pond
project
in
the
southwest
portion
of
town
and
that's
located
roughly
at
windermere
and
radcliffe.
O
L
O
Yep,
I
can
certainly
send
that
to
you
and
then
the
loan
would
have
to
be
paid
back,
and
so
we've
we've
structured
the
rates,
assuming
that
we
have
to
pay
back
these
loans
or
we
would
have
to
issue
debt
in
the
form
of
bonds,
so
that
is
worked
into
the
calculation
of
how
we
set
the
rates,
but
I'll
be
happy
to
send
you
some
more
information.
Thank.
A
B
O
B
O
E
N
N
And,
lastly,
just
as
a
notes,
I
know
that
many
of
you
may
not
know,
but
maria
d'andrea
is
going
to
be
leaving
us,
and
I
just
wanted
to
send
her
a
thank
you
for
all
the
work
that
she's
done
with
public
works.
So
I
didn't
want
to
leave
the
opportunity
to
not
say
those
words.
Obviously,
yes,
you
see
more
at
city
council
meetings
here
in
the
coming
weeks,
but
thank
you.
J
A
C
We
are
going
to
present
this
very
efficiently,
so
what
we're
gonna,
what
we're
actually
gonna
do
in
the
interest
of
time,
since
we
have
one
minute
left.
The
notice
that
I
want
to
provide
you
today
is
that
that
we
have
a
water
efficiency
plan,
update
that
will
be
going
to
a
required
public
notice.
So
it's
a
60-day
public
notice
that
we'll
be
issuing
it
for
public
comment.
C
We
were
going
to
present
a
just
an
overview
of
the
efficiency
plan
today,
however,
since
since
we
are
running
out
of
time,
we'll
defer
that
actual
presentation
until
september,
which
will
be
during
that
60-day
period,
but
we
want
to
get
it
out
on
out
for
that
public
notice.
So
we
can,
in
the
interest
of
time,
defer
that
to
next
month.
A
Marie
I'd
like
to
thank
you
for
on
the
borders
behalf
of
your
service
as
well,
and
wish
you
best
of
luck
in
your
next
endeavor.
Thank
you
with
that.
This
meeting
is
adjourned
again.
Thank
you
all
for
your
patience
to
this.
I
know
our
meetings
have
been
long,
but
go
have
a
good
evening
with
wesley
left.
Thank
you
good.