Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-16 NURB Minutes Final NURB Meeting – December 6, 2016 1 Northeast Urban Renewal Board (NURB) Regular Meeting Tuesday, December 6, 2016 The Northeast Urban Renewal Board met in regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 6, 2016, in the Conference Room, Professional Building, 20 East Olive Street, Bozeman, Montana. Present: Absent: Voting Members: Erik Nelson, Chair Daniel Doehring Robert Pavlic Bobbi Clem Jeanne Wesley-Wiese Non-Voting Members: John Usher Tom Noble Commissioner Liaison: I-Ho Pomeroy Staff: Brit Fontenot, Economic Development Director Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary Guests: Shane Strong, KLJ Engineering Chris Nixon, 719 North Wallace Avenue Greg Beardslee, 221 North Church Avenue Jenna Caplette, 415 East Aspen Street Maurice Quanbeck, 520 North 11th Avenue Call to Order –Chair Erik Nelson called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. Changes to the Agenda – No changes were made to the agenda. Public Comment – No comment was received under this agenda item. Minutes – November 1, 2016. It was moved by Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, seconded Bob Pavlic, that the minutes of the meeting of November 1, 2016, be approved as submitted. The motion carried on a 3-0 vote. NURB Meeting – December 6, 2016 2 Discussion/Action Items – Discussion regarding methods of funding the Aspen Street pedestrian bridge in the event it is not funded through the bond issue. Chair Erik Nelson stated that Greg Beardslee submitted a letter with his reasons for wanting to see the Aspen Street pedestrian bridge constructed. Greg Beardslee stated he has lived on North Church Avenue for 31 years. His children attended Hawthorne School at the same time as Rose Caplette, a girl with Downs Syndrome, went there. She is now a grown-up who lives on East Aspen Street and rides a tricycle around town. He is concerned that the Rouse Avenue reconstruction will cut off the one access to her home and she will become isolated. If the pedestrian bridge were constructed, it would give residents on that street an option for leaving their homes on foot or bicycle. Jenna Caplette, Rose’s mother, stated she has lived on East Aspen Street for forty years. She was originally opposed to the pedestrian bridge because it is dangerous to cross North Rouse Avenue at East Aspen Street; however, she recognizes that the residents along that section of East Aspen Street will be isolated with the North Rouse reconstruction and the bridge would provide a much needed access. She noted the bike kitchen that was on East Aspen when the bridge was originally proposed is gone; and the bridge would now provide easy access for those living on the east side of the creek to access the Meat Shoppe. Jeanne Wesley-Wiese noted that the costs and possible funding sources for the pedestrian bridge were discussed at the November NENA meeting. She stated the bridge on the extension of Front Street is projected to cost less than $75,000, so it makes her question the estimated costs of the East Aspen Street bridge. Chris Nixon stated he has requested information on the bridge and its design as well as information on the company that prefabricates the bridge. Bob Pavlic asked if the new floodplain maps impact the location and length of the bridge and if there is adequate room to install it. Shane Strong responded there is room to pour the abutments for the bridge. He stated the top- of-bank to top-of-bank is roughly 33 feet, so a 40-foot-long bridge is sufficient. He noted that the cost of the bridge is estimated at $1,000 per foot plus an equal amount for installation. He stated that the costs of reconstructing East Aspen Street are estimated at $60,000. Erik Nelson noted that this Board must ensure the bridge is connected to other pedestrian facilities, which has triggered the need to upgrade East Aspen Street. Responding to Erik Nelson, Shane Strong stated he will ask City Engineering staff what type of street improvements will be required in conjunction with the pedestrian bridge. Responding to suggestions from Greg Beardslee, Erik Nelson cautioned that because public funds are being used, City regulations must be followed and recognized that does increase the costs. Erik Nelson asked what the next logical steps are to make the bridge a reality. He then asked Recording Secretary Robin Sullivan to verify what has been previously budgeted for this project. The next steps will be to identify the review criteria for the project and what other City funds NURB Meeting – December 6, 2016 3 might be available to cover a portion of the project. He then suggested that this Board may need to rely on the neighborhood to advocate for this project and to assist in obtaining funding to close any gap in funding. Shane Strong stated the proposed bridge is a single span bridge with steel beam, concrete deck and steel rails. Erik Nelson stated this project can be discussed further at the next Board meeting, when more information is available. Review of remaining process for sale of bonds, including timeline for both the sale of bonds and completion of the street designs and bidding documents. Recording Secretary Robin Sullivan distributed copies of the spreadsheet showing the steps and timelines, based on the information provided by Lanette Windemaker and Shane Strong. Economic Development Director Brit Fontenot stated that on November 21, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 4732, which was the first action to enable the bond sale. This resolution set the public hearing for December 19. He reported that the motion to adopt the resolution carried on a 4-1 vote with Commissioner Krauss voting No because he feels it might be appropriate to wait a little longer and let the increment grow. The Economic Development Director noted that after the public hearing on December 19, the Commission will consider another resolution that formally approves the projects and directs staff to release an RFP for the sale of bonds. He noted that the resolution as drafted provides for the sale of bonds on March 1, which he realizes does not align with the timeline prepared by the Shane Strong for preparing the street designs and bidding documents. Responding to Erik Nelson, Brit Fontenot stated that the Board can now capture engineering costs incurred sixty days prior to November 21. Following a brief discussion, Chair Nelson asked that staff prepare a revised timeline that properly meshes the bonding and construction bidding processes and keep this Board informed of the steps for completing the process. Wrap-up of North Wallace Avenue construction project. Shane Strong reported that construction has stopped for the winter. The project is 95 percent complete, with installation of signs, thermal lay-down striping and punch list items remaining; and those should not require shutting down the street. He stated that bigger turning radii are needed but existing power poles are in the way. He recognized that some of the stop signs are currently difficult to see, so he is proposing the installation of stop ahead signs to let drivers know before they reach the intersection. He asked that Board members forward any other issues to him so they can be included in the punch list. Updates on current projects and updated project cost estimates. Shane Strong stated they have begun the designing of improvements to East Peach Street and East Tamarack Street, and he hopes to meet with City Engineering staff on Friday to discuss specific design points. He reminded the Board that both streets are located within 60-foot-wide rights- NURB Meeting – December 6, 2016 4 of-way, and improvements will include curb, gutter and sidewalks. He showed two street sections from the transportation plan, noting the street sections are 31 feet and 35 feet wide, comparing that to the 33-foot width of North Wallace Avenue. He will also talk to the City staff about trees in the boulevard areas and possible alternative street designs. Erik Nelson noted that the design for East Peach Street previously developed included bioswales and sharrows. He noted this Board spent a considerable amount of time on those street designs and asked Shane Strong to be an advocate for that design. Shane Strong responded that sharrows are no problem; however, the detail for the bioswales was not a good idea because it retained water adjacent to the road base, and the result would be eventual erosion of that road base. He provided some alternatives to the initially proposed bioswales, including some retention options that keep the water away from the road base. He noted that this would include a cut in the curb to allow water to run into a catch basin under the boulevard and then seep into the ground below the road base. He cautioned that this option simply results in the appearance of a ditch in the boulevard. Erik Nelson stated the Board is interested in taking a leadership role in environmental issues, and not discharging stormwater into a storm drain and into the creek. He then noted that he has seen beautiful vegetation in a bioswale area where the weather is warmer. Shane Strong cautioned that neither he nor the City would stamp off on the street designs as they were previously done, although some kind of underground retention system can be installed. Erik Nelson asked that Shane Strong provide alternatives for environmentally friendly options. Responding to questions from Brit Fontenot, Shane Strong stated that East Peach Street drains toward the north and east, so piping the stormwater runoff to Bozeman Creek is not an option. He noted there are storm drainage facilities to Avocado Street, with underground detention in that area. Shane Strong asked if the Board wants bioswales on East Tamarack Street. Jeanne Wesley-Wiese asked if the stormwater runoff could be channeled to the depot trail; Shane Strong responded an elongated depression could be done in the south end of the park. Responding to John Usher, Shane Strong stated he will provide a standard street design as well as alternatives that include bioswales and options for underground storage of water. Erik Nelson noted part of the Board’s interest in an alternative street design is to preserve the historic character of the district. Staff updates on items of interest to the Board. Economic Development Director Brit Fontenot announced that John How is now working at MSU. Shane Strong stated that a planner from KLJ’s Billings office will work with this Board until a new planner is hired in the Bozeman office. He will try to have Forrest Sanderson at next month’s meeting. NURB Meeting – December 6, 2016 5 Brit Fontenot suggested that Neighborhood Coordinator Jessica Johnson attend an upcoming Board meeting to discuss how she and the board may work together; the Board agreed she should be invited to the February meeting. Update on financial status of NURB fund. Recording Secretary Robin Sullivan distributed copies of the revenues and expenditures for Fiscal Year 2016-17. She briefly highlighted the financial information, noting the first half tax revenues should be included in next month’s report. Set agenda for January 3, 2017 meeting or cancel meeting. Items to be included on the January 3 agenda, in addition to the standard agenda items, are election of the Chair and Vice Chair for 2017, the 30-percent designs for East Peach Street and East Tamarack Street, an update on the pedestrian bridge costs and permitting process, and an updated timeline on bonding. Erik Nelson announced that he will tender his resignation as of January because of upcoming projects in the district and the attendant conflicts of interest. FYI/Discussion (formerly Neighborhood News). There was no discussion under this agenda item. Adjournment – 7:54 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, Chair Nelson adjourned the meeting. Erik Nelson, Chair Northeast Urban Renewal Board City of Bozeman