HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-24-22 NURB Agenda & Packet MaterialsA.Call meeting to order at 6:00pm
Via Webex:
https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php?
MTID=e9ce9340e98a6dd4dbb01c334d9d0d50e
Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit.
Click Join Now to enter the meeting
Via Phone:
Call-in toll number (US/Canada): 1-650-479-3208
Access code: 2556 601 8451
B.Disclosures
C.Changes to the Agenda
D.Approval of Minutes
D.1 Northeast Urban Renewal Board Minutes from December 16, 2021 and August 19,
2021.(Fine)
E.Public Comment
Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for
individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be
an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please
limit your comments to three minutes.
F.Action Items
F.1 Discussion Fiscal Year 2022 Budget and Work Plan (Fine)
G.FYI/Discussion
H.Adjournment
THE NORTHEAST URBAN RENEWAL BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
NURB AGENDA
Thursday, March 24, 2022
For more information please contact David Fine, dfine@bozeman.net
This board generally meets the third Thursday of the month from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
1
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Northeast Urban Renewal Board
FROM:David Fine, Economic Development Program Manager
SUBJECT:Northeast Urban Renewal Board Minutes from December 16, 2021 and
August 19, 2021.
MEETING DATE:March 24, 2022
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Approve minutes from December 16, 2021 and August 19, 2021 as
submitted.
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:Draft minutes from December 16, 2021 and August 19, 2021.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:n/a
FISCAL EFFECTS:None.
Attachments:
NURB 121621 min.doc
NURB 081921 min.doc
Report compiled on: March 14, 2022
2
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 1
Northeast Urban Renewal Board (NURB)
Regular Meeting
Thursday, December 16, 2021
The Northeast Urban Renewal Board met in regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday,
December 16, 2021, via Webex.
Present:Absent:
Voting Members:
Ethan Barlow Charlie Kees
Corwin Dormire
Natalie Van Dusen (arrived at 6:35 p.m.)
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese
Non-Voting Members:
EJ Daws Chris Nixon
Robert Pavlic
Commissioner Liaison:
I-Ho Pomeroy
Staff:
David Fine, Urban Renewal Program Manager
Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary
Guests:
Sophia Breyfogle, Outlaw Partners
Jeff Lusin, Architect for Wildlands
Meg Koenig, Wildlands
Jesse DiTommaso, Economic Development Specialist
Call to Order – Chair Corwin Dormire called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Disclosures. David Fine announced that Charlie Kees is not joining this meeting because he's
working on the project and, therefore, must abstain from participating.
Changes to Agenda. No changes were made to the agenda.
Minutes – November 2, 2021. It was moved by Corwin Dormire, seconded by Ethan Barlow,
that the minutes of the regular meeting of November 2, 2021 be approved as submitted. The
motion carried on a 3-0 vote.
Public Comment – Amy Hoitsma noted she has submitted a letter identifying several concerns
about the proposed Wildlands development. She lives down the street from the project site and
3
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 2
has been following its progression. She was supportive at the beginning of the process;
however, she has several concerns with the current plans. She noted that there are currently
33 parking spaces on the site; and the applicant is proposing a total of 32 parking spaces for an
additional 28 bedrooms and additional commercial space. She is concerned that this increase in
building space coupled with the loss of one parking space will negatively impact the
infrastructure in the neighborhood. She also asked that the applicants explain the
inconsistencies in the various documents on this project.
Discussion/Action Items –
Recommendation to the City Commission TIF Assistance for the Wildlands Mixed
Use Project. David Fine indicated that the Wildlands will present the project after which he will
provide staff input.
Eric Ladd, one of the principals with Outlaw Real Estate Partners, stated he has witnessed the
history of this area since he moved here in 1998 and resides in the northeast neighborhood. He
noted their development company is committed to being a part of the community and to “doing
stuff right.” He characterized the northeast neighborhood as quirky and eclectic; however, some
of it needs to be repurposed and redone. He then indicated it is not easy to do an infill project
and, as a result, it is difficult to develop in this neighborhood.
Mike Magrans stated he moved to Big Sky early last summer, but spends a lot of his time in
Bozeman and Belgrade. He has a 20-year background in real estate and has “invested blood,
sweat and tears and capital” in four projects in Bozeman. Those developments include a
project on the west side that provides 1200 doors, the Wildlands project and the Bronkens
Clover Leaf development.
Mike Magrans turned attention to the Wildlands project, which is located at the northeast corner
of the intersection of North Wallace Avenue and East Peach Street. The existing building
houses two tenants, one of which is expanding its business that will involve $600,000 in
renovations. Outlaw Partners proposes to wrap a mixed-use building around the existing
building that includes twelve residences and three commercial spaces. It is anticipated
construction will take thirteen to fourteen months and will generate an estimated $250,000
annually in new tax revenue. The subject property has three decommissioned fuel tanks and
one warehouse that is falling down. The first step will be to remove that blight from the
neighborhood. He stated that, when completed, it is anticipated the building will include a
restaurant, health and wellness center and a community gathering space that will be open to the
public. The project includes 31 parking spaces for the second and third level residences and a
fourth level roof deck.
Mike Magrans showed the site plan, noting that in addition to the building spaces, an open plaza
with outdoor fireplace will be developed. He voiced their interest in extending fiber to the project
for the tenants. He indicated that the firm is sensitive to the affordable housing challenges;
however, with only twelve dwelling units on the site, they are unable to provide units in the
affordable range. He stated, however, the applicant also owns 2.1 acres at the Bronken site;
and they are willing to commit at least three affordable units at 120 percent of AMI when the site
is developed. They will also pay the City back with additional tax revenue from this project,
which is estimated to take two years.
4
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 3
Mike Magrans stated the construction costs are estimated at $23 million, and they are
requesting $580,000 in tax increment monies to cover a portion of those costs. He indicated
that the team has evaluated this application in accordance with the criteria for TIF assistance;
and they believe the score makes this project eligible for the monies.
Corwin Dormire noted that the Board has received public comment on this project and asked
the team to address the issues raised, including parking, the differences in the documents
submitted and sustainability.
Eric Ladd responded that the group is committed to sustainability, but cautioned that there are
cost and design limitations for solar. He noted that sustainability changes every year, and other
options they are considering include insulation, energy efficiency, light fixtures and ensuring the
electric service will support charging of electric cars.
Jeff Lusin stated the plans exceed energy code requirements and will include items like air
barriers. Also, the exterior products are longevity materials that won’t require maintenance for
the long term.
Responding to questions from board members, Jeff Lusin confirmed that the plan provides 32
parking spaces for the expanded building. Removal of curb cuts and providing access to the
parking area from the alley will eliminate vehicle/pedestrian conflicts and improve walkability.
Mike Magrans stated sheltered bike parking will also be provided.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese stated she lives close to the site, and she sees people driving to this site
rather than walking to it. She then asked about the configuration of the parking lot.
Eric Ladd responded that the parking area will be off the alley and out of sight from North
Wallace Avenue. Traffic will exit onto North Ida Avenue and North Wallace Avenue. He
acknowledged that parking is a problem in the entire community, and this project will not resolve
that issue. He suggested that a parking garage in the neighborhood could address the issues in
this area.
Responding to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, Eric Ladd stated they cannot provide affordable units on
this site because it is a low density development. While he is sympathetic to the issue, this site
is not suitable for high density residential development; and that is why they are proposing to
use the secondary site to provide affordable units.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese voiced her frustration that, based on the history of proposed projects in
the neighborhood, what has been proposed has not been what happened. She cited the
Brewery site and the Silo project on East Cottonwood Street as examples, noting the brewery
was torn down and the district no longer exists and the silos were replaced by high-end housing.
Responding to questions from Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, Eric Ladd stated he is working on the
potential installation of solar panels. He noted the building will be plumbed for the panels and
he will get them installed if possible.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese stated the people who live in this area like the peace and quiet of the
neighborhood, and not everyone is excited about the changes that are being proposed or are
occurring. She also noted they do not see the need to fix up the area.
5
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 4
Eric Ladd stated he, too, loves the quirky character of the area. He noted, however, that
tonight’s discussion is about the economic impact of bringing value to the neighborhood.
Natalie Van Dusen asked if the people who purchase the residential units are expected to live
there or if the units will be second or third homes.
Eric Ladd estimated that half of the units will be occupied full time while the other half will be
occupied three to six months a year.
Natalie Van Dusen noted affordable housing is an issue and a real problem. She observed that
this project is expected to draw more employees to work on the site; however, if they can’t
afford to live here, they can’t afford to work here. She recognized the applicant’s intent to
provide affordable housing in its future project; however, she noted that other projects designed
to provide affordable housing have not come to fruition.
Eric Ladd stated that providing affordable housing on this site was not part of their original plan.
He acknowledged that adding a fourth story to this proposal would allow the option of providing
some affordable units; however, they chose to provide that housing in the next project and to
include that intent in their presentation.
Corwin Dormire stated each board member will be given an opportunity to ask questions after
which discussion will begin.
Ethan Barlow stated he was struck by the inter-related relationship of everyone’s desire for
affordable housing and ample parking spaces. He noted this is a difficult and expensive climate
in which to build, and allocating TIF monies to close the gap on the project is appropriate. He
acknowledged that the lack of affordable housing in the project is a concern; however, he noted
that the applicant chose not to include a fourth story because that height was unpopular with the
neighborhood. He then asked what the applicants have done to educate the public about this
project.
Eric Ladd responded that they met with the NorthEast Neighborhood Association twice and
fielded a number of questions. He noted the primary concerns were the scale and size of the
building, the amount of glass and parking.
Mike Magrans stated the City is asking for density and affordability, but the zoning and code
requirements for parking make it very difficult. As a result, he identified the need for the City to
sit down with developers and talk about it.
Ethan Barlow acknowledged that this project may not be popular, but it is delivering a lot of the
things the community has expressed an interest in.
Eric Ladd stated they listened to the adjacent neighbors and lowered the building by ten feet.
He noted that this is a small project and is on a scale appropriate for the neighborhood. He
indicated this project is as good as it can be while remaining viable.
Corwin Dormire stated that absentee residential unit owners will not create an impact on the
parking spaces. He then noted that those residential units allow for expansion of the
commercial spaces.
6
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 5
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese noted that, while the applicants have talked about affordable housing
and parking, they have not mentioned the fact that the commercial units and small restaurant
will further complicate the parking issue.
Eric Ladd responded that the commercial tenants have not yet been chosen; however, he
anticipates that some of those businesses will be open more in the evenings than in the
daytime.
Corwin Dormire stated he feels this is a nice project and has good proportions. He is a fan of
the modified hardwood materials proposed and also feels that is appropriate for the
neighborhood. He also supports the concealed parking and the open space being provided.
David Fine stated he has submitted a staff report for this project and forwarded staff’s
recommendation for approval of the applicant’s request. He evaluated the project against the
criteria adopted by the Board at its last meeting, and found that it receives over half the points.
He also had a consulting firm do a financial analysis, and they found a significant financial gap
in the project that would cause the developer not to proceed. He noted this is a small site with a
lot of competing issues.
David Fine stated that once the Board has made its recommendation, staff will work with the
applicant on legally binding agreements to ensure the developers meet their commitments to
receive TIF monies. He noted that the subject site contains crumbling infrastructure that will
need to be addressed either now or in the future.
Responding to Corwin Dormire, David Fine stated the staff recommendation is based on both
the tax revenues that the project will generate in a short period of time and the feasibility gap for
the project. He noted that the additional tax revenues will allow this Board to address other
district priorities.
Corwin Dormire observed that the shortfall could improve if the cost of construction comes down
or if the units are sold for more than projected.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese questioned how the City plans to work with the developer to address
parking issues in this area, especially with the added commercial space. She also asked how
the City can bind this developer to meeting its affordable housing commitment in a future
project.
David Fine responded that restrictions can be placed on the land for the future project so that,
even if it changes hands, those restrictions must be met. He noted this Board adopted a
resolution identifying parking as a priority, and staff is currently working with two developers on
addressing that issue, possibly through construction of a parking garage.
Corwin Dormire opened the meeting for public comment; no comment was received.
Corwin Dormire asked that board members submit their comments on the project, based on the
point system that the Board adopted at its last meeting. He noted that this project replaces
some aspects of the neighborhood that are in disrepair. He stated that removing curb cuts and
providing curbs, sidewalks and bike paths is important to the growth and viability of the city. He
supports the mixed use proposal, particularly the spaces for small businesses. He
acknowledged that a restaurant has given the people in the neighborhood pause, but he feels a
7
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 6
small restaurant could be a benefit, particularly in this mixed use development. He noted that
several years ago, when Wild Crumb was proposing its bakery, people opposed it; however, it
has been an asset to the neighborhood. He suggested that the Board not focus on parking,
since those calculations are outside its expertise. He feels the compatibility, physical design
and massing are appropriate. He does not find the solar panels a deal breaker, noting that the
shell, insulation value and high end windows offer sustainability. He is supportive of the exterior
spaces, landscaping, curb and gutter, and sidewalk improvements. He indicated that a
successful project will result in generating an additional tax base for this TIF district. He
concluded by stating he sees merit in the project.
Ethan Barlow characterized this as a perfect example of a project that creates taxable value for
the neighborhood but replaces some of the idiosyncrasies that he is fond of. He does not see
any concern on which the Board should base its decision; rather, he sees the role that TIF
financing can play in making this project possible. He noted the projections suggest the
repayment time is relatively short. He is supportive of the enhanced pedestrian experience and
the social interaction that will result from this project, which includes the removal of curb cuts
and installation of continuous sidewalks. He then suggested that the issues of affordable
housing and parking are more appropriately considered in discussions on policy and adoption of
ordinances.
Natalie Van Dusen stated she agrees with many of Corwin Dormire’s comments. She likes the
materials and the proposed building design as well as the reoriented parking area. She is
concerned with the characterization of certain elements, stating that running a restaurant in a
1,000-square-foot space is not realistic. She suggested, rather that a wine bar would be more
appropriate in that type of space. She concluded by stating she has no issue with the project;
rather, she wants to understand if this is an opportunity to allocate funds that will result in more
funds to continue addressing the vibrancy of the community.
Corwin Dormire indicated that he feels a 1,000-square-foot space could provide a small intimate
area that could be used as a restaurant, a crepe bar or a wine bar; and it would fit into the
neighborhood better than a larger food space. He suggested that having different businesses
operating during different times of the day could result in eyes on the street and the
neighborhood and increase the security of the area.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese stated she is still struggling over the parking, which she characterized as
“a big mess”. She noted the project is well done and a nice size, but it deals another blow to
what some think is blight but is really the character of the neighborhood. She voiced concern
that this will strip out the funky character of the area and move in the opposite direction from
what those living in the area appreciate. She is also concerned about the negative impacts that
this project may have on the traffic levels on North Wallace Avenue. As a resident across the
street, she is concerned about the potential of a wine bar or other business that may remain
open until 11:00 p.m., which could negatively impact the livability and quietness of the
neighborhood. She concluded by questioning what three affordable units in a future project
would do for the community.
Corwin Dormire stated he is sensitive to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese’s thoughts and acknowledged
that change is hard. He observed that traffic and parking are problems in many different places,
not just in this city or state. He stressed that this Board’s job is to evaluate projects in terms of
their merit and then to allocate monies to aid in their development. He noted that everyone here
has chosen “a pretty incredible place to live” and acknowledged that over the past twenty years,
8
NURB Meeting – December 16, 2021 7
everyone probably wishes some things had happened differently. He believes that in this
instance, the Board needs to look at this particular project and decide if it is offering something
the Board is interested in.
Responding to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, Ethan Barlow stated the evaluation of this project shows
0 of 6 possible points for affordable housing.
Responding to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, David Fine forwarded staff’s recommendation that TIF
monies not be awarded until after the project has been completed and taxes paid for two years.
He stated that the result should be accumulating funds close to the amount they are requesting.
The applicant will then be reimbursed only what they have paid in taxes.
It was moved by Ethan Barlow, seconded by Corwin Dormire, that the Board recommend to the
Commission that they designate the Wildlands project as an urban renewal project in the
Northeast Urban Renewal District and enter into a development agreement to reimburse up to
$583,445 in eligible costs from incremental taxes generated by the project. The motion carried
on a 4-0 vote.
David Fine indicated that staff will begin negotiating an agreement; and this item will be on the
Commission’s January 11 agenda.
FYI/Discussion.There was no discussion under this agenda item.
Adjournment – 8:41 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Board at this
time, Corwin Dormire adjourned the meeting.
Corwin Dormire, Chair
Northeast Urban Renewal Board
City of Bozeman
9
NURB Meeting – August 19, 2021 1
Northeast Urban Renewal Board (NURB)
Regular Meeting
Thursday, August 19, 2021
The Northeast Urban Renewal Board met in regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, August
19, 2021, via Webex.
Present:Absent:
Voting Members:
Ethan Barlow Corwin Dormire
Charlie Kees
Natalie Van Dusen (arrived at 6:38 pm)
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese
Non-Voting Members:
EJ Daws
Chris Nixon
Robert Pavlic
Commissioner Liaison:
I-Ho Pomeroy
Staff:
David Fine, Urban Renewal Program Manager
Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary
Guests:
Call to Order – Vice Chair Ethan Barlow called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
Changes to the Agenda. No changes were made to the agenda.
Public Comment – No public was in attendance at this meeting.
Approval of Minutes – May 20, 2021. It was moved by Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, seconded by
Charlie Kees, that the minutes of the regular meeting of May 20, 2021 be approved as
submitted. The motion carried on a 3-0 vote.
Discussion/Action Items –
Aspen Street Pedestrian Bridge next steps. David Fine stated the pedestrian bridge
has been on this Board’s work plan for several years. The bridge is about 90 percent
engineered and, therefore, is a shovel ready project. The Cottonwood and Ida project has been
terminated at this time and, as a result, construction of that section of Front Street between East
Tamarack Street and North Ida Avenue is also terminated. The result is to move the Aspen
10
NURB Meeting – August 19, 2021 2
Street pedestrian bridge to this fiscal year. The outstanding issues are the exact location of the
bridge and finalizing the engineering. He characterized the bridge as structurally sound and
crossing the creek in a straight line; however, he suggested this Board may wish to take
additional steps to make it a statement piece and an architectural asset to the community. As a
result, he has contacted Rob Pertzborn to identify artistic features that could be added to make
the bridge an asset. He acknowledged that this step would increase the cost of the bridge.
Jeanne Wesley-Wiese stated she is happy that the pedestrian bridge can be funded this fiscal
year; and she supports making it a statement. She noted that this has always been the art side
of town and she like having a creative side to the project.
Ethan Barlow acknowledged the bridge has had quite a history and has been a possibility for a
long time. He finds the practical solution underwhelming and supports a more aesthetic
approach.
David Fine stated the current engineered design is structurally sound with concrete abutments
in the proper orientation to the creek. He noted that a pre-engineered bridge can be purchased
and placed on those abutments; and that is the current design. He noted that this type of bridge
does not preclude cool architectural elements.
Natalie Van Dusen stated a bridge with architectural elements would reflect the character and
positive nature of the neighborhood.
Charlie Kees noted the bridge has been in the queue for years, and he is in favor of it. He lives
on East Aspen Street and finds the bridge would open connectivity to the neighborhood across
the creek and could make his son’s travel to Hawthorne School easier. He cares about the
uniqueness of the northeast neighborhood and wishes to protect it. He then asked about the
timeline for the bridge.
David Fine stated he does not believe adding architectural elements will add to the timeline for
the project. He indicated the final engineering and design should be completed later this fall,
with bidding in the first quarter of 2022 and construction next summer.
Responding to additional questions from Charlie Kees, David Fine confirmed the sidewalk
alignment was recently staked. He noted the sidewalk is located within the street right-of-way,
but there is a lot of stuff in the public right-of-way right now. The staking is so the public
understands what might be displaced or need to be moved as a part of the project; and that is
what holds the most potential to frustrate people. He plans a softer approach for gaining
support for moving encroachments, but acknowledged that some difficult decisions may have to
be made.
It was moved by Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, seconded by Charlie Kees, that the Aspen Street
pedestrian bridge be prioritized as a project in the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget and work plan.
The motion carried on a 4-0 vote.
Update on the financial status of the NURB fund and staff updates on status of
projects in the FY2020-2021 Work Plan and Budget.Robin Sullivan briefly highlighted the
financial report. She then drew attention to the balance in the fund, which is significantly higher
than the projected balance forward in the FY 2021-2022 budget.
11
NURB Meeting – August 19, 2021 3
David Fine stated the parking structure that had been attached to the Cottonwood and Ida
project is not necessarily dead since parking is needed in the area. He noted there are no
specific plans at this time, but it is an issue that will be explored further.
David Fine reported that the principal investor in the Cottonwood and Ida project has pulled the
plug on the project. He noted the project was to include dedicated affordable units and a mix of
attainable and luxury units. The higher costs of construction resulted in the inability to provide
attainable units and was still risky with low margins. The development group is socially
conscious about its projects and did not feel it could proceed with the project as it was changing.
At this time, they are considering options for the site.
David Fine noted that less has been spent on boulevard and open space maintenance than in
prior years, mainly because the contractor for the Aspen Street mowing stopped doing so, and
he did not know it until he was contacted about the lack of maintenance. Since it is difficult to
get a new mowing crew late in the season, he has asked the Parks Department to mow the area
until the end of the season.
David Fine reported the quiet zone feasibility study has been completed and reveals that all
three crossings need to be improved. No funding is available to do the North Rouse Avenue
crossing, but some developers could potentially be interested in fronting some of the costs of
doing so. The Griffin Drive upgrades are currently underway, and the improvements needed for
the quiet zone designation, including a raised median and 10-foot-wide asphalt paths on both
side of the roadway with bike/pedestrian gates, are being installed as a part of the project. He
noted that this district could fund the improvements for the North Wallace Avenue crossing, but
he would prefer to get developers to fund the project if possible.
Responding to Ethan Barlow, David Fine stated the preferred quiet zone improvements include
raised medians, lights, bells and gates. He stated that gates for bike/pedestrian facilities are
required for those facilities that are separated from the street. He noted that the improvements
can be installed at any time; however, a quiet zone cannot be established until all of the
improvements are done. He cautioned that the Montana Department of Transportation controls
the North Rouse Avenue crossing and, as a result, will make the decision on whether quiet zone
improvements will be made for that crossing.
Responding to Ethan Barlow, David Fine stated the Gallatin Valley Land Trust found they did
not need the $15,000 they had requested for the Front Street trail because the bids came in
under estimate.
Review of the urban renewal plan and state statutes pertaining to urban renewal
districts. David Fine noted a couple board members were recently appointed. He drew
attention to how the district monies can be expended, noting that list is set forth in Section 7-15-
4288 of the Montana Code Annotated. He stated that public infrastructure is the area where
most of the tax increment financing monies have been expended to date. He noted that those
expenditures are limited by the urban renewal plan; and the plan needs to be updated if a
proposed project is not included in the original plan.
David Fine briefly highlighted some of the costs that have been covered by the MidTown Urban
Renewal District, including demolition costs and transitional housing costs for those who were
displaced by removal of a trailer court.
12
NURB Meeting – August 19, 2021 4
Responding to Natalie Van Dusen, David Fine stated the urban renewal plan for this district was
attached to the memo in the packet information.
.
Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Work Plan and Budget – Recommendations regarding future
projects in lieu of Front Street Construction (Tamarack to Ida). David Fine stated the
motion in the previous discussion on this issue addresses this agenda item. He noted that the
amount budgeted for this project may change because it does not include the architectural
elements that have been added.
David Fine noted the amount budgeted for this project was $170,000 and the amount budgeted
for the Front Street project was $190,000. He has notified the Commission that this change in
project priorities could happen, and staff can proceed with the direction that this Board has
given them.
Set agenda for September 16, 2021 meeting or cancel meeting. David Fine stated
he would like to have a meeting next month. He noted the property owners of the Wildlands
Project have also purchased the Bronken property. Those owners would like to talk to the
Board about their project and possibly make a request related to one of those projects. He also
wants to provide an update on Commission action regarding board consolidation.
FYI/Discussion.David Fine gave a brief update on board consolidation. He noted the City
currently has forty advisory boards, each of which has a Commissioner Liaison and staff
support. The City Manager has been looking at ways to consolidate and reduce the number of
boards. The first phase of the board consolidations has just occurred, shrinking the number of
boards to five; and the urban renewal boards are not a part of that phase. He stated those
boards will be included in the second phase; and the City Manager’s current proposal is that the
Commission take back the decision making authority for those districts. He noted this change
will require public action including revising the plans for both the Midtown and Northeast Urban
Renewal Districts and the adoption of an ordinance.
Responding to Ethan Barlow, David Fine stated the goal is to have the first phase board
consolidations completed in November with the new boards being seated in December. The
change in urban renewal boards is anticipated in the first quarter of 2022.
Adjournment – 7:27 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Board at this
time, Ethan Barlow adjourned the meeting.
Ethan Barlow, Vice Chair
Northeast Urban Renewal Board
City of Bozeman
13
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Northeast Urban Renewal Board
FROM:David Fine, Economic Development Program Manger
SUBJECT:Discussion Fiscal Year 2022 Budget and Work Plan
MEETING DATE:March 24, 2022
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study
RECOMMENDATION:Provide feedback to staff on the draft Work Plan and Budget for FY 2022.
STRATEGIC PLAN:2.2 Infrastructure Investments: Strategically invest in infrastructure as a
mechanism to encourage economic development.
BACKGROUND:This meeting represents the first opportunity for the Board to consider their
recommendation to the City Commission concerning the Work Plan and
Budget for the Northeast Urban Renewal District for Fiscal Year 2023 (July
2022 - June 2023). While the narrative is provided for background, Staff
intends to get agreement from the Board on recommended projects and
expenditures and then adjust the narrative and the timing of the projects to
fit the recommendation of the Board. The goal is to finalize this
recommendation at the *DATE* meeting of the Board.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None at this time.
ALTERNATIVES:At the recommendation of the Board.
FISCAL EFFECTS:n/a
Attachments:
21-22 work plan update 031722.xlsx
Work plan synopsis 031722.xlsx
Report compiled on: March 14, 2022
14
FY22 Budget Update 03/17/2022
Revenues:
Estimated Beginning Balance $370,000.00 $569,844.00
FY22 Tax Increment $270,000.00 $206,946.00
Delinquent Increment $64,226.00
State Shared/Entitlement
Other Revenues/Refunds & Reimbursements $37,220.00
Interest $1,000.00 $314.00
Total Estimated Revenues $641,000.00 $878,550.00
Expenditures:
Infrastructure
Front Street - Idato East Aspen Engineering $18,000.00
Front Street - Tamarack to Ida Construction $190,000.00
Pedestrian Bridge/East Aspen Street Engineering
Front Street connector trail $15,000.00
Parking Structure $50,000.00 $250.00
Quiet Zone Study $20,842.00
Subtotal - Infrastructure $273,000.00 $21,092.00
Maintenance
Trails/Boulevards Maintenance $5,700.00 $120.00
Subtotal - Maintenance $5,700.00 $120.00
Administration
Staff Support $3,000.00 $825.00
Administrative Services $18,000.00 $7,151.00
Professional Services $10,000.00 $6,584.00
Bond Repayment $93,000.00 $46,000.00
Subtotal Administration $124,000.00 $60,560.00
Reserves
Designated Reserve - Bond $120,900.00
Designated Reserve - Projects $117,400.00
Subtotal Reserves $238,300.00 $0.00
Total Expenditures $641,000.00 $81,772.00
Balance $796,778.00
Northeast Urban Renewal District
2021-2022
15
FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22
Depot Park x x x
Depot Trail Area x x x
Trails/Depot Park maintenance x x x x x x x x x
Front Street Shared Use Path x
Aspen Street ROW open space x x x
N Church Ave trail improvements x x x
N Church Avenue sidewalks x
E Peach Street sidewalks x x
E Peach sidewalks/stormwater/landscaping & N
Ida Ave as shared use connector x
E Peach sidewalks/stormwater/landscaping x x x x x x x x
Neighborhood visioning document x x x
E Aspen ROW survey (Rouse/creek)x x
Aspen Street pedestrian bridge x x x x x x
Pedestrian bridge/E Aspen x x x x x x
E Tamarack Street x x x x x
E Tamarack/Front/Ida design/improvements x x x x x
Intersection Front/Ida/Aspen x
Front Street/E Aspen Street x x
North Ida Avenue x x
North Ida/Front Street x x
Preserve America Grant Match x x x
Redevelopment Incentive Program x x x x x
Streambank Restoration x x x
Depot Stabilization Project x x
Depot Rehabilitation Project x x x x
Entranceway Enhancements x x
Street lighting study x x
Front Street trail extension x x x
RUDAT x
North Wallace Avenue x x
Pedestrian RR Crossing x
Quiet Zone Feasibility Study x x x x x
Parking Structure x
Public Arts program x
Projects in NURB work plans
16