Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-12 WSB AGENDAWATER& SEWER BOARD AGENDA Tuesday, July 12, 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE ROOM 1. MINlJTES OF THE JUNE 7, 2005 MEETING. (ATT. 1) 2. LARGE WATER METER INSTALLATION. (ATT. 2) 3. AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE SOUTH PLATTE ENHANCEMENT FUND. (ATT. 3) 4. OFF-LEASH DOG PARK STUDY. (ATT. 4) 5. OTHER. WATER AND SEWER BOARD MINUTES June 7, 2005 A TT. I The meeting was called to order at 5:06 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Also present: 1. MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 2005. Clark, Moore, Higday, Otis, Bradshaw, Habenicht Burns, Cassidy, Garrett Stewart Fonda, Director of Utilities The Englewood Water and Sewer Board approved the minutes from the May 10, 2005 meeting. Mr. Habenicht moved; Mr. Clark seconded : Ayes: Nays: Members absent: Motion carried. To approve the minutes from the May 10, 2005 Englewood Water and Sewer Board Meeting. Clark, Moore, Higday, Otis, Bradshaw, Habenicht None Burns, Cassidy, Garrett 2. GUEST: TOM BRENNAN -STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA. Tom Brennan, Utilities Engineer, appeared to discuss the proposed Englewood Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. The Federal Clean Water Act now requires stormwater discharges be authorized under a General Permit for Stormwater Discharge issued by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division. The Colorado Discharge Permit System, under Regulation 61, states that the City is responsible for the quality of the stormwater discharged from our jurisdiction. The Storm Drainage Criteria Manual would grant City staff the authority to address drainage and water quality mandates that have been imposed by the EPA and the Colorado Department of Health. The criteria manual gives guidelines to design engineers and property owners for minimum standards for stormwater drainage and water quality. The Storm Drainage Criteria Manual will be placed under Title 12 of the Englewood Municipal Code, which makes the Water and Sewer Board responsible for administrative review and appeal. Mr. Higday moved ; Mr. Habenicht seconded: Ayes: Nays: Members absent: Motion carried. To recommend Council approval of the Englewood Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, to be placed under Title 12 of the Englewood Municipal Code. Clark, Moore, Higday, Otis, Bradshaw, Habenicht None Burns, Cassidy, Garrett 3. ALLEN PLANT WASHW ATER PUMP EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION. The existing Allen Filter Plant washwater pumps were initially built to handle only the backwash water for the original plant, but are now handling twice the volume of the original design . In addition, they must now pump sludge and carbon granules, which are abrasive materials . Replacement pumps are needed for handling the additional volume , abrasive materials and settled solids from the pretreatment settling process. The bid opening was held June 1, 2005, and five bids were received. CDM reviewed the bids and recommended Genesee Builders, Inc in the amount of $167,000.00 as the lowest, acceptable bid. Mr. Moore moved : Mr. Habenicht seconded: Ayes: Nays : Members absent: Motion carried. 4. BELLEVIEW PARK -DOG PARK. Council approval for labor, materials and start-up for the Allen Plant Washwater Pump Station submersible pumps to Genesee Builders, Inc. in the amount of $167,000. Clark, Moore, Higday, Otis, Bradshaw, Habenicht None Burns, Cassidy, Garrett The water quality study approval is going to the Parks and Recreation Commission, and will then go to City Council. If approved, the study will begin immediately and should be completed in six weeks . 5. WATERRlGHTS ISSUES. Stu reviewed the status of various water rights issues that are ongoing. He also noted that the FRlCO Central Wells case is in the process of being settled. 6. McLELLAN PROPERTY. Stu discussed a proposal from Shea Hornes for constructing a road on a portion of Englewood's land on the northeast comer of Lucent Blvd. Stu noted it would provide access to Englewood's property and make it more marketable. The McLellan Foundation will be forwarding a recommendation for City Council approval. 7. POND AT NEW DENVER SEMINARY ON SANTA FE DR. Jim Higday informed the Board of a dispute going on over City Ditch flows at the new Denver Seminary site on South Santa Fe Drive. It appears that the Denver Seminary is filling a pond at their new development and interrupting Valley Feed's irrigation schedule. Stu noted that this issue has come to his attention and is being resolved between the two parties. The meeting adjourned at 6 :00 p .m . The next Water and Sewer Board meeting will be Tuesday, July 12, 2005 at 5:00 p.m . in the Community Development Conference Room. Respectfully submitted , Cathy Burrage Recording Secretary Date July 18, 2005 INITIATED BY Utilities Department ATT 2 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Agenda Item Subject Large Water Meter Installation STAFF SOURCE Stewart H. Fonda, Director of Utilities COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION None. RECOMMENDED ACTION The Water and Sewer Board, at their July 12, 2005 meeting, recommended Council approval by motion of the purchase of water meters and yokes from National Meter & Automation in the amount of $151,465.00 for the three year program ($41,165.00 will be used in 2005 with the remainder divided over the next two years), and the bid from National Metering Service in the amount of $35,660 for 2005 valve work and installation of large commercial meters. Labor for the large meter installations will be renegotiated yearly. Essentially the installation and valve work contract is a time and materials contract. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The Utilities Department is in the process of updating existing meters to incorporate electronic transmitter systems (ERT), which are compatible with our billing system and will make meter reading more efficient and safe. This will reduce needed manpower for meter reading and decrease on-the-job injuries. Many commercial meters in Englewood are over 15 years old and as large meters age, they become inefficient and slow down, causing a loss in revenue. AWWA standards recommend that larger meters be tested every three years and replaced every ten years. The recommended large meter replacement program will have the larger 1-1/2" to 6" meters being replaced over the next three years. Badger meters will be used to maintain consistency with existing meters and as meters are pulled, they will be tested for accuracy and determine loss. By having National Metering Service provide labor for replacing these larger meters, installation can be completed in a short amount of time and begin more accurate readings on the larger water users. The new meters will have test plugs that will allow periodic accuracy testing, meeting AWWA testing specifications . Denver has instituted this large meter replacement program and found that the majority of their initial costs were recovered the first year. Approximately 100 meters a year will be changed out and updated with the radio frequency read-outs. National Meter & Automation, providing the meters, is located in Centennial, and is the largest and only Badger water meter distributor in Colorado . National Metering Services, providing the meter installation portion, is located in Kearney, New Jersey and just completed a job in Broomfield. Upon checking, Broomfield provided excellent references. FINANCIAL IMPACT $300,000 was budgeted under maintenance for 3 years, averaging out to approximately $100 ,000 a year, with more being spent the first year. Because of possible valve replacement that may be necessary once the crew is on the job, there are variables in the labor amount. For meters, two bids were received: Hughes Supply National Meter & Automation For installation, three bids were received: Quicks Hoe Service Vanguard Utility National Metering Service $158,355.00 $151,465.00 $71,682.00 $69,544.00 $35,660 .00 For the meter portion , National Meter and Automation is the lowest acceptable bidder in the amount of $151,465.00. For the valve portion, the lowest acceptable bid was $35,660 from National Metering Service. It does not include the valves necessary during the meter exchange. It is anticipated that 110 valves will need to be exchanged during the Q-1 phase . At a cost of $175.00 to $375.00 per valve, they will be replaced on a case-by-case basis. It is estimated that an additional $19 ,000 to $22,000 will be needed for meter valve installations, making the final bid approximately an additional $55,000 to $60,000 . This is still makes National Metering Service the lowest acceptable bidder. This bid includes National's testing of each old meter for accuracy as they are pulled. This will be done either in the field or at National's field office. Funds were budgeted for the meters and installation in the 2005 Budget. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Bid Proposal Tabulation Sheets CI'1""Y OF ENGLEliVOOD Bid Item: IFB-05-121 Large Automated Water Meter Update Program Bid Opening Date: June 16, 2005 10:00 a.m. ITEM VENDOR Nation Meter Service Quicks Hoe Service Vanguard Utility American Mechanical NO. DESCRIPTION QTY each extended each extended each extended each extended 1. 1 1 /2" -Meters with pit erts 61 175.00 10,675.00 549 .00 33,489.00 479.00 29,219 .00 0 .00 0 .00 2. 1 1/2" -Meters with remote erts 35 265.00 9,275.00 549 .00 19,215.00 479 .00 16,765.00 0 .00 0.00 3. 2" -Meters with pit erts 11 175.00 1,925.00 549.00 6,039.00 580.00 6,380.00 0.00 0.00 4. 2" -Meters with remote erts 9 265 .00 2,385 .00 549.00 4,941 .00 580.00 5,220.00 0 .00 0 .00 5. 3" -Meters with pit erts 4 900.00 3,600.00 650 .00 2,600.00 970.00 3,880.00 0.00 0 .00 6 . 3 " -Meters with remote erts 6 900.00 5,400.00 650.00 3,900.00 970.00 5,820.00 0.00 0.00 7. 4" -Meters with pit erts 1 1,200.00 1,200.00 749 .00 749.00 1, 130.00 1,130.00 0.00 0.00 8 . 4" -Meters with remote erts 1 1,200.00 1,200.00 749.00 749.00 1, 130.00 1, 130.00 0.00 0.00 ' 9. 11uµc,.1y line valve 1 1/2" 1 175.00 0 .00 1,200.00 0.00 10. 0 ----~., Line valve 2" 1 225.00 0 .00 1,680.00 -0.00 11. ro----~. Line valve 3" 1 375.00 0 .00 1,875.00 0 .00 12. --.--.1 Line valve 4" 1 375 .00 0.00 1,900.00 0 .00 13. 1-Preperty Line valve 6" 1 375 .00 0 .00 2,950.00 0 .00 Total ' 35 ,660.00 71,682.00 69,5"'44.00 NO BID Exceptions: See Bid Documents See Bid Documents See Bid Documents H :\DClarke\excelfiles\excel bid doc by dept\05 BID FILES\05 UTILITIES\IFB-05-121LargeWaterMeterUpdate .XLS CITY OF ENGLEfVOOD Bid Item: IFB-05-126 Large Automated Water Meters Bid Opening Date: June 9, 2005 10:00 a.m. ITEM VENDOR Hughes Supply NO. DESCRIPTION QTY each extended 1. 1 1/2" -Meters with pit erts 154 447 .00 68,838 .00 2. 1 1/2" -Meters with remote erts 62 425.00 26,350.00 3. 2" -Meters with pit erts 48 519.00 24,912 .00 4. 2" -Meters with remote erts 23 497.00 11,431.00 5 . 3 " -Meters with pit erts 13 771.00 10,023.00 6 . 3" -Meters with remote erts 14 755.00 10,570.00 7. 4" -Meters with pit erts 1 1,312.00 1,312.00 8. 4" -Meters with remote erts 2 1,295.00 2,590.00 9. 6 " -Meters with remote erts 1 2,329 .00 2,329 .00 All To lnculed gaskets, nuts & bolts Total 158,355.00 Hershey Class II-Non Exceptions: Noted National Meter each extended each extended each extended 385 .00 59,290.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 375 .00 23,250.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 505.00 24,240.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 495 .00 11,385.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 930.00 12,090.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 915 .00 12,810.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 1,735.00 3,470 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3, 180.00 3,180.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 Total 151,465.00 Total 0.00 Total 0.00 Badger Non Noted 1 ·A::.. ·~ t/ae 3 ¥ --:v v; , H :\DClarke\excelfiles\excel bid doc by depl\05 BID FILES\05 UTILITIES\IFB-05-126LargeWaterMeters.XLS Date August 1, 2005 INITIATED BY Utilities Department ATT. 3 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Agenda Item Subject South Platte Protection Plan STAFF SOURCE Stewart H. Fonda, Director of Utilities COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION Council approval at their March 4, 1996 meeting for the South Platte Wild and Scenic River Review Project Participation Agreement. Council approved the City's participation in the South Platte Protection Plan at their August 10, 2004 meeting. Council approved funding in the South Platte Review Project for $8,000 for three years at their January 18, 2005 meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION The Water and Sewer Board recommended Council approval at their July 12 , 2005 meeting for City of Englewood's Utilities Department to participate in the Agreement Establishing The South Platte Enhancement Fund -A Donor Advised Fund of the Denver Foundation. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The original South Platte Wild and Scenic River Review project involved a collaborative effort in providing comments to the Forest Service and any other decision making agency regarding our collective concerns regarding the ability to protect the water supply and relevant functions of the North Fork and mainstream of the South Platte River. A Recore of Decision was reached in July, 2004 and numerous stakeholders developed an alternative to the Wild and Scenic designation now known as the South Platte Protection Plan. The goal of the Plan is to protect and enhance the resources of the area at the local level without federal designation, while preserving the role of the river in water supply and maintaining sufficient flexibility in river management to accommodate changes over time. The attached Agreement Establishing the South Platte Enhancement Fund of the Denver Foundation establishes the foundation as an advised fund with the membership consisting of Douglas County, Jefferson County, South Metro Water Supply Authority, Parker Water and Sanitation District, City of Aurora, Colorado Springs Utilities, City of Englewood, City of Thornton and Denver Water. FINANCIAL IMPACT A principal element of the South Platte Plan is the participation of water suppliers and local governments participating in an "Endowment Fund" to be used to protect the river values which the Forest Service sought to safeguard through the Federal "Wild and Scenic Rivers" Act. Englewood's proportionate share as a member of the Board will be $8,000 a year for each of the coming three years. The amount each participant is being asked to pay is tied to the number of customers serviced by the water utility. The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the agreement. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Ordinance Agreement Establishing the South Platte Enhancement Fund -A donor Advised Fund of the Denver Foundation. Wildscen IV.doc AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THESOUTHPLATTEENHANCEMENTFUND A DONOR ADVISED FUND OF THE DENVER FOUNDATION THIS AGREEMENT is made this __ day of , 2005 between Grantors listed on Exhibit A and THE DENVER FOUNDATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation (the "Foundation"). Grantors are all go ve rnmental ent iti es and political subdivisions of the State of Colorado , contributions to which are d eductible under section 1 70( c )( 1) of the Internal Revenue Code. Grantors and other partie s ha ve organized the South Platte Protection Plan Enhancement Board (the "South Platte Enhancement Board") for the purpose of supporting projects that enhance and preserve certain resource value s within porti o ns of the South Platte River and the North -~a rk of the South Platte Ri ver. Grantors and the Foundation desire to provide for the establishment o f an advised Fund (the "Fund") within the Foundation for the benefit of Grantors in connection with Grantors ' participation in the South Platte Enhancement Board. The Foundation is willing to receive , administer and distribute all contributions to such advised Fund upon the following terms and conditions . 1. Name o f Fund. The Fund shall be established on the books of the Foundation as an advised fund and shall be known as The South Platte Enhancement Fund. 2. Propertv C onstituting Fund. Grantors hereby transfer to the Foundation the property described on E xhibit B ("Gift"), attached hereto and made a part thereof, as an irrevocable gift to the Foundation to be held as a separate fund (the "Fund") and to be administered and distributed in accordance with the following terms and conditions. The Foundation hereby accepts this Gift and agrees to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Fund shall include: (1) The Gift; (2) such additional property as may , from time to time , be received by Foundation from Grantors or from any other source and accepted by the Foundation for inclusion in the Fund; (3) and all income and gains received with respect to the Gift and any of the foregoing property . The Fund shall be the property of the Foundation to be held by it in its corporate capacity and shall not be deemed a trust fund held by it in a trustee capacity . The Foundation shall not be obligated to engage in the fundraising efforts of the South Platte Enhancement Board or any of the Grantors or otherwise solicit gifts to the fund . If an asset transferred to the Foundation from any Grantor were previously received by any of the Grantors as donor-restricted gifts , such assets shall be added to and held as part of the Fund only if such donor restrictions are specifically approved and accepted by the Foundation. 3. Use of Fund Assets. (a) Purposes The purpose of the Fund (the "Purpose") shall be to support programs which are consistent with the South Platte Protection Plan attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit C (the "South Platte Protection Plan") including to enhance and preserve fisheries, wildlife and other geologic, historic, cultural, recreational and scenic resources, and directly related vegetation and ecological values within portions of the South Platte River and the North Fork of the South Platte River identified from time to time by the South Platte Enhancement Board. (b) Distributions . The parties generally intend and expect that the principal of the Fund shall largely be preserved in perpetuity. Accordingly, the parties anticipate that each year, an amount not to exceed 15% of the market value of the Fund (determined in accordance with the Foundation's valuation policies and procedures) less administrative fees (such amount referred to as the "Unitrust Amount"), shall be used or distributed for the Purpose , after considering any recommendations made in writing to the Foundation by the Advisory Committee (described below) in accordance with the Foundation's guidelines for advised funds in effect from time to time . Generally, the parties anticipate that if an amount less than the Uni trust Amount is distributed in any year, then an amount equal to the difference between that year's Unitrust Amount and the amount actually distributed that year may be distributed in any subsequent year, in addition to the Unitrust Amount for that subsequent year. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all or any part of the principal of the Fund may be distributed to , for the benefit of, or to carry out the purposes of, a Grantor that is qualified as a political subdivision of the State of Colorado , contributions to which are deductible under section 170( c )(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, including, without limitation , for any of the Granto rs ' reasonable administrative expenses incurred in connection with its participation in the South Platte Enhancement Board. However, the Foundation and the original Grantors anticipate that whenever all of the Grantors are qualified as political subdivisions of the State of Colorado contributions to which are deductible under section 170( c )( 1 ), then any distribution by the Foundation of the entire principal of the Fund to the Grantors would be made in the following percentages: Douglas County .0375 Jefferson County .0375 South Metro Water Supply Authority .146 Parker Water and Sanitation District .022 City of Aurora .167 Colorado Springs Utilities .0375 City of Englewood .02 City of Thornton .0312 Denver Water .5 ( c) General Restrictions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Fund shall at all times be held and administered in accordance with: the provisions of the Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust creating "The Denver Foundation" as it now exists or may be hereafter amended (the "Declaration" attached hereto as Exhibit D) and the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Foundation, all of which are attached hereto as Exhibits E and F 2 .. ' respectively and are hereby accepted and agreed to by Grantors , including those provisions relating to: (1) the amendment or termination of designations of specific organizations; (2) restrictions with respect to the use of principal or income; and (3) other directions or advice from donors. Grantors acknowledge that under the provisions of the Declaration and applicable tax regulations , the Board of Trustees of the Foundation shall have the power to modify or eliminate any designation, restriction or condition on the distribution of funds for any specified charitable purposes or designated organization if in its sole judgment (without the necessity or the approval of any participating trustee , custodian or agent) such designation , restriction or condition becomes , in effect, unnecessary, undesirable , impractical, incapable of fulfillment or inconsistent with the charitable needs of the Foundation. 4. Advisory Committee. (a) Committee Members. Such persons as the South Platte Enhancement Board shall appoint, from time to time, shall co mprise the "Advisory Committee." For purposes of this Agreement, the South Platte Enhancement Board shall also appoint, from time to time, one of the members of the Advisory Committee to serve as its chair. Members of the Advisory Committee will consist of representatives of the various member organizations according to Exhibit C. Members of the Advisory Committee may be removed and replaced at any time by the South Platte Enhancement Board upor vri tten notification to the Foundation by the President or Treasurer who will serve as co -chai r s or.the Fund's Advisory Committee. The initial President and Treasurer of the South Platte Enhancement Board are Tom Krol and Don Kennedy , respectively , and will therefore serve as the initial co-chairs of the Advisory Committee. The Foundation must also be notified in writi ng of the replacement of the co-chairs. (b) Role of Committee. The Advisory Committee may from time to time submit to the Board of Trustees of the Foundation written recommendations with respect to distributions from the Fund consistent with paragraph 3(b) above, including, without limitation, recommendations about distributions for the Purposes and about distributions to or for the benefit of Grantors. ( c) Procedures. The Advisory Committee shall conduct its activities in accordance with such rules and procedures as the Advisory Com mittee itself may establish. The Foundation may rely on any writing that purports to set forth the recommendations of the Advisory Committee so long as it is signe d by the co-chairs of the Advisory Committee or by any person designated in writing by the co-chairs to serve as the representative of the Advisory Committee. 5. Reports. The Foundation shall render reports at least quarterly to the co -chairs or other Advisory Committee-designated representative of the Advisory Committee showing the assets then held as the principal of the Fund plus all receipts, expenses and distributions during the period covered by the report. All records of the Foundation related to its management of the Fund shall be available for inspection by authorized representatives of Grantors and the Advisory Committee at all reasonable times. 3 6. Investments. All assets held as part of the Fund shall be invested by the Foundation in accordance with its general investment policies and objectives approved by the Board of Trustees from time to time. Fund assets may be commingled with other assets of the Foundation for investment purposes, provided that accurate accounts are kept of the Fund's share of any such commingled investments. The Fund will be an "institutional fund" of the Foundation and, as such, shall be invested and administered in accordance with the Colorado Uniform Management of Institutional Funds Act. 7. Administration Fees and Expenses. The Foundation shall be entitled to pay or reimburse itself from the Fund for all reasonable direct out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the Foundation in accepting, holding, protecting, investing, administering and distributing the Fund and shall be entitled to charge to the Fund a general administration fee to cover a portion of the Foundation's general operating expenses. The general administration fee shall be consistent with the Foundation's normal practice of allocating costs of administration among its various funds and may change from time to time. The general administrative fee shall be 1 % per year; it is expected that the fee shall remain 1 % for the life of the Fund. In addition, The Foundation will discuss with the Advisory Committee any potential fee increases and/or costs incurred by the Fund outside of normal practices. However, no such fee shall be payable with respect to the Fund until the Foundation has received assets constituting an initial contribution to establish the Fund. The general administrative fee shall be transferred to the Foundation's general funds in quarterly installments on or about the last day of each calendar quarter, and each quarterly installment shall be based on the value of the Fund as of the last day of the immediately preceding quarter. The Foundation shall have no duty to incur any debt, expense or other obligation of any kind with respect to the Fund, unless such debt, expense or other obligation can and shall be fully paid and satisfied solely from the assets of the Fund. 8. Spendthrift Provision. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, no income or principal distributable for the Fund may be assigned or encumbered by any of the Grantors, or be attached by or subject to the interference or control of any creditor of any of the Grantors, or reached by any legal or equitable process in satisfaction of any debt or liability of any of the Grantors, prior to its actua l receipt by such Gran tors . 9. Component Part. It is intended that the Fund shall be a component part of the Foundation and not a separate trust, and that nothing in this Agreement shall affect the status of the Foundation as an organization described in section 501 ( c )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and as an organization that is not a private foundation within the meaning of section 509( a) of the Code. This Agreement shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the foregoing intention and so as to conform to the requirements of such provisions of the federal tax laws and any regulations issued pursuant thereto. The Foundation shall have all of the powers provided in the Declaration, in the Foundation 's Articles ofincorporation and Bylaws or otherwise by law in connection with its administration of the Fund. In addition, the Foundation shall have the power, acting alone, to amend this Agreement in any manner required for the sole purpose of ensuring that the Fund qualifies and continues to qualify as a component part of the Foundation as a "community trust," within the meaning of Treas. Reg . Sec . l .170A-9( e)(l 1). The Foundation shall inform Grantors in writing within three days of any such agreement. 4 10. Contact Information. For purposes of this Agreement, all notices, recommendations and reports shall be delivered by mail, delivery service, fax or e-mail to the addresses below, unless a party provides different contact information in writing to the other parties. Notice given by personal delivery or mail shall be effective upon actual received. Notice given by telecopier shall be effective upon actual receipt with a valid confirmation sheet if such notice is received during a recipient's normal business hours or at the beginning of the recipients next business day after receipt if not received during the recipient's normal business hours. If to Advisory Committee: Tom Krol 7485 Rossman Gulch Road Morrison, CO 80465 Phone : 303 .697.0886 Fax: 303-697-0886 E-mail: tom.krol@aol.com and Donald Kennedy 1600 West 12 1h Avenue Denver, CO 80204 Phone: 303.628.6528 Fax: 303-628-6852 E-mail: don.kennedy@denverwater.org If to Foundation : The Denver Foundation Attn: Barbara Berv 950 South Cherry Street, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80246-266 2 Phone: 303.300 .17 90 xllO Fax: 303-300-6547 E-mail: bberv@denverfoundation.org 11. Miscellaneous. a . References in this Agreement to the Internal Revenue Code or the Code are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and shall include the corresponding provisions of any subsequent federal tax laws. b . Paragraph captions are provided for convenience only and shall have no significance in the interpretation of this Agreement. c .. Except as expressly provided otherwise this agreement is intended to be solely for the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and permitted 5 assigns and this Agreement shall not otherwise be deemed to confer upon or give to any other person or third party, any remedy, cause of action, or other right. d. The failure of either party to insist in any one or more instances upon strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement, or take advantage of its rights under this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any such provisions or the relinquishments of any such rights but the same shall continue and remain in full force and effect. e. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado with Colorado as exclusive venue . f. This writing is an integrated agreement and constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the Fund. EXECUTED at Denver, Colorado to be effective as of the date first above written. (see attached signatory pages for all Grantors) THE DENVER FOUNDATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation David J. Miller, President 6 ATTEST: Deputy Clerk ST A TE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF JEFFERSON ) COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO Jim Congrove, Chairman Board of County Commissioners The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of , 2005, by Jim Congrove, Chairman for the Board of County Commissioners for the County of Jefferson. WITNESS my hand and official seal: My Commission expires: ____ _ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Steven L. Snyder Assistant County Attorney Notary Public ATTEST: Debra A. Johnson, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM FOR AURORA: Christine McKenney Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, ACTING BY AND TIIROUGH ITS UTILITY ENTERPRISE Edward J . Tauer, Mayor SEAL ARAPAHOE COUNTY WATER AND WASTEWATER AUTHORITY 8 STA TE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF DOUGLAS ) PARKER WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT Frank Jaeger, Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of ____ , 2005, by Frank Jaeger, Manager of the Parker Water and Sanitation District. WITNESS my hand and official seal: My Commission expires: ____ _ Notary Public South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages 9 10 South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages SOUTH METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AUTHORITY John Hendrick, President 11 South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS UTILITIES DEPARTMENT By~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stewart Fonda, Director of Utilities ATTEST: By~~~~~~~~~ H. J. Barry, Manager APPROVED: Director of Planning APPROVED AS TO FORM: Legal Division 12 South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, acting by and through its BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS By ___________ _ William R. Roberts, President REGISTERED AND COUNTERSIGNED: Dennis J. Gallagher, Auditor CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER By : ___________ _ ATTEST: MARY A. NIBLACK Deputy Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Kristin Decker Assistant County Attorney 13 South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COUNTY OF DOUGLAS, COLORADO By: _____________ _ WALTER M. MAXWELL, Chair APPROVED AS TO FISCAL CONTENT: Karen Montgomery Director of Finance ATIEST: Nancy Vincent, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney 14 South Platte Enhancement Fund -Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages CITY OF THORNTON: BY ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jack Ethredge, City Manager 15 South Platte Enhancement Fund-Denver Foundation Counterpart Signature Pages COLORADO SPRINGS UTILITIES Jerry Forte, Chief Operating Officer Douglas County Commissioners Walter M. Maxwell, Chairman County of Jefferson Jim Congrove, Chairman City and County of Denver, acting by and through its Board of Water Commissioners William R. Roberts , President City of Aurora, Colorado , acting by and through its Utility Enterprise Edward J. Tauer, Mayor Exhi bit A Parker Water and Sanitation District Frank Jaeger, Manager South Metropolitan Water Supply Authority John Hendrick, President City of Englewood Stewart Fonda, Director of Utilities City of Thornton JackEthredge,Manager Colorado Springs Utilities Jerry Forte, Chief Operating Officer Exhibit B South Platte Protection Plan -Endowment Fund GOAL OF ENDOWMENT FUND: $1 Million Collected Over 3 Years. Contributing GrouQ Contributions Year 1 Year2 Year 3 Douglas Co un ty 15,000 15,000 7,493 Jefferson County 15,000 15,000 7,493 South Metro Water Supply Authority: • Centennial Water 21,998 21,998 10,990 • Inverness 670 670 340 • Meridian 1,011 1,01 1 500 • Arapahoe County Water 3,752 3,752 1,878 & Wastewater Authority • East Cherry Creek Valley 11,953 11,953 5,974 Water & Sanitation District • Pinery 2,278 2,278 1,139 • Castle Pines North 2,267 2,267 1,139 • Cottonwood 1,541 1,541 779 • Stonegate 2,577 2,577 1,279 • Castle Rock 8,543 8,543 4,276 • Roxboro ugh 2,005 2,005 999 Parker Water 9,000 9,000 4,496 & Sanitation District City of Aurora 67,000 67,000 33 ,468 Colorado Springs Utilities 15,000 15,000 7,493 City of Englewood 8,000 8,000 3,996 City of Thornton 12,500 12,500 6,234 Denver Water 200.000 200 000 99.844 Total: Year 1 -$400,095 Year 2 -$400,095 Year 3 -$199,810 ..__. ___________________ __ AT T. Y- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~==) • • • II II • • • • I I I I I I I _. - T he City of Engleivood OFF·LEASH DOG PARK FLOOD PLAIN STUDY AT BELLEVIEW PARK l vlttller Engin eering Co.) Inc. Proj ect N o. 05-017.01 -June 9, 2005- • i u I I . I • • • • q • • I I • Introduction Muller Engineering Company has been contracted by the City of Englewood to complete a floodplain study for the Off Leash Dog Park project along the Big Dry Creek floodplain. The City stated that the dog park requires a four foot high fence to encompass the area. The City also indicated that another consultant will study the water quality aspect to having a dog park in relatively close proximity to a water treatment plant intake . That study may also provide additional water quality detention requirements to capture and filter some of the dog waste effluent prior to discharging into the creek. The City provided a conceptual layout for the dog park to the engineer to convey the design intent of the project. The conceptual layout provided by the City also shows two double fenced entryways into the park, which is used to minimize potential for dogs to escape the area. The area of the dog park is approximately 1.6 acres. The approximate dimensions are 160 wide by 440 feet long, with the length dimension paralleling the Big Dry Creek alignment. The location of the dog park encroaches into the floodway limits . Only construction ac tivity that does not cause a rise to the floodplain is theoretically allowed within the floodwa y. This study evaluated various options that exist to see ifthere is a feasible solution to building the dog park without causing a rise to the 100-year water surface elevations. The first evaluation is to confirm that the use of standard fencing would create an obstruction that causes a rise to the floodplain, without including some additional measures. The other evaluations include considering drop fence systems, and to consider regrading opportunities that could offset the impacts of the fence obstruction. These evaluations are described as follo w s . Existing Conditions Base Model Muller Engineering completed a HEC-2 analysis for the project area of Big Dry Creek to reflect the various projects that have been completed over the last 10 years. The project include ECIC channel improvement project located downstream of Santa Fe Drive, the Windermere Bridge, the A WTP floodwall , the subsequent bank stabilization, and the trail construction along the creek. The results from this analysis for the project area are similar to the FHAD study completed by WRC. While there are some changes to the floodplain elevations , the changes are fairly minor. This updated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR.) model provides the base conditions to compare the proposed conditions from this study, to see the impacts of our proposed improvements . Model Fence as Obstruction The HEC-2 water surface profile program was used to model the impacts of building a fence in the floodplain. The fence was modeled as a 100 % obstruction to determine the impacts; as suspected, the fence causes a rise to the flood water surface elevations. This alternative causes rises that are mostly less than one foot (Section 16.l had 1.3 feet of rise), and in all cases the floodwall fully contains the floodplain along the north • i i - d • I • • q II • II • Page 2of3 boundary, and the south boundary is contained within the park area. Also, no private properties or structures would be impacted by the increased flood limits. Model Fence As Obstruction with Fill at Cross Section 14.l Removed The HEC-2 base model was revised to include excavating some of the existing fill placed within the floodplain and modeled as such in cross section 14.l. Results of the modelling indicated that this fill had a significant impact and by removing it, the water surfaces upstream were reduced below LOlvIR model( model DOG P ARK3.HC2 not included). Upon discovering this condition, the model was revised to reflect obstructions at cross sections 13. 6 and 15 .1 representing the fencing blockage at the downstream and upstream perpendicular-to-flow fences , respectively(DOG P ARK4.HC2). The results of this model indicate that a standard 4 foot high chain link fence at 13.6 and a net 2.5 foot high blockage at cross section 15 .1 would not cause a rise to the floodplain. The net 2.5 foot blockage is due to an initial plan to utilize a laydown fence system and to excavate the fence 1.5 feet below grade to provide some low lying blockage to occur without rising the floodplain. No blockage was considered to impact cross sections 14.6, 14.2 and 14.l since the flood elevations are high enough to overtop the north parallel fencing at 14.6 and the contraction limits caused by the blockage at cross section 13.6 does not extend into cross section 14.1. The fencing at cross section 15 .1 was modeled in a 1.5 foot deep excavation to accommodate a percentage of blockage that may impact a drop fencing system, therefore the height of blockage was modeled as being 2.5 feet high. Site Grading Requirements The grading will provide a drainage swale along the north edge of the fenced park to route runoff from the dog park to the water quality detention pond. The water quality pond was conceptually sized based on requirements for a temporary sediment pond at 1800 cubic feet per acre for layout purposes . Camp, Dresser, and McKee is evaluating the water quality issues associated with having the dog park located close to water treatment plant intake pipes . Additional coordination with the water quality consultant may be required. Project Costs The project costs consist of earthwork, Chain Link fencing and Sod, and native seed. The native seed is for the placement of the fill outside the floodplain limits. The Opinion of Probable costs is attached. The costs do not include irrigation system, tap fees or related equipment for irrigating the park . • • • • • d • • • • • • • • • • • Page 3 of3 Conclusion The dog park can be constructed as shown on the accompanying site plan utilizing a four foot high chain link fence without causing any increase to the floodplain elevations based on the results of the attached HEC-2 models. The use of drop fencing is not required because sufficient floodplain benefits result from excavating the fill material in the vicinity of cross section 14.1, which offsets the use of standard chain link fencing without causing a rise to the floodplain. It is fortunate that a solution to use standard fencing can be accommodated without causing any floodplain rise by completing some minor excavation activity rather than needing to rely on the use of drop fencing, since drop fencing systems have some inherent risks as to their effectiveness. For example, if there is only partial blockage (or partial pressure buildup), will that be adequate to cause the fence to laydown adequately or will the drop fence resist laying down thus causing an unforeseen impact to the floodplain. Based on the results of this floodplain study, the project can proceed to the next level of study and evaluation. Since no rise to the floodplain will occur due to the project, there is no requirement to obtain a CLO:MR nor route the study through the UDFCD for their review, however both of these activities can be completed if the City desires additional review .