HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes_CCSpecialMeeting_01302018CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
JANUARY 30, 2018 — 6:00 P.M.
IONA COMMUNITY CENTER
PRESENT: Mayor Dan Gubler, Council President Rob Geray, Council Member Kathy
McNamara, Council Member Michael Thompson, Public Works Director Zech Prouse, and City
Clerk Shara Roberts.
ABSENT: Chief Of Police Karl Bowcutt.
VISITORS: Ted Hendricks, Paul Scoresby, Dave Noel, John Price, Sally Price, Louise Bryan,
Mike Bryan, and James West.
General Discussion of the Water System Improvement Project with Greg Hansen: Greg
Hansen with Rockwell Homes expressed they are still 100% committed to the original agreement
they had previously discussed with the Council which consisted of developing the land
contiguous to the City with 110 '/2 acre lots with drainage swales. At the time these discussions
took place the water connection fee was $3,000 per lot and Rockwell was willing to pay the lump
sum amount up front. Additionally, they were going to cover the estimated cost of $98,000 for
approximately 2,000 linear feet of distribution line on Telford Road to make the connection into
the development and bring those distribution lines through the development to Main Street.
However, since then the City has increased the water connection fee to $4,859 which
dramatically changes the number for the project.
He provided a handout "Exhibit A" which outlines the detailed costs of the old agreement vs. the
new agreement and outlines a difference of $204,490 in total additional costs to Rockwell. As a
result, those numbers leave Rockwell upside down in the project and do not add up for them to
be in a position to participate in the project as originally discussed.
As an alternative, Mr. Hansen presented a proposal which from his perspective would generate
more dollars to the City and leave them in a position to develop the project within city limits as
opposed to Bonneville County. Mr. Hansen suggested 160 1/3 acre lots with curb and gutter
instead of drainage swales which would be compliant with the City's current zoning guidelines.
He furthered outlined the City would be responsible for the installation of the distribution line on
Telford Road, and Rockwell would not pay the water connection fees up front on the 160
building lots. With the addition of 50 lots it would generate $242,950 dollars which more than
covers the distribution line cost plus interest rates. Overall, he estimates it would save the City
nearly $367,950 on the water system improvement project. Additionally, the City would collect
extra water fees per month and additional tax revenue for the duration of the life of those homes.
Mayor Gubler explained to Mr. Hansen the Council is contemplating having a separate well site
from the storage tank and asked if they would consider a well site as part of the development or a
green space.
Mr. Hansen indicated they could have discussions about the City buying a piece of the land for
that purpose.
Council President Geray indicated he remembered in a conversation where Rockwell agreed to
provide an additional $100,000.
Mr. Hansen recalled the additional $100,000 was the installation of the distribution line on
Telford Road.
Director Prouse asked if Rockwell would be willing to do the 1/3 acre lots with swales opposed
to curb and gutter as they require more long term maintenance for the City and if that would free
up $100,000 for Rockwell to install the distribution line on 49t". Mr. Hansen indicated it could be
a possibility he could take back to his team for negotiation.
Council President Geray expressed concerns with the alternative proposal as it incorporates
significant change from what has been communicated to the public in regards to this potential
development, and felt the Council as a whole needs to take some time to digest the information
before any decisions are made.
Mayor Gubler expressed the Council could consider allowing Rockwell Homes to build under
the previous connection fee of $3,000 since that was the water connection fee during the time
these preliminary discussions took place.
Council President Geray clarified with Mr. Hansen that, with the increase in the number of lots
Rockwell would not be paying the lump sum of the water connections up front any longer. Mr.
Hansen indicated that was correct.
Mr. Hansen expressed again to the Council they are willing to go back and commit 100% to the
original agreement which was discussed.
After further discussion, Mayor Gubler directed Clerk Roberts to add this as an item of business
for further discussion on the February 201" work session agenda.
Review of the Project Schedule: Mayor Gubler reported as part of the loan agreement with the
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) the City has to outline a proposed schedule for the
project.
Dave Noel with Forsgren Associates provided a proposed project schedule "Exhibit B" for the
Council's review.
Council President Geray expressed he personally would refer to Mr. Noel who is the Project
Manager to evaluate what he believes to be a realistic schedule.
After further discussion, Mayor Gubler outlined he just wanted the Council to be aware of the
scheduling options, but there is no need for a decision to be made at this time.
Review and Approval of the Amendments to the Facility Planning Study: Mayor Gubler
expressed after reading some correspondence from Engineer Paul Scoresby and discussing it
further with the Project Engineer Dave Noel he believes the Council will be inclined to continue
2
down the path of constructing the new storage tank and well on the planned site. There are ways
in which the tank can be designed to minimize issues of dead space.
Engineer Paul Scoresby directed the Council to review the last paragraph of his correspondence
"Exhibit C". Mr. Scoresby outlined from his perspective he believes the location of tank and well
site will work very well together and referred the rest of the preliminary discussion to Mr. Noel
who has been selected as the Design Professional Engineer for the project.
Mayor Gubler outlined it might be wise to incorporate more options into the amendment such as
the option to construct the tank further up the hill to reduce concerns of elevation and dead space
or incorporate two possible well sites so the City has options as the project progresses.
Council President Geray inquired if Mr. Noel's concerns were adequately addressed.
Mr. Noel reported he and Mr. Scoresby talked about design options to help alleviate the main
concern of dead storage space.
Mayor Gubler entertained a motion. Council President Geray moved to approve the amendments
to the facility planning study as presented with the provision of incorporating the amendments as
proposed in Exhibit C. Council Member Thompson seconded the motion. Approval of the
facility planning study was taken by a roll call vote:
Council Member Geray: Yes
Council Member McNamara: Yes Council Member Thompson: Yes
Entry of Email Correspondence to the Record Regarding the Appointment of the City
Council Vacancy: Mayor Gubler explained he directed Clerk Roberts to send out email
correspondence letting the Council know he would like to appoint citizen John Price to the
vacant city council seat during February's regularly scheduled city council meeting. As a result,
a discussion was sparked between himself, Council President Geray, and Council Member
Thompson. There was no deliberation towards a decision just a simple discussion of their
opinion on the appointment. However, after consulting with the City Attorney and for the
purpose of remaining transparent he advised the email correspondence be entered into the record.
Mayor Gubler entertained a motion. Council Member Thompson moved to approving entering
the email correspondence to the record. Council President Geray seconded the motion. All in
favor, motion carried.
Meeting adjourned 7:15 p.m.
COUNCIL APPROVED: February 20th, 2018
Dan Gubler, Mayor
ATTEST:
�_ M
Shara RobertsCity Clerk
The Original agreement that we negotiated was the following: Note Rockwell is happy to comply with
what is outlined below.
1- The Subdivision would be % Acre lots with a drainage swell along the street. Those guidelines
created 110 building lots.
2- Rockwell agreed to pay the water connection fee up front on the 110 building lots. At the time
of the negotiation the water connection fee was $3,000.00 per lot. ($330,000).
3- Rockwell agreed to install an addition 300' of piping on 49th North at the cost of $62,000.
4- Iona City asked if they could upsize the water line going through the subdivision from 491h North
to the connection on main street and the City would pay for the increase in cost for the
increased pipe size. The City also requested that the pipe be connected at the time of
construction for the water project even if Rockwell was not ready for the other divisions to be
developed. Rockwell agrees to all of these requests.
The total cost for with this agreement from Rockwell was estimated as follows:
Old connection fee of $3000 (110 lots)
$330,000
Interest over 5 year minus sales rate
$62,000
Telford water line 1900' of piping
$98,000 (55th to the entrance)
Total Cost Old Agreement
$490,000
New connection fee of $4,859 (110 lots) $534,490
Interest over 5 year minus sales rate $62,000
Telford water line 1900' of piping $98,000 (55th to the entrance)
Total Cost Old Agreement plus new fee $694,490
110 lots new connection fee vs the old agreement
Total Cost Old Agreement plus new fee $694,490
Total Cost Old Agreement $490,000
Additional Cost to Rockwell $204,490
The new cost as of January 2018 even if we don't do the addition piping and prepay the fees it cost
us $44,490 more dollars
New Connection fee of $4,859 (110 lots) $534,490
Old Total Cost Including 1900" piping and pre -paid fees $490,000
Difference (Costing Rockwell with just the new fee) $44,490
These numbers do not work for us
Let's see if we can create a win for both of us.
"EXHIBIT A"
Ideas for the Iona Water Project
1- The Subdivision would be 1/3 Acre lots with curb and gutter. As out lined in your current zoning
Those guidelines created 160 building lots.
2- Rockwell would not pay the water connection fee up front on the 160 building lots.
3- Rockwell would not install addition 300' of piping on 491h
4- Iona City asked if they could upsize the water line going through the subdivision from 491h North
to the connection on main street and the City would pay for the increase in cost for the
increased pipe size. The City also requested that the pipe be connected at the time of
construction for the water project even if Rockwell was not ready for the other divisions to be
developed. Rockwell agrees to all of these requests.
The total cost for with this agreement from Rockwell is estimated as follows:
New connection fee of $4,859 (160 lots) $777,440
With the addition of 50 lots that generates $242,950 more dollars than with 110 lots which more
than covers the cost of the 1900' of pipe we would not be paying for and added interest costs.
50 lots connection fee $4,859
$242,950
Telford water line 1900' of piping
-$98,000
Interest over 5 year minus sales rate
-$62,000
That leaves the City more dollars
$82,950
Option 1 for the City will cost the City $243,000 more dollars than connecting through Rockwell's well
subdivision. Even if you pay the cost of the $98,000 for the additional 1900' of piping. With the
additional connection fees you save $
Option 1 bringing the water lines through Rockwell's Subdivision $243,000
50 additional lots connection fee $4,859 $242,950
Subtract the cost of the 1900' of Piping on 491h North-$98,000
Subtract the cost of added interest @2% DEQ over 10 Years under-$20,000
Total dollars the City Saves $367,950
ATTACHMENT A
LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF IDAHO
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND
CITY OF IONA
LOAN PROJECT NUMBER: DW1805
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Pursuant to Section V, Special Conditions of the loan agreement (Agreement) between the State of
Idaho, Department of Environmental Quality (Department) and the city of Iona (Borrower), Loan
Project Number: DWI 805, the Borrower agrees to complete the project, which consists of installing a
new generator, constructing a new storage tank, a new well and transmission lines, in accordance with
the following schedule:
Number of Months from Task 5 p,� >� �� T s ki✓ o� �P /
Loan Acceptance k
10% Design Review
5 50% Design Review
al
cV 90% Design Review
_
User Charge System Approved
Water System Protection Ordinance Approved
Final Plans, Specifications and Bidding Documents
/ _
Bid Summary
/ 3
Award Construction Contract
i
_
Project Management Conference
Plan of Operation Amendment
2 Z
Draft Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Manual
Staffing Plan
Construction Completion
User Charge or Tax Assessment System Enacted
to
Water Protection Ordinance Enacted
2
Final O&M Manual
Lv
Updated Drinking Water System Classification Worksheets
160
Verify Appropriate Operator Licensure
21
Final Inspection
g/
Initiate Operation
2—
Final Payment
Project schedule approved by:
Signature of Borrower Representative
Printed Name of Borrower Representative
Date of Approval
City of Iona DW1805
Signature of Department Representative
Printed Name of Department Representative
Date of Approval
Attachment A
"EXHIBIT B"
1/30/2018 Schiess and Associates Consulting Engineering Mail - Preparation Information for Iona Council Meeting
G&A I Paul Scoresby <pscoresby@schiesseng.com>
Preparation Information for Iona Council Meeting
1 message
Paul Scoresby <pscoresby@schiesseng.com> Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:03 PM
To: dnoel@forsgren.com
Cc: Shara Roberts <cityclerk@cityofiona.org>, Zech Prouse <publicworks@cityofiona.org>
Dave, Zech & Shara,
Shara, please pass this information onto the council for review for tonights meeting
Based on the feedback I received from Zech from the special Friday meeting held on Jan. 19, 1 have prepared for review
some additional preliminary engineering information.
Prior to getting into details, please remember that the tank on the hill with the well next to it was the City's idea for
simpleness of operations long-term (no booster pump station operations expenses) and to capture the distribution system
benefits associated with the transmission line. Having said this, I support the City's plan completely. It implements wise
long-term planning well beyond the life of the loan payback period.
In regards to well location, I am a strong proponent of drilling the well next to the storage tank so that the well can direct
feed the storage tank. This will ensure that the water in the tank does not stagnate and age and is constantly replaced
with new water, both of which promote water quality. This is needed, especially for an oversized tank, which 1.0 MG
would initially be. Additionally, in the event that the City begins continuous disinfection, the tank can be used as a chlorine
contact vessel. This type of arrangement is superior and should always be sought for when able.
I also believe that there is a good chance of developing 1,400 - 2,000 gpm of water at the tank site that may have
superior pumping characteristics (low drawdown = less energy to pump). Well 2 by the existing tank located less than one
mile to the south on the hill was test pumped at 2,538 gpm. It is 365 feet deep and had less than two feet of drawdown.
Well 1 down in the old part of the city on Rockwood Ave. was drilled to 404 feet deep, was test pumped at 1,600 gpm and
had 10 feet of drawdown. Falls Water Company drilled their Well 10 on Telford Road two and a half miles straight west of
Iona's proposed well/tank site last year. It is 360 feet deep, only produced 1,300 gpm and had 48 feet of drawdown.
Panorama Hills water system north of the proposed well/tank site also has drilled wells on the hill successfully. Drilling the
well at this site is a good bet and well aligned with long-term planning.
The City should also remember that on the north side of Telford Road across the street from proposed Thomasville
Estates and up -gradient from the City is the old abandoned and covered Bonneville County junk yard pit. This pit dates
back to the 1970's. Any well site between the old junk yard pit and the city should not be given serious consideration.
About the proposed tank site, please review the attached documents. To remove ambiguity regarding elevation, with
Zech's help, we verified the elevations of the floor and overflow of the existing tank and then sketched a new 1.0 MG tank
on the new site to see where the new site elevations are relative to those same elevations. These documents verify that
either dead storage would have to be built into the new storage tank or the site will have to be filled to match floor
elevations. This plan is built around elevations of the existing storage tank that provides a maximum 70 psi to the city and
only has 20 or so years of useful life. I now give some thoughts about this situation.
In the estimate of cost presented to the bond voters, we allocated $64,000 for rock excavation on the tank site. If the site
is filled to match tank floor elevations, then very little rock excavation will be required to install the tank and associated
water lines. Three or four cubic yards of structural fill could be placed for the same price of one yard of excavated rock.
The project budget is not harmed by filling instead of excavating rock.
The last page of the attached documents is from the geotechnical engineering report commissioned for the Comore Loma
water tanks installed on the hill several miles south in the same type of loess soil. This report required that five feet of fill
be placed under the foundations and floor of those tanks. With the frost depth requirement, eight feet of excavation and
backfill with engineered structural fill was required. In summary, there will likely be over -excavation and filling required for
the tank foundation in absence of having to excavate for rock. Thus, this site is an effective site for the construction of a
new storage tank.
Since the existing storage tank only provides 70 psi to the city on the best of days and the city likes to keep pressures in
the city at 60 psi on the worst of days (summer nights), this is a small operating pressure band to function within (10 psi or
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=adeO49683e&jsver=n5lS-ZlkXEE.en.&view=pt&search=sent&th=161487453fE "EXHIBIT C"
1/30/2018 Schiess and Associates Consulting Engineering Mail - Preparation Information for Iona Council Meeting
23 feet). As an example, the City of Ammon's 2.0 MG storage tank on the hillside was positioned to provide 85 psi on the
south side of Ammon (We wrote the Ammon facility planning study). Ammon has a 20-25 psi operating band if they are
determined like Iona to keep minimum pressures near 60 psi at the tap. The 10 psi operating band in Iona forces the
distribution lines to be sized larger overall to limit pipe friction and pressure losses in distribution pipes. Since we are
stuck with matching the overflow of the new tank to the old tank now, Iona could benefit from having a storage tank that
was constructed to be expandable to provide another 10 psi or 23 feet of head and give itself more operating range in the
future after the existing storage tank is retired. A steel tank would be expandable vertically. This would enable the City to
build a smaller tank in the 700,000-800,000 gal. range now and then expand the tank upward after the existing tank is
retired and when the additional storage is actually needed. This tank would lessen the footprint of the new tank on the
new site, reduce the filling that would be necessary, and reduce current project costs. With a large transmission main and
good looping to the existing distribution system and future expansion of the City eastward with additional looping onto the
transmission line, the length of the transmission line will eventually shorten and what may be considered one or two psi of
dead storage now may be effectively used or at least allocated as fire flow storage in the future. A steel tank constructed
20-25 feet tall now and later expanded to 40-45 feet tall would accomplish this. The foundation for the tank would have to
be designed for the future load. An aluminum dome roof could be used that would never require maintenance and support
upward expansion of the steel tank. The future tank would then be in the 1.5 MG range in size.
In summary, regardless of the city's decision on tank size, type, shape and future expansion capability, it is easy to
support the City's own idea to place a new storage tank on the hill at the purchased tank site and adjacent new well to
pump directly to the storage tank with a tank bypass line for tank maintenance. The intent of the draft Amendment 2 to the
Iona Water Master Plan was to accomplish DEQ approval to put the tank and well on the hill at the purchased tank site so
that the environmental evaluation can proceed. I am 100 percent confident DEQ will support this plan. The tank size,
type, shape and future expansion capability of a new storage tank is a preliminary engineering task and should be
outside of the scope of work of preparation of Amendment 2 to the original water master plan.
Sincerely,
Paul H. Scoresby, MS, PE
Schiess & Associates
7103 S. 45th W. I Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402
208-522-1244 1 FAX 208-522-9232 1 Cell 208-313-2454
pscoresby@schiesseng.com
.. iona storage tank prelim engineering.pdf
1598K
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=adeO49683e&jsver=n5lS-ZlkXEE.en.&view=pt&search=sent&th=161487453f66f441 &siml=161487453f66f441 2/2
Schiess & Associates
0OV44S INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVING COMMUNITY
7103 SOUTH WEST, IDAHO FALLS, ID 83402
OFFICE: (208) 522-1244 FAX: (208) 522-9232
n W�'rL'ow
4gsAll 05-
TOP or_
4/934.8i
PAGE OF
JOB L %'N A- V✓1�T'�2.,
JOB NUMBER SCALE
CALCULATED BY DATE
CHECKED BY DATE
-Tp o � Dryu R L.f- T5 f. RAvTI= R--
�q5
#95k• $8
Ou612,A5 x..
V;'9 fz. le r� �� F.re'14 Vgovzf.j
PAGE OF
Schiess & Associates JOB
m S4 IMPROVING COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE
JOB NUMBER SCALE
7103 SOUTH WEST, IDAHO FALLS, ID 83402 CALCULATED BY DATE
OFFICE: (208) 522-1244 FAX: (208) 522-9232 CHECKED BY DATE
.2 5
vVFgf�ow
401 5,q • r75
/9.5g r
so 7-
1"� :S i--
/�- ��^^��� -
!/� P'�v�lli�ww C'f''�- �
Sg
Ski
6- f
S z-
50
Lt 'Al
y4
q4
14a.
qo
30
a'k
3q
3:-
30
z�
2 l�
�2
�d
Foundation Design Report A M E R I f A N
Comore Loma Water System Tanks
Bonneville County, Idaho � •
File No. 02589
December 23, 2014 T E f H N I t S
properly sized riprap underlain by filter geotextile. Alternatively, vegetative seeding of the cut
slopes may be used as an erosion countermeasure, so long as the vegetation is self-sustaining.
4.3 Perimeter Wall and Center Column Foundation and Bottom Mat for Tanks
The perimeter ringwall footing and thickened slab or footing supporting the center column (if
applicable) for the tanks should bear directly on a 5-foot thickness of compacted structural fill.
Additionally, the structural fill should be reinforced with a double layer of geogrid. It is further
recommended that the concrete slab or bottom of the tank shell be supported by a 5-foot
thickness of compacted structural fill reinforced with a single layer of geogrid. We recommend
that the geogrid reinforcement consist of Tensar BX 1200, or structural equivalent. Adjacent
geogrids should be overlapped at least two feet. A sketch of the recommended foundation and
tank area preparation is shown below.
X MIN.
TOP OF FOUNDATION AT
LEAST I TO 2 INCHES
ABOVE FINISHED GRADE PERIMETER (RINGWALL) FOUNDATION
ASPHALT SURFACE
OR BURRIED 301.11L TANK
GEOMEIVBRANE ///
FINISHED GRADE / CONCRETE SLAB (IF SELECTED).
6%. SLOPE (MIN.) / OR SAND CUSHION PER MANUFACTURER'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
WALL COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL
TING GEOGRID (TENSAR BX1200 OR
EQUIVALENT) PLACED 30" BELOW
CONCRETE SLAB OR SAND CUSHION
COMPACTED
GENERAL FILL
— — — — — — --
— — S'TIN,
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
6' h1IN.
-----------------
GEOGRID (TENSAR BX1200 OR
COMPA TED STRUCTUF AL FILL EQUIVALENT) PLACED 5" and 24"
-- — -- — -- — — — —7E+ ABOVE COMPACTED SUBGRADE
MIN.
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
American Geotechnics Page 9