BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY, KANSAS Amended Agenda WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2014 4:00 p.m. -Kansas Association of Counties Service Awards -Consider approval of the minutes for October 15, November 5, November 13 and November 19, 2014 CONSENT AGENDA

(1) (a) Consider approval of Commission Orders; (b) Consider contracts for hazardous materials table top and full scale exercises for Emergency Management (Jackie Waggoner); (c) Consider acquisition of right-of-way to Project No. 23C-4640-01; Route 1055 Baldwin through

Vinland (Michael Kelly); (d) Consider approval of a City/County Cooperation Agreement appointing Dr. Caleb Trent , M.D. for

the Lawrence-Douglas County Fire Medical Department (Mark Bradford); (e) Consider approval of a Class “B” Club Occupational license for Paradise Saloon (Clerk’s Office); (f) Consider approval of a Notice to Township Board for a Cereal Malt Beverage license for

Clinton Submarina (Clerk’s Office); and (g) Consider approval of a Notice to Township Board for a Cereal Malt Beverage license for

Clinton Marina (Clerk’s Office). REGULAR AGENDA

(2) Building Commission Board discussion (Sarah Plinsky) (3) Authorize the Assistant County Administrator to enter into an agreement with Allen, Gibbs & Houlik, L.C. to perform the 2014 Audit and prepare the associated financial statements.

(Sarah Plinsky)

(4) Executive Session to discuss acquisition of real property and/or easements for right of way for a county road project.

(5) (a) Consider approval of Accounts Payable (if necessary) (b) Appointments -Board of Zoning Appeal (1) eligible for reappointment 10/2014 -Building Code Board of Appeals (1) eligible for reappointment 12/2014 -Douglas County Fair Board (3) (Palmyra, Wakarusa, Marion Townships) 01/15 (c) Public Comment (d) Miscellaneous

RECESS RECONVENE 6:35 p.m.

(6) Recognition for Emergency Management Volunteers (Teri Smith)-No backup (7) Public Hearing for amending the 2014 Budget (8) CUP-14-00298: Consider a Conditional Use Permit for a new 195’ Verizon Wireless

communications tower located north of the Westar Substation at 1287 E 1200 Rd. Submitted by PAMCORP LLC for Verizon Wireless LLC on behalf of The Kansas District of the Wesleyan Church Inc, property owner of record. (PC Item 1; approved 8-0 on 11/17/14) (Sandra Day)

(9) Adjourn

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2014 -Consider approval of Cereal Malt Beverage License for Flamingo Enterprises (Clerk’s Office) -Consider approval of Cereal Malt Beverage license for The Clinton Store (Clerk’s Office); -Market Match annual report (Eileen Horn) -Annual report for the Common Ground program (Eileen Horn) WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2014 – Canceled WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 31, 2014 – Canceled WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 7, 2014 - Light Agenda, Possible Cancel Note: The Douglas County Commission meets regularly on Wednesdays at 4:00 P.M. for administrative items and 6:35 P.M. for public items at the Douglas County Courthouse. Specific regular meeting dates that are not listed above have not been cancelled unless specifically noted on this schedule.

MEMO: The Board of County Commissioners Craig Weinaug, County Administrator FROM: Jackie Waggoner, Purchasing Director Division of Purchasing SUBJECT: Consider Contracts for Hazardous Materials Tabletop and Full Scale Exercises DATE: December 4, 2014 In September the Board of County Commissioners accepted two Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness grants awarded to Emergency Management. One grant was for $30,000 to conduct a hazardous material tabletop exercise, and the second grant for $80,000 to conduct a hazardous material full scale exercise. Douglas County has an obligation to match 20% of each grant project total. This match will be in-kind (salary, equipment, material, facility use, etc.). Staff solicited two proposals for both exercises and received five responses. As you can see from the attached summary, the consultants who responded submitted proposals for both solicitations. An evaluating committee consisting of LEPC Board members ,Tom Damewood with Lawrence Memorial Hospital and Mike Russell with the University of Kansas Environmental Health & Safety and I reviewed and discussed the proposals. Our evaluation criteria included experience and qualifications, cost, timetable, references, and description of proposed hazardous exercise scenario. During the evaluation process, the committee concluded how valuable it was for the consultant to have experience and knowledge of the player’s roles and responsibilities, and a good understanding of countywide policies, procedures, and processes. It is important to understand that the exercise participants volunteer their time to plan, develop, and participate in the exercises to test and improve our Emergency Operation Plan and agency SOPs. As a result of our evaluation, the committee recognized the importance and efficiencies of an established relationship with a consultant for our exercises. Over the past few years Ascenttra (consultant) has been awarded contracts for different types of emergency exercises through our competitive bidding process. Based on the relationships that have been developed, their experience and knowledge of Douglas County’s operation, the overall consensus was Ascenttra’s proposals offer the qualifications that will challenge the participants, provide the best outcome, and were within the awarded grant funds. RECOMMENDATION: The Board of County Commissioners approves contracts with Ascenttra in the amount of $30,000 to conduct a hazardous material tabletop exercise, and $80,000 to conduct a hazardous material full scale exercise.

DOUGLAS COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Division of Purchasing

1100 Massachusetts Street Lawrence, KS 66044-3064

(785) 832-5286 Fax (785) 838-2480 www.douglas-county.com

HAZARDOUS FULL SCALE EXERCISE (FSE) & TABLE EXERCISE (TTX) CONSULTANT COST EXPERIENCE QUALIFICATIONS REFERENCE TIMELINE EXERCISE SCENARIO

Blue Rock $88,240 FSE $49,700 TTX

Provides a team of multi-disciplinary experts, service

providers, and industry professionals with decades of

experience.

Consist of people with unrivalled experience within their program areas. Special

qualifications gained through “boots on the ground” work, education, collaboration and

teamwork.

Iron Ore Company of Canada, Nebraska State

Emergency Response, Rio Tinto Minerals

FSE - 5.5 months, start date TBD with client

TTX – 3 months; start

date TBD

Exercise will improve community’s ability to respond

and manage a multi-agency, multi-operational hazardous

materials incident. Will include a TBD coordination with the

University of Kansas. Tetra Tech $35,027.69 FSE

$18,948.66 TTX SME’s have dedicated careers

to emergency management, public safety, and hazmat

response. MEP and HSEEP certified.

Will implement a proven approach: comprehensive

understanding of objectives and HSEEP requirements,

communicate effectively, skills to facilitate effective meetings,

ability to plan, organize conduct and evaluate exercise.

Johnson County, Wyandotte County, and

Leavenworth County Emergency Managements

FSE - January – June, 2015

TTX – January – May,

2015

Exercise will be designed to identify measurable expected

actions and Simple, Measurable, Realistic and Time –limited

(SMART) objectives consistent with HMEP, HSEEP standards, DHS’s Core Capabilities, and local policies & procedures.

The Olsen Group $70,000 FSE $24,500 TTX

Successfully executed planning & exercise projects for cities,

counties, colleges & universities. Demonstrates

variety of exercise they have conducted for a diverse group

of clients.

Consultants have hands on experience with multiple types of emergency responses. Team has 3 hallmarks: outstanding

project leadership, key exercise design and conduct and

evaluation staff, “gold standard” subject matter experts.

NJ Office of Homeland Security, Delaware

Emergency Management, Virginia Dept. of

Emergency Management

FSE - 25 Days

TTX – No later than 8/1/2015 (anticipates

much shorter timeline)

Based on years of experience, we have developed a standard

methodology to exercise design, development, conduct and

evaluation that is HSEEP guided and both cost and time efficient.

Emergency Preparedness Consulting

$53,900 FSE $24,900 TTX

Provided examples of projects completed or in progress.

Extensive experience in development of all hazards exercise. To assure HSEEP requirements are met they

completed FEMA MEPP course of study. Provide client with

completely customized solution

Southeast Texas Regional Advisory Council, Polk

County Emergency Management, Mercy

Medical Center

FSE - May 11 – July 27, 2015

Operations (FFS) or discussion (TTX) based exercise designed to test plans to hazardous incident at

the airport. Capabilities, objectives and scope TBD.

Ascenttra $80,000 FSE $30,000 TTX

Brings extensive experienced team of emergency

management and response personnel. All Ascenttra staff has taken HSE course, several staff skilled Master Exercise Practitioners & Homeland

Security Exercise and Evaluation Program instructors.

Has successful history with Douglas County.

We do not work under a one size fits all style. Nationally known

and recognized for our innovative exercise design

processes and realistic exercise conduct.

Federal Management Agency – National Exercise Division, Northern Virginia

Emergency Response System, Queen Anne’s

County Emergency Management, Douglas

County Emergency Management, LMH

FSE - Understands that contract and deliverables

must be completed by 8/1/2015.

TTX - 12 Weeks January

– July, 2015

Provided a detailed scenario that identifies locations, players, and

objectives. This can be fine tuned during the planning meetings.

1

A CITY/COUNTY COOPERATION AGREEMENT APPOINTING

DR. CALEB TRENT, M.D. AS MEDICAL DIRECTOR

FOR THE LAWRENCE-DOUGLAS COUNTY FIRE MEDICAL DEPARTMENT

WHEREAS, K.S.A. 65-6126 requires each emergency medical service to have a medical director appointed by the operator of the service to review, approve and implement medical protocols, approve and monitor the activities and education of the attendants; and WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, hereinafter “City” and Douglas County, Kansas, hereinafter “County”, have entered into an agreement by which the City, through the Lawrence-Douglas County Fire Medical department (hereinafter ‘LDCFM”) is the “operator” of an “ambulance service”, as those terms are defined in K.S.A. 65-6112(c) and (r), respectively; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City/County to appoint Dr. Caleb Trent, M.D., hereinafter “Dr. Trent” or “Medical Director” as the medical director of the LDCFM to perform the duties and have the authority as hereinafter set out. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY/COUNTY, DR. TRENT, AND LAWRENCE EMERGENCY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES, PA AGREE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. APPOINTMENT: Dr. Caleb Trent, M.D., is hereby appointed Medical Director (as that term is used in K.S.A. 65-6126) of LDCFM and Dr. Trent accepts the appointment and agrees to serve in this capacity. SECTION II. TERM: This Agreement and the foregoing appointment commence on _______________ and continue for a term of 12 months, expiring ______________. This appointment will automatically renew for additional successive 12 month terms unless the City/County or Dr. Trent shall give notice in writing to the other 180 days prior to any automatic renewal of intent to terminate the services described hereunder. This agreement automatically terminates if Dr. Trent ceases to be associated, whether employed or retained as an independent contractor, with Lawrence Emergency Medical Associates, and no further compensation will be made after termination. SECTION III. ACCOUNTABILITY: The Medical Director shall coordinate all duties, responsibilities and services to be provided by him under this Agreement with the Chief of the LDCFM, or the Chief’s designee. Whenever this Agreement requires, or when it becomes necessary, for the Medical Director to advise, provide or communicate information to, or seek approval of, the City/County in matters relating to the Medical Director’s services, such communication shall be directed to, and any approval shall be sought from, both the City Manager of Lawrence and the County Administrator, Douglas County, Kansas, or his/her designees. SECTION IV. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW: The Medical Director shall ensure that personnel operating under his/her authority are in compliance with the provisions of K.S.A. 65-6101 et

seq., and are operating according to the protocol and standard operating guidelines established by the Medical Society of Douglas County and LDCFM.

2

SECTION V. REQUIREMENTS OF THE POSITION: The Medical Director shall be responsible for LDCFM medical treatment procedures for providing pre-hospital medical care of persons requiring services of LDCFM within Douglas County. The Medical Director shall possess the following qualifications and perform the following duties: A. Qualifications:

1. Must submit proof that he holds a current license to practice medicine and surgery in the State of Kansas and is a member of the Lawrence Memorial Hospital medical staff.

2. Be Board Certified in critical care medicine or in one of the subspecialty areas, i.e. internal medicine, emergency medicine, surgery, pediatrics, or anesthesiology.

3. Be routinely involved in the active management of critically ill or injured patients.

4. Have at least three (3) years in the pre-hospital and emergent care of the acutely ill or injured patient.

5. Have demonstrated active involvement in the training of basic life support (BLS) and advance life support (ALS) pre-hospital medical care.

6. Have demonstrated active involvement in all aspects of the quality assessment of pre-hospital medical care.

7. Have demonstrated active involvement in an Emergency Medical Service System (EMSS).

8. Be familiar with the legislative processes affecting EMSS in Kansas and Douglas County.

B. Responsibilities:

1. To serve as the “Medical Director” for LDCFM as defined by K.S.A. 65-6126, and fulfill all statutory and regulatory requirements of such position.

2. To establish and monitor medical education standards and activities for all State certified medical personnel of LDCFM and other attendants.

3. Place limitations on the level of pre-hospital activities of those who deviate from the established medical standards.

4. Recommend standing orders to the “local component medical society” for their approval as required by K.S.A. 65-601 et seq.

5. Implement medical protocols, with the assistance of the EMS Advisory Committee, which are appropriate to the training and expertise of the personnel of LDCFM. These medical treatment protocols shall include guidelines under which non-transport of patients may occur.

3

6. Ensure quality patient care by providing review of patient care records as deemed necessary by the Chief of LDCFM or his/her designee, and no less than quarterly assessment of patient management in the field.

7. To coordinate with the Lawrence Memorial Hospital staff to facilitate a continuum of care approach to delivery of service by LDCFM.

8. Review or cause the peer review of all patient contacts by LDCFM personnel.

9. Implement medical quality assurance and improvement measures to identify LDCFM patient care performance, as well as individual and service wide strengths and weaknesses.

10. Assist in the representation of pre-hospital medical care interests of LDCFM at selected meetings pertaining to department.

11. Conduct or participate in scientific research to evaluate the delivery of pre-hospital medical care by LDCFM.

12. Provides medical advice regarding remedial education and the restriction of technician patient functions if required.

SECTION VI. COMPENSATION: A. The County agrees to pay Lawrence Emergency Medicine Associates, PA an amount

not to exceed $18,000.00 annually as compensation for the Medical Director’s (who is an employee of Lawrence Emergency Medicine Associates, PA) satisfactory performance of services rendered during the initial term of this Agreement. Payment shall be made in equal monthly installments of $1,500.00 by the last day of each month during the term of this Agreement.

B. Compensation to Dr. Trent will be provided by his employer, and no further

compensation from the County or City will be provided. C. Renewal compensation, unless otherwise agreed to by both Lawrence Emergency

Medicine Associates, PA and the County, shall be the amount stated above in Paragraph A for any renewal term.

D. Compensation upon termination of this Agreement, for any reason, during either the

initial or any renewal term, shall end effective the date of termination. SECTION VII. INDEMNIFICATION: The City, County, and their officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be held harmless and fully indemnified by the Medical Director from any and all loss, damage, liability, claim, demand or cause of action whatsoever arising out of or resulting from or alleged to have arisen out of or resulted from any negligent act or omission of willing misconduct of the Medical Director in the performance of this agreement.

4

Authorized by the governing body of the City of Lawrence, Kansas on _________________, 2014. David L. Corliss, City Manager Authorized by the Board of Douglas County Commissioners, on _________ , 2014. Nancy Thellman Chair, Board of Douglas County Commissioners ATTEST: Jaime Shew, Douglas County Clerk Lawrence Emergency Medicine Associates, PA Signature: Date: Caleb Trent, M.D., Medical Director Signature: Date:

KANSAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES

30TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE NOVEMBER 21, 2005

CAPITOL PLAZA HOTEL AND KANSAS EXPOCENTRE TOPEKA, KANSAS

PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSIONS: HOW THEY WORK

Panelist:

Joe L. Norton

1

PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSIONS:

HOW THEY WORK presented by JOE L. NORTON INTRODUCTION Since 1933 the Kansas cash-basis and budget laws have prohibited municipalities from incurring debt in excess of that for which the municipality has funds on hand and within its current budget authority. Further, the various forms of tax-lid laws have restricted a municipality's ability to accumulate sums sufficient to finance on a "pay-as-you-go" basis various public building and facility needs. The tax-lid law has been repealed, however, the cash-basis and budget laws require exceptions to be met in order to commit public funds beyond the current budget year. One exception requires a successful referendum; other exceptions exist for lawfully authorized bonds and notes, annual appropriation leases and leases to public building commissions. I. WHY FINANCE - CASH-BASIS LAW?

A. Prohibitions. K.S.A. 10-1101 et seq. (the "Cash Basis Law") provides, in substance, that it is unlawful for the governing body of any Kansas municipality to create any indebtedness, or to authorize the issuance of any order, warrant, or check or other evidence of such indebtedness, in excess of the amount of funds actually on hand in the treasury of such municipality at the time for such purpose. Municipalities that fall within the parameters of the Cash Basis Law include cities, counties, school districts, community colleges, and other similar political subdivisions and taxing districts.

B. Exceeding Limitations of the Cash Basis Law: K.S.A. 10-1116 provides that the limitations on indebtedness under the provisions of the Cash Basis Law may be exceeded in certain instances, including when: (1) payment has been authorized by a vote of the electors of such municipality, (2) provision has been made for payment by the issuance of bonds or temporary notes as provided by law; (3) provision has been made for payment by the issuance of no-fund warrants authorized by law; (4) provision has been made for a revolving fund for the operation of any municipal airport; or (5) provision has been made for payment pursuant to a service agreement for privatization of public services. Additionally, an amount equal to 100% of the accrued revenue of the current fiscal year, plus balances carried forward, cash reserves and grants, is prescribed as the limit of indebtedness for certain funds, including enterprise funds established to account for self-supporting activities which render services on a user charge basis to the general public. Various other statutes also create additional exceptions from the Cash Basis Law. One such statute is K.S.A. 10-1116b, which provides, in substance, that the Cash Basis Law shall not prohibit a municipality from entering into (1) an agreement to pay for electric interconnection or transmission facilities or services,

2

(2) a lease agreement, or (3) a lease purchase or installment purchase agreement; if any such agreements specifically state that the municipality is obligated only to pay periodic payments or monthly installments under the agreement as may lawfully be made from (a) funds budgeted and appropriated for that purpose during such municipality's current budget year or (b) funds made available from any lawfully operated revenue producing source. Another exception is contained in the statute that authorizes the creation of public building commissions, K.S.A. 12-1757 et seq. That act authorizes the execution by a municipality of a long-term (not to exceed 50 years) lease with a public building commission as a specific exception to the Cash Basis Law and K.S.A. 79-2925 et seq. (the "Budget Law"). Once a municipality has appropriately identified and established an exemption from the Cash Basis Law, the municipality may proceed to execute contracts for the construction or acquisition of the proposed property or improvements without violating the Cash Basis Law. II. WHAT ARE BONDS? "Bonds" is a generic term used to describe several types of debt instruments issued by cities and other municipal corporations or political subdivisions. These "bonds" can take the actual form of bonds or may be temporary notes, debentures or lease-purchase certificates of participation. A. General Obligation Bonds. General obligation bonds are the most secure debt instrument which may be issued by Kansas municipalities. Usually, such bonds will provide the lowest interest rate available at that time in the financial markets for similar length of maturing obligations. General obligation bonds may be issued to finance a variety of public improvements, including public buildings, streets, sewers and water system improvements. All general obligation bonds are secured by the full faith and credit of the issuing municipality, and such municipality must levy unlimited taxes on all taxable tangible property in the municipality to repay the principal of and interest on the bonds. Even though a municipality issues general obligation bonds, it may anticipate that revenues generated from a particular source (e.g. utility system or sales tax) will provide the necessary funds for payment of the principal and interest on the bonds. If revenues are insufficient, however, the municipality must make the payments from other funds of the municipality, including from ad valorem taxes, if necessary. Kansas law generally provides that unless associated with a refunding issue, general obligation bonds in excess of $100,000 must be sold at competitive public sale. B. Revenue Bonds. As opposed to general obligation bonds, revenue bonds are not generally payable from ad valorem taxing authority. Revenue bonds therefore usually have a higher interest rate than similar term general obligation bonds of the same issuer. Usually, revenue bonds have no specific tax backing, and, while payment can be made from tax revenues or any other source the municipality deems advisable, revenue bonds are secured solely by a dedicated source of revenue. Primary examples are bonds issued for and secured by municipal electric, water, sewer and natural gas utilities. Other examples of revenue bonds are industrial revenue bonds, multi-family housing revenue bonds, single-family housing revenue bonds, sales tax revenue bonds, public building commission revenue bonds and bonds issued by colleges and universities which are secured by dormitory or student union fees. Revenue bonds may be secured by a gross or net revenues pledge. A gross revenues pledge is one that pledges for payment of debt service the revenues of a system before payment of operation and maintenance expenses. A net revenues pledge is one that pledges for payment of debt service the revenues remaining after deduction for payment of operation and maintenance expenses. Revenue bonds may have maturities of up to forty years, are permitted to be sold at public or negotiated sale and may have provision for citizen protest prior to authorization and issuance.

3

Examples of revenue bonds that may be issued for public building and facility projects are bonds issued by Public Building Commissions established pursuant to K.S.A. 12-1757 et seq., bonds secured by local option sales tax revenues issued pursuant to K.S.A. 12-195 et seq., and leasehold revenue bonds secured by an interest in a lease with a governmental organization referenced in K.S.A. 10-1116 et seq. Further discussion of each of these types of revenue bonds follows in this memorandum. C. Short-term Financings/Temporary Notes. Short-term financing may be issued to provide construction financing prior to the issuance of long-term debt and may be repaid by such long-term debt or from a dedicated source of revenue. Bond anticipation notes, often referred to as "BANS", are issued to finance the construction of capital improvement projects of the municipality prior to the issuance of long-term debt. In order to issue BANS, the issuer must first authorize the long-term bonds. Other examples of short-term obligations are notes issued to provide funding in advance of receipt of federal or state grant funds. III. PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSION BONDS A. General. One possible financing mechanism for governmental buildings and facilities is the issuance of public building commission revenue bonds pursuant to K.S.A. 12-1757 et seq. (the "PBC Act"). The following briefly outlines the manner in which a public building commission must be established and composed, the projects such a commission is authorized to undertake, the manner in which home rule charter action could be used to alter and substitute legislative provisions relating to public building commission projects, the legal structure present in public building commission bond issues and a few observations regarding public building commissions. B. Establishment and Composition. The PBC Act authorizes both cities and counties to create public building commissions ("PBC") for the purposes of acquiring a site or sites for and constructing, reconstructing, equipping and furnishing a building or buildings or other facilities of a revenue producing character, including parking facilities, or for purchasing or otherwise acquiring such building or buildings or facilities. A PBC may be created by ordinance or resolution, as applicable, of the governing body of a Kansas city or county. A PBC may consist of between three and nine members, as appointed by the governing body of the city or county that created the PBC, except that when the PBC provides for a building to be used by a governmental entity other than that which created the PBC, the governing body of such governmental entity shall be represented on the PBC by not less than one member. The ordinance or resolution establishing the PBC should set the number of members and prescribe the manner in which they are to be selected and their terms of office. A single purpose PBC may be established to finance projects for its sponsor city or county, or a multi-purpose PBC with broader authority may be created. The authorizing ordinance or resolution may also limit the ability of the PBC to finance projects that are permitted by the PBC Act, as modified, or may require the consent of the governing body of the city or county that created the PBC. Bylaws are not required by the PBC Act but are helpful to provide basic ground rules for organization and operation. C. Permissible Powers and Projects. The PBC Act provides that a PBC may do all things necessary or incidental to the purpose of constructing, acquiring, enlarging, furnishing, equipping, operating and maintaining buildings, to be made available for use by governmental entities as follows: county courthouse, the housing and accommodation of county offices or county business or for city offices or such other purposes as are commonly carried on in connection with such facilities or in county courthouses and general city buildings, including administrative offices for school districts and housing, accommodations and parking facilities for offices of state and federal agencies.

4

D. Modification Through Home Rule. Many local governments operate public buildings not specifically enumerated by the PBC Act as those that can be maintained and operated by a PBC, including recreational, educational and other public facilities. The legislative enactment respecting PBCs is not, however, uniformly applicable to all cities and counties in Kansas and is therefore subject to the home rule charter powers granted to cities by K.S.A. 12-101 et seq. and Article 12, Section 5 of the Kansas Constitution and to counties by K.S.A. 19-101 et seq. A city or county may pass a charter ordinance or resolution pursuant to its home rule powers to expand PBC authority to include the authority to maintain and operate additional types of public building projects, including recreational, educational and other public projects. A charter ordinance or resolution is an ordinance or resolution that exempts a city or county from the whole or any part of any enactment of the Kansas legislature and may provide substitute and additional provisions on the same subject. A charter ordinance requires passage by a two-thirds vote of the governing body of a city. A charter resolution requires passage by a unanimous vote of a three-member county governing body and a two-thirds vote of a five or seven-member county governing body. Every charter ordinance must be published once each week for two consecutive weeks in the official city or county newspaper and is subject to a sixty day notice and protest opportunity. The governing body of a city or county may also directly submit any charter ordinance or resolution to a referendum without petition and such charter ordinance or resolution shall then become effective when approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon. Pursuant to charter home rule authority, PBCs have acquired and constructed state prisons, law enforcement centers, swimming pools, school auditoriums, hospitals, senior care centers, assisted living facilities and community college educational facilities. E. Legal Structure. The PBC Act authorizes a PBC to issue revenue bonds to finance the aforementioned public buildings or facilities or improvements thereto. The PBC must adopt a resolution declaring it necessary to finance a project. The resolution must be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in the official city or county newspaper, as applicable. A referendum is required if a protest petition is filed by not less than five percent of the electors of the city, county or school district, as applicable, within thirty days after the last publication. The charter ordinance or resolution procedure described above may also be used to eliminate the notice and protest provisions described in the preceding sentence relating to the creating city or county, if desired. The PBC has no power to levy taxes and PBC revenue bonds are not general obligations or debt of any public body within the meaning of any statutory or constitutional debt limitation. PBC revenue bonds are payable solely from the rents and revenues to be derived from the operation, management or use of the buildings or other facilities operated and maintained by the PBC. In order to generate the rents and revenues described in the previous paragraph, the PBC must negotiate a lease for use of a public building by another governmental entity or a non-profit corporation. The PBC is authorized to fix rates, rentals, fees and charges for the use of any and all buildings or space therein or other facilities owned and operated by the PBC, sufficient at all times to pay maintenance and operation costs of such buildings or facilities, the principal of and the interest on bonds issued by the PBC as the same shall become due and payable, and to make all payments to any accounts created in relation to the bonds. The lease may have a term of up to fifty years and will be valid notwithstanding the Cash Basis Law and Budget Law. A PBC lease is normally a "net lease" and the governmental entity leasing a project is responsible for payment of taxes, insurance and maintenance charges related to such project. A PBC

5

lease also usually provides for a purchase option upon retirement of PBC bonds issued to finance the project that was subject to such lease. The purchase price is typically nominal. The PBC is a conduit issuer of bonds and issues bonds "on behalf of" the governmental entity to which PBC buildings and facilities are leased and by which such buildings and facilities are used. As such, the bond resolution adopted by the PBC, and perhaps a trust indenture entered into by the PBC, frequently provide for rents and revenues payable to the PBC to be paid directly to a bond trustee or bond paying agent for application to PBC bond debt service. Such arrangements minimize ongoing PBC responsibilities following the issuance of bonds and completion of a PBC project. F. Observations. PBCs and bonds issued thereby have become an attractive alternative for the financing of a public building or facility project for many reasons, including those that follow. First, the exclusion of PBC bonds from any bonded debt limitation can be an important consideration by governmental entities regarding project financings that would consume a significant portion of governmental entities’ bonded debt limits, if financed with general obligation bonds. Second, the ability to utilize charter home rule powers to alter the Act provides great flexibility respecting the type of projects that may be undertaken and financed by a PBC and this flexibility is not always available with other financing mechanisms, including general obligation bonds. Third, PBC bonds can often be issued without approval by referendum. Finally, although PBC bonds are leasehold revenue bonds, the exception of PBC leases from the cash-basis law provides a level of security not often present with other lease-based or revenue bond transactions, and the interest rates on PBC bonds are therefore normally lower than such transactions and sometimes are nearly as low as rates associated with general obligation financing.

* * * * * *

memo

Attached is the amended 2014 County budget. There are five funds that need to be amended.

• General Fund to allow additional year end transfer. The sales tax might come in at $278,000 more than budgeted.

• Road & Bridge Fund to allow additional year end transfer. We collected $418,000 more in gasoline tax. The biggest portion of this is the state correction payment. If the state continues the correction payments, they will end in April 2016.

• Ambulance to allow additional year end transfer. We collected $206,000 more ambulance fees than budgeted.

• Employee Benefit KPERS & KPF expenses are estimated to be over budget.

• Grants Fund to allow for the expenditure of grants.

Douglas County, KS

To: County Commission

From: Debbie Sparkes CC: Craig Weinaug; Sarah Plinsky

Date: 12/1/2014

Re: Amended 2014 County Budget

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-1

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Regular Agenda – Public Hearing Item

PC Staff Report 11/17/2014 ITEM NO. 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR VERIZON WIRELESS; 1287 E 1200 RD

(SLD) CUP-14-00298: Consider a Conditional Use Permit for a new 190’ Verizon Wireless communications tower located north of the Westar Substation at 1287 E 1200 Rd. Submitted by PAMCORP LLC for Verizon Wireless LLC on behalf of The Kansas District of the Wesleyan Church Inc, property owner of record. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a communication tower located at 1287 E 1200 Road and forwarding it to the County Commission for a recommendation of approval subject to the following condition(s):

1) Provision of a revised site plan to include the following changes:

a) Revise the landscape plan to show five (5) street trees along E 1200 Road/Kasold Drive located 8’ from west side of pedestrian pathway.

b) Revise the site plan to show a city approved access driveway apron and a paved access drive from the apron to 6’ west of the recreation path.

Reason for Request: Verizon Wireless proposes to construct and operate a 190 foot tall self-supporting monopole type communications tower which will be used to provide enhanced wireless voice and data services to its local subscribers. The facility will be unmanned and will be designed to accommodate at least two additional sets of antennas for use by other carriers. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site plan 2. Conceptual development for area on east side of Kasold Drive. KEY POINTS • Application is for a new 190’ monopole tower. • Ground equipment includes an equipment shelter building and generator to be located within the

shelter building. • Property is encumbered by regulatory floodplain. • Property is located in the Lawrence Urban Growth Area. • This application includes a 100’ by 100’ development area. Initially only a portion of the site will

be developed with a tower and equipment. The future pad sites will require expansion of the enclosure.

ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED • Board of County Commissioners’ approval of the Conditional Use. • Submission and approval of a local floodplain development permit to Douglas County • Submission and approval of a local building permit to Douglas County • Obtain a Conditional Use Permit from Douglas County PUBLIC COMMENT • Public communication regarding location of proposed tower

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-2

• Inquiry from individual leasing property as proposed structure relates to fireworks sales at this location.

Site Summary: Subject Property: Proposed Buildings:

14.55 acres 100’ x 100’ lease area 11’ x 25’ Pad site for equipment shelter building H frame for equipment 190’ monopole Generator located within shelter building Additional pad sites for future carriers

GENERAL INFORMATION

Current Zoning and Land Use: A (Agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts. Existing agricultural field.

Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:

A (Agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts to the North; existing agricultural field. A (Agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts to the South; KPL substation. VC (Valley Channel) District to the west. Yankee Tank Creek, riparian area and agricultural field. A (Agricultural) and RM12 (Multi-Dwelling Residential) District to the east. Rural Water District #5 pump station and future Religious Institution and Duplex Residential uses.

VC

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-3

I. ZONING AND USES OF PROPERTY NEARBY This property includes county zoning to the north, south and west and urban (City of Lawrence) zoning to the east. The property to the east was annexed in 2009 and has been rezoned multiple times to accommodate future development of the site. The immediate property to the east is undeveloped at this time but has been platted for development. Attached to this staff report is a concept plan that shows future development of the area on the east side of Kasold Drive (Attachment B) Two properties located in proximity to the subject property are used for utility purposes.

• 1290 E 1200 Road, zoned A (Agricultural) District; RWD #5 (to the east). • 1287 E 1200 Road, Zoned A (Agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts; Westar

substation (to the south). Staff Finding – The predominate zoning and land use on the west side of E 1200 Road (Kasold Drive) is agricultural. The predominate zoning and land use on the east side of E 1200 Road (Kasold Drive) is currently undeveloped but zoned for future Religious Institution and Duplex Residential uses. II. CHARACTER OF THE AREA This property is located on the southwest fringe of the Lawrence City limits. The property is located between W. 31st Street (extended) and the South Lawrence Trafficway (SLT)/K-10. This area has an agricultural character with limited development potential because of extensive floodplain in the area. The subject property is bounded on the west side by the Yankee Tank Creek. The Westar substation and large overhead transmission lines run parallel to the South Lawrence Trafficway. Staff Finding – This property is located in a unique area of Lawrence between the existing city limits and the South Lawrence Traffiway/K-10. The property is bounded by Yankee Tank Creek and includes limited development options because of existing floodplain. III. SUITABILITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN

RESTRICTED Applicant’s response: “Yes”

This property is currently restricted to uses allowed in the A (Agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts. These two districts are generally associated with agricultural activates such as farms, truck gardens, nurseries, grazing and similar activities. The A portion of the property allows both residential and non-residential uses. The VC portion of the property is more restrictive with regard to land uses. The proposed tower will be located on the A zoned portion of the subject property. The proposed request does not change the base zoning district or alter the allowed uses. Section 12-319.4.31 (d) specifically identifies commercial, industrial or agricultural zoning districts as suitable for communication towers. Staff Finding – The portion of the subject property zoned A (Agricultural) District is a suitable district for the proposed use. The base zoning district is not altered by this request. A

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-4

communication tower is an allowed use in the A (Agricultural) District subject to a Conditional Use Permit. IV. LENGTH OF TIME SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS REMAINED VACANT AS ZONED The property is currently vacant with the exception of two silos located in the southeast corner of the site. The zoning has remained unchanged since 1966. Staff Finding – The property is essentially vacant with the exception of two silos as described above. The zoning has remained unchanged since 1966. V. EXTENT TO WHICH REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS WILL DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT

NEARBY PROPERTY Applicant’s Response: “No”

Section 12-319-1.01 of the County Zoning Regulations recognize that “….certain uses may be desirable when located in the community, but that these uses may be incompatible with other uses permitted in a district…when found to be in the interest of the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community may be permitted, except as otherwise specified in any district from which they are prohibited.” Communication towers are specifically recommended to be located in commercial, industrial or agricultural zoning districts. The location of the tower is situated so that it has a visual connection to other existing utility uses in the immediate area and to have the least adverse impact on the regulatory floodplain. Staff Finding – Development potential in the area is limited by the presence of extensive regulatory floodplain. At this time the area to the north and east is undeveloped. Any future development will occur with knowledge of this improvement, if approved. VI. RELATIVE GAIN TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BY THE DESTRUCTION OF THE VALUE OF THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY AS COMPARED TO THE HARDSHIP IMPOSED UPON THE INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNERS Approval of the request expands the structural network of towers and structures that are capable of supporting communication equipment. The proposed request facilitates cellular communications and wireless data use within the community. The proposed equipment does not conflict with existing emergency communication equipment. The majority of the property will remain viable for existing land uses and uses permitted within the A (agricultural) and VC (Valley Channel) Districts. Staff Finding – The benefit to the public is improved cellular communication and wireless data capacity within the Verizon network. Additionally, the structure provides an opportunity for other carriers to co-locate in the future. If denied, the property can continue to be used for current land uses and those uses allowed per the existing zoning of the property.

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-5

VII. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The subject property is not located within an identified Urban Growth Area for any of the incorporated cities in Douglas County. There are several unincorporated communities and land divisions forming informal subdivisions in the surrounding area. Chapter 10; Community Facilities of Horizon 2020 addresses public utilities. Key strategies (Page 10-10) primarily address municipal unities such as water and wastewater planning. One strategy states:

• The visual appearance of utility improvements will be addressed to ensure compatibility with existing and planned land use areas.

The plan specifically addressed electric and telephone services and encourages this infrastructure to be placed underground in conjunction with new development where feasible. Communication towers support the wireless industry and accommodate the reduction of hardwire infrastructure. However, it should not be interpreted that wireless communication will replace hardwire needs in the community. The plan recognizes that “telephone and electric utilities have a strong visual presence in the unincorporated Douglas County Landscape.” Large transmission lines and easements should be coordinated throughout the community to minimize visual and environmental impacts. The Comprehensive Plan does not explicitly address communication towers. Staff Finding – The comprehensive plan does not provide any specific land use recommendations regarding communication towers. A Conditional Use Permit can be used to allow specific non-residential uses subject to approval of a site plan. This tool allows proportional development in harmony with the surrounding area. The proposed request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REVIEW In addition to typical site plan design standards, communication towers must address specific requirements of section 12-319-4.31 of the County Zoning Regulations. As discussed above, the proposed use is located in an appropriate zoning district. New communication towers require design that shall accommodate at least three two-way antennas for every 150’ of tower height or co-location space. The proposed tower includes three co-location spaces in addition to the Verizon equipment space for a total of up to four carriers on this tower. Setback The setback of the communication tower is required per section 20-319-4.31(d) to be at least equal to the height of the tower to the nearest property line measured from the center of the tower. The east property line is the nearest property line to the proposed improvements. The tower setback may be reduced when documentation from a registered engineer is submitted certifying the “fall zone” of the tower in the event of a failure. Evaluation of the required structural documentation will continue to be reviewed with the submission of a building permit to the County Zoning and Codes Office. The proposed setback is shown to be 118’ from the east property line to the center of the tower.

PC Staff Report – 11/17/2014 CUP-14-00298 Item No. 1-6

The tower and ground equipment will be located in a 100’ by 100’ enclosure area located approximately 90’ from the east property line. The initial enclosure area will be 50’ by 50’ to accommodate expansion of the base station as additionally carriers co-locate on the tower. The proposed equipment shelter is located approximately 100’ from the east property line. The site plan shows pad sites within the enclosure to accommodate future carriers located on the north and west sides of the tower. The initial 50’ by 50’ fenced enclosure would need to be expanded to accommodate future co-location applications. Lighting Lighting is not proposed with this application for the communication tower. The tower will need to meet any applicable FAA requirements. Generally, towers less than 200’ are not required to be lit. ground equipment will have lighting on front and rear sides of the building. Lighting must be shielded and directed down. Access, Circulation, and Off Street Parking Access to this site is from E 1200 Road/Kasold Drive. This segment of E 1200 Road is completely within the City Limits. The applicant will be required to seek a driveway permit for access to the tower site from the City of Lawrence. The access drive will provide maintenance access to the tower enclosure. This use does not require off-street parking. The design of the site provides adequate vehicular access and turnaround for maintenance activity to the site. The access drive should be revised to an asphalt surface from the apron to 6’ west of the recreation path. The existing street pavement is chip sealed and the recreation path is concrete. Pavement of the access driveway will prevent gravel being pulled up on the path from the service trucks crossing to the site. Landscaping/Buffering The site plan as submitted includes screening vegetation around three sides of the proposed enclosure. This site will not be irrigated and will not be staffed. The survival of this type of vegetative plan is usually unsuccessful especially in a rural application. An alternative to the proposed landscaping will be to provide street trees along E 1200 Road/Kasold Drive as would be required in a comparable City application. A development with 100’ of frontage, in the City, would be required to provide three street trees. Staff recommends additional trees as an alternative to the perimeter screening proposed. Other Prior to construction of the tower the applicant will be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit, issued by the County Zoning and Codes office as well as applicable building and floodplain development permits. Recent changes to federal laws allow some future modifications to approved and existing communication towers, base stations, co-location equipment and other features. The full scope of these changes has not been assessed by staff. Changes can include expanding the tower by up to an additional 20’ and increasing the base station (enclosure area) by up to 10%. Conclusion The proposed application meets the required documentation requirements of the County Zoning Regulations. Staff recommends minor changes to the site plan to faciliate the project compatibility with some City design standards since this site is located on the boundary of the existing city limits.

1 | P a g e   

CITY OF LAWRENCE DOUGLAS COUNTY ZONING APPLICATION CUP-14-00298

VERIZON WIRELESS NARRATIVE STATEMENT AND JUSTIFICATION Applicant: Scott Goble on behalf of Verizon Wireless and Steven L. Eudaly Address: 574 South Barn Stable Street, Nixa, MO 65714 Phone: (417) 848-7584 Tower Owner: Verizon Wireless Address: 10740 Nall, Suite 400, Overland Park, KS 66211 Phone: (913) 344-2892 Property Owner: The Kansas District of the Wesleyan Church, Inc. Address: 3705 Clinton Parkway, Lawrence, KS 66047 Owner Phone: (404) 644-6446 Verizon Site Name: LAWC KASOLD Address of Proposed Tower Site: 1293 East 1200 Road, Lawrence Current Zoning of Proposed Tower Property: A, Agricultural Current Use of Proposed Tower Property: Vacant Land Tax Parcel ID#: 115-15-0-10-01-003.00-0

Project Description: Verizon Wireless proposes to construct and operate a 190 foot tall self-support lattice type communications tower which will be used to provide wireless voice and data services to local subscribers. Justification for the proposed Verizon telecommunications facility and tower: There is a significant degradation of service in much of the area depicted on the map in the coverage letter from Verizon’s radio frequency engineer Hank Madden dated September 12, 2014. The addition of a new cell site at the proposed location will significantly enhance both voice and data signals but most critically it will correct a significant compromise in data speed in this area due to adjacent existing Verizon cell sites being overburdened due to extremely high traffic volume. Comment regarding the search for a suitable location for the proposed tower: The Verizon radio frequency engineering team identified a very specific search area for the new cell site. That search area is depicted on the zoning map which is being submitted with this letter. In order to meet the coverage enhancement objective Verizon requires new antennas to be mounted between 190 feet and 250 feet above ground somewhere within this search area. Our first objective in searching for a suitable antenna location is to find any existing structures on which we might co-locate Verizon antennas at a height above ground that will meet our coverage objectives. Existing structures can include communications towers, buildings, water towers, etc. with adequate height above ground. In this instance our search did not identify any existing structures within the search area which is why Verizon needs to construct a new tower.

2 | P a g e   

Specific comments pursuant to the Douglas County zoning ordinance 12-319-4.31, Radio, Television, Telecommunication and Microwave Towers: Section b (3): The tower height and design are described on the zoning drawings. The proposed height is 190 feet and the proposed design is a self-support lattice type. The proposed color scheme will be galvanized steel. We intentionally limited the proposed tower height to 190 feet so that it would not require aeronautical safety lighting. It is our intention to provide an engineering report, signed and sealed by an engineer licensed in the state of Kansas which will include at a minimum; a cross section of the structure, engineering specifications detailing construction of the tower and base and tower capacity including the number and type of antennas it can accommodate but it is not possible to provide this report until after such time as the tower has been ordered and that can’t happen until after we receive a zoning SUP and for this reason we request the required items of this section 12 be made a condition of the SUP. Section c (1) (2): There are no existing towers or structures within the critical search area that will accommodate Verizon’s antenna requirements of being 190 feet above ground. Section c (3): The tower will be capable of accommodating at a minimum three additional sets of antennas for other carriers. Section d (1): The set-back for the proposed 190 foot tower is 118 feet from the nearest property line (refer to page LSE-3 of the zoning drawings). This is less than the full tower height requirement although it is our intention to utilize a tower designed so that in the event it might fails it will collapse upon itself well within the 118 feet dimension. It is our intention to provide an engineering report, signed and sealed by an engineer licensed in the state of Kansas which will prove this fall zone area but it is not possible to provide this report until after such time as the tower has been ordered and that can’t happen until after we receive a zoning SUP and for this reason we request the required items of this section 12 be made a condition of the SUP. Section d (6): We intentionally limited the proposed tower height to 190 feet so that it would not require aeronautical safety lighting. Respectfully Submitted on this day September 15, 2014

Scott Goble 574 S Barn Stable St, Nixa, MO 65714 (417) 848-7584 Real Estate Contractor On Behalf of Verizon Wireless

UV10

OS

RM12

RM12D

RM12

PRD

RS7

OS-FP

RM12-FP

UR

RM12VC

A

A

AK-10 Hwy

Kaso

ld Dr

W 31st St

Havro ne Way

W 32nd St

Aldr

ich

St

Kaso

ld Dr

E1200 Rd

µLawrence-Douglas County Planning OfficeNovember 2014 Subject Property

CUP-14-00298: Conditional Use Permit for a NewVerizon Wireless Communications TowerLocated Just North of 1287 E 1200 Road

PC Minutes 11/17/14 DRAFT ITEM NO. 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR VERIZON WIRELESS; 1287 E 1200 RD (SLD) CUP-14-00298: Consider a Conditional Use Permit for a new 195’ Verizon Wireless communications tower located north of the Westar Substation at 1287 E 1200 Rd. Submitted by PAMCORP LLC for Verizon Wireless LLC on behalf of The Kansas District of the Wesleyan Church Inc, property owner of record. STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Sandra Day presented the item. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. Scott Goble, representing Verizon Wireless, showed a search area map on the overhead. He said the goal was to find a site as close to the center of that site as possible. PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Russell Livingston asked about the height of the tower and stacking leased space above that. Commissioner Liese said the tower could not go above 199’. Mr. McCullough said that was correct. APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENT Mr. Goble said it would be a 199’ tower and that Verizon would occupy the top of the tower. He stated leased space would be below that. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Culver asked about the following paragraph in the staff report:

Recent changes to federal laws allow some future modifications to approved and existing communication towers, base stations, co-location equipment and other features. The full scope of these changes has not been assessed by staff. Changes can include expanding the tower by up to an additional 20’ and increasing the base station (enclosure area) by up to 10%.

Ms. Day said at this point she did not know the full implication of what the changes in the federal regulations would mean. She said co-location changes were primarily focused on federal law as it related to historic preservation and for the environmental review that goes with these types of applications. She said according to the release that she read it may have some implications for the local governing body. She said ultimately they needed to review the communication tower regulations for the city and county. She said there could be some requirements that an application could be expanded. Commissioner Liese asked if there was any reason why they couldn’t insert a height maximum in the motion. Mr. McCullough said the height maximum was understood in the application. He said the federal preemption may allow tower companies to expand to a certain degree administratively. He said staff was not sure of what the implications were at this point. He said an applicant would still need to go through the local process of zoning but it may make it so the applicant could get a 10% increase perhaps without going back through the process. Ms. Day said staff did not know at this point because it is a recent determination at the federal level. Commissioner Struckhoff asked if the proposed allowable increase trigger lighting requirements. Ms. Day said her understanding was that towers under 200’ were not automatically required to be lit by FAA requirements.

Commissioner von Achen asked if there would be room for three additional carriers on the tower. Mr. Goble said yes, there would be room for three additional carriers on the tower. He said he had sharing agreements with other carriers. Commissioner von Achen asked if towers in the area had co-location spaces. Mr. Goble said each tower had a certain amount of structural integrity. Commissioner von Achen asked if Verizon anticipated the co-locations to fill up quickly. Mr. Goble said he couldn’t speculate at this time. He said the 10% height was a federal regulatory requirement and that any co-locator would need to show federal compliance that they would not be increasing the tower height by more than 10%. He said nothing in the federal requirement would supersede the local jurisdiction. Commissioner Denney asked if this was in the floodplain. Ms. Day nodded her head yes. Commissioner Denney asked if the control building would be susceptible to flooding. Ms. Day said it would need to meet minimum elevation requirements. Commissioner Liese asked how deep the tower would go into the ground. Mr. Goble said they would do a geotechnical investigation of the subsurface soils. He said in this part of the country they were used to going 35’ with the tower foundation. He said the compound would be built up above the floodplain. ACTION TAKEN Motioned by Commissioner von Achen, seconded by Commissioner Britton, to approve the Conditional Use Permit for a communication tower located at 1287 E 1200 Road and forwarding it to the County Commission for a recommendation of approval subject to the following condition(s):

1) Provision of a revised site plan to include the following changes:

a) Revise the landscape plan to show five (5) street trees along E 1200 Road/Kasold Drive located 8’ from west side of pedestrian pathway.

b) Revise the site plan to show a city approved access driveway apron and a paved access drive from the apron to 6’ west of the recreation path.

Unanimously approved 8-0.