Loading...
02/26/2024 - Meeting Minutes MINUTES FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS BOARD MEETING(CDCIP) Monday, February 26, 2024 5:00pm 1. Board Members Board Members Not Present Jenny Bonk, Chair Brad Christensen, Vice-Chair Jake Skog Heidi Steed Devon Schechinger Teresa Gregori Andrea Schaefer Joseph Murphy Staff Present Bret Montgomery, Rachel Molinari, Mike Atkinson, Jordan Smith, Aaron Price, and Mary Beth Thompson—Department of Finance Ben Luedtke, Salt Lake City Council Staff Elizabeth Buehler—Information Management Services (IMS) Department Mark Stephens, Chris Norlem—Engineering Division Tom Millar, Tyler Murdock,Nancy Monteith, Tyler Fonarow, Bruce Brown, Makaylah Maponga, Troy Anderson—Public Lands Department Constituents Present Breanna Brannan, David Gall, Kerri Nakamura, Michelle Watts, Amy J. Hawkins, Michael Mayo, Ashley Saulsberry, Jon Cracroft, Tracy Schmidt,Nedra Crow, Helen Reynolds 2. Staff Updates There were no staff updates. 3. Business A. Welcome & Introductions Ms. Molinari welcomed the CDCIP Board members and City staff then opened the meeting on February 26, 2024, at 5:04 p.m. The staff offered individual introductions. Ms. Bonk then started the introduction of the CDCIP Board, and each member introduced themselves. B. Meeting Structure Outline Ms. Molinari explained that each applicant would have two minutes to discuss their application, followed by a Q&A from the Board members. She added that there would also be City staff available to help answer some of the questions. Ms. Molinari informed the participants attending online to please keep their microphones muted until called upon. She also said that each person must state their name for the public record before answering any questions. C. Questions & Discussion on Proposed CIP Projects Constituent Engineering Applications: 1200 E Curb/Gutter/Sidewalk and&pave Street Constituent- Breanna Brannan Ms. Brannan described the project and stated that the condition of the road was getting worse each year. She said the street was often mistaken for an alley and City services, such as garbage collection, were occasionally missed. She expressed that adding a sidewalk, curb, and gutter would help with these issues and would provide an area for families to walk without being on the road. Ms. Schechinger inquired about the project being submitted each of the past two years and whether funding was ever approved. Ms. Brannan confirmed that this was the third year submitting an application, and that funding had not been approved in the past. Mr. Christensen asked the applicant if the City provided a reason for why this project had not been prioritized. Ms. Brannan stated she had contacted many departments and was told there was no funding available and that there were other City projects that might help address her street. She stated that 1200 East had not been included in any of those other projects. Ms. Schechinger asked why the applicant believed they had not received funding for this project. Ms. Brannan stated that since the improvement would benefit a smaller group of people, the City had likely prioritized funding for projects with larger impacts. She said the road continued to deteriorate and would need to be improved at some point. AlleMays between Sherman/Harrison and Harrison/Browning Constituent- David Gall Mr. Gall disclosed that he had lived in the area for 17 years and had been a community volunteer. He said he would like for the McClelland Trail to be extended through the alleyway to connect to 1300 South. He added that there were a lot of businesses and residents that used the alleyway and had a vested interest in seeing it improved. Mr. Gall stated that snow removal in the area was contracted out and that the businesses would fill in potholes themselves to facilitate traffic going through the alleyway. Mr. Christensen asked for clarification on the McClelland Trail and how that would be incorporated into the alleyway improvements. Mr. Gall explained that the trail ended at Harrison Avenue and the residents would like to see it continue down Harrison Avenue, through the alleyway and continue to Sherman Avenue and 1300 South. Ms. Bonk inquired if there was any discussion with the business owners to help fund this project. Mr. Gall responded that he had not asked the business owners,but there might be interest in collaborating with the City to offset some of the costs. He informed the Board that he had received an estimate from Beck Construction that was less than what the Engineering Division said it would cost. Mr. Norlem added that the official City cost estimate stated that the document the applicant was referring to would not meet City standards and said if the project were approved, it would be required to go out for bid. Alley Improvement A798 No constituents were present. Mr. Murphy asked about the alleyway being a mix of gravel and grass and if the application was to address the gravel portion or both. Mr. Norlem stated that the improvements would be to the gravel portion because the grass portion was a private alleyway. Fayette Avenue Improvements between Washington Street& 200 West Constituent- Kerri Nakamura Ms. Nakamura explained the public improvements on Fayette Avenue, between 200 West and Washington Street, as described in her proposal. She added that300 West to Washington was previously completed by a developer. She said that the application aligned with City's Master Plan for walkable communities and street lighting. She also explained that due to zoning regulations, developers were not required to build as much parking per residential unit. Ms. Nakamura stated there were two parcels of City-owned land that were being used by residents for parking and they were not being maintained. She went on to say that there were discussions with Utah Department of Transportation(UDOT) to possibly match City funds for more development around the area. Mr. Christensen asked for clarification on whether UDOT agreed to match City funds. Ms. Nakamura confirmed that UDOT stated that applying for their matching funds would be stronger if the City had committed funds to the project. Mr. Christensen then asked about the boundaries of the UDOT property. Ms. Nakamura stated there was a fence line that bordered the City and UDOT properties and that UDOT was willing to move the fence back to develop more of the area behind it. Ms. Bonk inquired if the funding requested for the project would be reduced by matching funds from UDOT. Ms. Nakamura explained that total funding from the City would be used to apply for separate funding from UDOT to improve UDOT land. Mr. Christensen asked what the area was like at night. Ms. Nakamura replied that it was very dark and not safe to walk down Fayette Avenue to the businesses on 300 West. Fairpark Placemakin Sign Constituent- Michelle Watts Ms. Watts explained that the project would span across three districts and would inspire pride in the area since most people were unaware that Fairpark was its own neighborhood. She said there was a pedestrian bridge on 300 North and that adding signs at the end of the bridge would welcome people to the neighborhood. She added that they had received a separate grant that was used for a mural, and funding for this project would add to changes that would happen in the area. Mr. Murphy asked about the submitted examples from the Rose Park neighborhood for a concrete structure and sign that would span across the street. He questioned if the requested funding would be enough for both the concrete structure and the road sign. Ms. Watts replied that the funding would go towards the concrete structure because it was unlikely a road sign would be allowed by the City. Mr. Christensen asked about the 300 North pedestrian bridge and why that was chosen as a location. Ms. Watts explained that some of the neighborhood boundary lines had changed, and it was a suitable location to welcome people to the area. Main Street Alley Improvements, from No- Tell Motel to Utah Pride Constituent-Amy I Hawkins Ms. Hawkins stated that she had lived in the area for 11 years and that families had moved out of their homes due to the crime in the alleyway. Sha said that a developer was building forty new residential units and would put in lighting for part of the alleyway. She explained that funding for this project would be used to pave the alleyway and would encourage the developer to install more lighting. Ms. Schechinger inquired if the applicant had conversations with the developer regarding the additional lighting installation. Ms. Hawkins replied that she did not have an agreement in writing because the City's CIP program cannot fund lighting in alleyways,but she was hopeful that paving the alleyway would push the developer to install more lighting. Mr. Christensen asked if there had been discussions with the City about closing the alleyway. Ms. Hawkins stated that the developer and the residents were not in favor of closing it. Mr. Stephens said that the City typically was not in favor of closing alleyways. Constituent Public Lands Applications: Liberty Park Greenhouse Restoration Constituent- Michael Mayo Mr. Mayo explained that the greenhouse restoration project was a resubmission from last year. He said the Greenhouse failed a safety and structural analysis completed by the City last fall and that the structure was currently closed. He added that since it was abandoned, the Greenhouse could become a target for vandalism and his proposal was to secure, restore, and re-envision the property. Mr. Mayo continued to say that a consultant recommended that an engineer should be retained to analyze and make recommendations regarding the Greenhouse. He said that a pro bono analysis was undertaken, and the University of Utah had agreed to do a case study. He explained that the Greenhouse was in a historic area and any redesign would be in concert with the Historic Preservation and Planning Division. Ms. Gregori asked how he envisioned the Greenhouse being used by the community in the future. Mr. Mayo explained there were several ideas for use in the future, including a meeting center for the agricultural community, a demonstration center, a place to house wetlands projects, or other options that would make the property a destination to visit. Mr. Murphy inquired about the funding source for future development and enhancement phases if the City Council allocated funding for the initial design phase. Mr. Murdock explained the Public Lands Department submitted an internal CIP application that seeks to provide funds for the construction design documents of the Liberty Park Greenhouse. He said that the full construction costs had not been secured and would likely rely on both internal and partner sources, similar to what was explored with a native plant greenhouse that looped in environmental and conservation groups. Mr. Murphy asked if Liberty Park's designation as a historic park would restrict the types of renovations that could take place at the greenhouse. Mr. Murdock stated that some original portions of the greenhouse still existed,but the original structure that was built in the 1900's no longer existed and that he was unaware of what restrictions would be in place. Srh West Commons Conversation Center(s) No constituents were present. Mr. Christensen asked for clarification on what section of 500 West this project would span. Ms. Montieth explained that she had worked with the constituent and that the project scope spanned from South Temple Street to 200 South along 500 West. She said the only seating available in the area was bench seating and there had been eight locations identified where funding could be used to replace benches with picnic-type tables. Mr. Murphy asked about a quote in the application from a private company to install the tables and if that aligned with estimates from the City. Ms. Montieth replied that the quote was like one the City would use for that type of seating. Ms. Molinari clarified that all work would have to be completed by the City and so any price on the private quote should be disregarded and the Board should only consider the City's cost estimate. 800 East Parks and Pathway Constituent-Ashley Saulsberry Ms. Saulsberry explained that there were grassy medians in the road on 800 East from South Temple Street to 900 South that was mostly unused space. She said that community members sometimes make use of the area by sitting and talking with their neighbors, and that she would like to see the space turned into a bicycle path with some park amenities. Mr. Murphy asked if adding a bicycle path to the middle of the median would be suitable at major intersections at 100 South or 200 South. Ms. Saulsberry explained that she envisioned the crossing occuring in the middle of the intersection and not diverting to a typical crosswalk. Mr. Murphy asked for clarification on the full length of the project and if 800 East was identified as a neighborhood byway. Mr. Millar stated that the 2015 Bicycle Master Plan encompassed South Temple Street to the city boundary and with the exception of some major street crossings, 800 East did function as a byway. Curtis Park Reimagined Constituent- Jon Cracroft Mr. Cracroft explained that Curtis Park was falling into disrepair after being remodeled 20 years ago and that the park was located between Foothill Drive and 1300 South. He added that the Foothill Village shopping center was in the process of remodeling and a new entrance would flow into Curtis Park. He said he wanted to see a playground added and a combined effort with Foothill Village to construct a walking/biking path through the park. Mr. Murphy asked what elements of the project would be prioritized if the project only received partial funding. Mr. Cracroft explained the three phases, the playground first, the corridor pathway second, and the third would be improving a retention pond that was in the park. East Bench H Rock Preserve Constituent- Tracy Schmidt Mr. Schmidt described the nature preserve that included a well-known boulder with the letter `H' painted on it that was covered in graffiti from Highland High School and rival high schools in the area. He explained that the area around the rock had started to erode and had become a safety concern with 50-foot cliffs that posed a safety concern for teenagers who would climb around the rocks at night. He stated there was a strong desire from the community for the improvement and restoration of the nature preserve. Mr. Murphy asked for clarification on whether the constituent wanted a trail constructed up to the `H' Rock or if the request was to install fencing around the rock to deter individuals. Mr. Schmidt explained that there was a desire for both and that current hiking trails were made safer and stopped erosion. Mr. Fonarow added that several project elements had been proposed, from fencing to retention and restoration of local trails. He stated that Public Lands staff met with students at Highland High School and discussed alternatives to the tradition of painting the 'H' Rock. Ms. Schaefer addressed the applicant's claims of safety concerns and inquired if the City completed an evaluation. She asked if funds were available for emergency repairs if safety concerns were identified. Mr. Murdock explained that a City assessment had not been completed and a meeting with Highland High School had taken place years ago,but no agreement had been made about maintenance of the land. He mentioned that a risk assessment could be performed to determine if a closure should occur, and that this was the only remaining high school with the rock painting tradition. Ms. Gregori asked what steps the City had taken to communicate with the students at Highland High School to make sure they agreed with the applicant's request. Mr. Fonarow stated that he and the applicant had met with the student council at the high school in September to discuss the dilemma and how the tradition was considered vandalizing private property. He said they met with students again three weeks ago and further discussed alternatives with the students. He explained that while the students understood the environmental and safety concerns, they did not want to stop painting the rock. Mr. Fonarow added that part of the proposal was to add signage and language that would invite visitors to be involved and be better stewards of the land. First Encampment Park Constituent-Nedra Crow Ms. Crow discussed the history of First Encampment Park and the community's knowledge regarding This Is the Place Heritage Park. She then described the park and how names listed on the monument had started to fade and that the current irrigation system was not conducive to draught tolerant plants. Mr. Murphy inquired about the section of the application concerning the water drainage system and the obstruction caused by leaves blocking a drain. He questioned whether the simple removal of the leaves would suffice to rectify the issue. In response, Ms. Crow elaborated that the drainage problem extended beyond the leaves that could be cleared away. She emphasized that it posed a safety concern, and through discussions with the City, alternatives such as upgrading to a larger drain or connecting it to the street would be considered. Mr. Murphy mentioned that he had visited the park during the day and observed the presence of light posts. He inquired about the level of lighting available during the nighttime. Ms. Crow explained that there were a lot of people that illegally occupy the park at night and adding more lighting would help with safety and discourage people from staying overnight. She went on to say that in one secluded corner of the park, neighbors installed cameras and lights to discourage people from sleeping there. Faultline Park Play round No constituents were present. Mr. Christensen inquired about the procedure for determining the replacement schedule of playground equipment. Mr. Millar stated that with 60 to 70 playgrounds spread across the city, each with a lifespan of 25 to 30 years, the need for regular upgrades averaged more than two replacements per year. He said these replacements were prioritized based on various factors including age, safety considerations,usage rates, and demand-driven expansion. Mr. Brown explained that the current playground was over 20 years old and in need of replacement. Mr. Millar noted that when refreshing a park or playground, adding amenities such as drinking fountains, benches, and tree-surrounded sidewalks are considered. Ms. Schechinger asked if refreshing a park brought it back to its original state or if it would be changed and upgraded. Mr. Brown explained that playground standards and equipment were constantly changing and that the Public Lands Department always looked for Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) access, as well as maintainable and cost-effective solution. Mr. Millar noted that most playgrounds were not replaced before the end of their lifespan due to funding constraints. Ms. Schechinger rephrased her question and asked if parks were replaced with environmentally friendly and sustainable materials. Mr. Millar explained that when funding was available for playground improvements, the Department considered elements such as surfacing, paving, landscape materials, or trees to improve and extend the life of the grounds. Mr. Skog inquired if there was a budget for park improvements or if each refresh project needed to submit a proposal for CIP funding. Mr. Millar stated that the Department strived for a systematic approach in the future as part of the 10-year capital plan and that replacements would be more data driven and take a needs-based approach. He said that the Department submitted a proposal to upgrade city-owned courts and playgrounds as an internal request this year. Ms. Schechinger asked if CIP requests were reactive or if they were planned out in advance. Mr. Millar replied that internal requests would follow a more systematic approach as part of the 10- year capital asset plan. Playground Shade Constituent- Helen Reynolds Ms. Reynolds explained that during the summer months playground equipment became too hot for children to use. She said children used City playgrounds regularly when not in school and there was no shade for protection. She added that the application was to address adding shade at parks throughout the entire city. Ms. Gregori asked if adding shade was a priority for the City. Ms. Reynolds talked about growing up in Australia where the playgrounds were shaded due to high rates of skin cancer. She explained that children in Utah have 3 months off during the summer with many sunny days but could not enjoy the many City playgrounds because the equipment got too hot. Mr. Christensen inquired how snow would factor into how long the shade sails were expected to last. Mr. Brown explained that the sails would be taken down and stored during the winter and said the City already did this for other items in the winter to avoid snow-load and to prolong usability. Ms. Steed asked about partial funding and how it would be distributed to the different playgrounds. Ms. Reynolds suggested determining which playgrounds already have trees that provide adequate shade and which playgrounds are the most popular if the project was partially funded. Mr. Murphy inquired about what preventive measures would be in place to predict upcoming windstorms to protect and prevent the shade sails from flying away. Mr. Millar explained that sails can easily be taken down and many of them include built in slits that allow wind to pass through. He said the City tracked forecasts closely to make sure irrigation systems and storm drains were adequately prepared for weather related events. Pocket Park Community Space—Jake Garn Way No constituents were present. Mr. Christensen inquired if there was a target population for the community space project. Ms. Maponga clarified that the project's proximity to nearby homes and its location just half a block away from the Jordan River Trail suggested it served a local population and she highlighted the absence of another park within a couple of blocks. Mr. Millar added that the proposal aligned with the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan for 600 South, which would connect with the area in this application. Popular Grove Park Lighting No constituents were present. Mr. Christensen asked about the current lighting at Poplar Grove Park and if the new basketball court would have lighting installed as part of last year's approved project scope or if this proposal was to supplement the improvements from last year. Mr. Anderson replied that most of the lighting in the park was street lighting, and there were no plans to light the basketball court at night. He also said that the City was looking to improve lighting around the perimeter of the park as part of an overall lighting improvement project. Street Futsal courts 1:1 Match No constituents were present. Mr. Murphy asked about the pros and cons of converting concrete slabs into f itsal courts when there were existing full-size soccer fields in the same park or nearby. Mr. Murdock stated that they had installed a futsal court in Sherwood Park last year. He explained that futsal courts were different from full-sized soccer fields that were consistently reserved during the summer months, and that the futsal courts provide a more equitable space for residents to use. He said the project scope would take existing concrete slabs and turn them into assets that the City could use. Mr. Murphy asked whether a concrete slab at Eleventh Avenue Park had been previously used as a volleyball court. Mr. Murdock replied that it was and that three of the four slabs listed in the application were previously used for volleyball. He said many of the concrete volleyball courts were underutilized and there would be public engagement to discuss change of use. Mr. Christensen stated that it would be much easier for a group of children to use a f itsal court as opposed to a grass field and Ms. Schechinger asked for clarification on why. Mr. Christensen responded that with fewer participants it was easier to use a smaller area. D. Overview and Expectations of next Meeting Ms. Molinari said that the next meeting would take place on Monday, March 4, 2024, covering the second half of the Constituent Public Lands related projects and that it would follow the same meeting structure. Ms. Bonk asked about the scoring process for the applications. Ms. Molinari stated that the scoring would be complete in Excel this year and that Board members should disregard any scoring questions in ZoomGrants. She said the scoring criteria would be sent out soon and while it would be similar to what the Board has seen in previous years, some of the criteria would be different. She explained that a score would be calculated, and the results would be provided to the Board before the funding meeting. She went on to say that the criteria ranking would be on a scale of zero to five and the spreadsheet would automatically calculate the total score. E. Approval of the Minutes There were no minutes to approve. F. Adjournment There being no further business. Mr. Skog made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Steed seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 6:43 pm. XJenny Bonk(Mar 29,202418:46 MDT) CDCIP Board Chair This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the CDCIP Board meeting held February 26, 2024. Minutes 02.26.2024 Final Audit Report 2024-03-30 Created: 2024-03-21 By: Rachel Molinari(rachel.molinari@slcgov.com) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAK3c_aRg7IR4UnRQcYLgE7N-mjnEOBnxW "Minutes 02.26.2024" History Document created by Rachel Molinari (rachel.molinari@slcgov.com) 2024-03-21 -5:41:30 PM GMT Document emailed to Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com)for signature 2024-03-21 -5:41:55 PM GMT Email viewed by Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com) 2024-03-30-0:46:18 AM GMT Al Document e-signed by Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com) Signature Date:2024-03-30-0:46:37 AM GMT-Time Source:server Agreement completed. 2024-03-30-0:46:37 AM GMT y Powered by Adobe Acrobat Sign