City Council regular meeting — May 26, 2020

Background:

• This property located at 75 Shelburne Road was returned to City ownership at no cost to the City from a Federal agency about ten years ago. At the time of transfer to City ownership, the building was in poor condition and has continued to deteriorate.
• Currently this facility houses Facilities Maintenance and several Police operations. The site also serves as a materials storage facility for Public Works stormwater, sanitation, and fleet management.
• The building now houses essential City functions that require dry, secure conditions.
• The roof and masonry are leaking. This project will replace roofing systems throughout the 1960's building and complete structural masonry repairs. High-bay windows in the former “drill hall”, while significantly deteriorating, are currently functional.
• Request for Bids was first advertised on March 11, 2020. No pre-bid meeting was held due to observance of pandemic public health concerns. Additional site information was provided to bidders.
• Formal bids were received April 30, 2020. The bids were not opened because only two bids were received.
• Request for Bids was Re-Advertised on May 5, 2020. Contractors were offered site visits following current COVID-19 restrictions per the State of North Carolina, Buncombe County, and the City of Asheville.
• Window Replacement not accepted: Additive Alternate #2 for upper window replacement did not meet the project budget. Windows are currently functioning and will need to be addressed in a future project.
• Construction will begin around July 15, 2020 with completion around November 15, 2020.
• Two bids were received and formally opened on May 14, 2020, their names and Base Bid + Alternate # 1 amounts are listed below:
• J. Bartholomew Construction Hendersonville, NC $ 632,500
• WNC Roofing Fletcher, NC $ 774,000 J. Bartholomew Construction, LLC was the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• Staff performed outreach to minority and women owned businesses through solicitation processes which include posting on the State’s Interactive Purchasing System and requiring prime contractors to reach out to Minority & Women-Owned Business Enterprise (MWBE) service providers for subcontracted services. The low bidder is not MWBE. The Contractor did document outreach to MWBE sub-contractors. Hemphill Concrete and Finishing (Black Minority Business Enterprise) of Brevard, NC will be performing masonry repairs. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• The roof system will be insulated per current codes and leak free. Con(s):

None Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract is included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

Background:

• The City was approached by a local developer who is building a new phase of the Hawthorne at Haywood Apartments and needed a connection to the nearest Metropolitan Sewerage District (MSD) sewer line. The closest opportunity for sewer connection is a line on Eastview Circle.
• The N.C. Dept. of Transportation does not allow sewer within the roadway of Eastview Circle and no remaining right of way outside of pavement is accessible for the sewer installation.
• The only feasible connection left is across city property (9618-90-5267) at the intersection of Old Haywood and Eastview Circle.
• The Real Estate Division consulted other City departments to determine whether it would be in the City’s best interest to allow this easement on City property. The Asheville Fire Department uses the property as a fire station and Asheville Police Department has a traffic division at this location.
• Representatives of both departments indicated that they had no objections to this sewer extension. The Streets Department was also consulted and they have no objection.
• The easement being requested is approximately 100 linear feet long and is 20 feet wide. The width is mandated by MSD regulation specifying minimum width. Fair Market Value has been determined to be $4,820 and the developer has agreed to pay this amount. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Project will bring much needed rental units to the Asheville area.
• City is receiving compensation for the easement. Con(s):
• There will be temporary disruption on City property during construction.

Fiscal Impact:

• City is receiving unbudgeted revenue for the easement in the amount of $4,820.

Background:

• In 2016, the voters of Asheville approved a GO bond referendum for $74 million.
• The City uses a draw program to minimize the cost of debt. A draw program is a model using short-term debt (24-59 month) during the construction of projects. This short-term debt is then “refunded,” or refinanced with long-term debt (20 years). This model minimizes the interest the City pays on debt during construction, ensuring that the City’s debt capacity is used most efficiently.
• In June 2018, the City entered into a GO bond draw program in an amount not to exceed $23 million.
• Over the subsequent 21 months, the City drew down on the loan to fund various GO-related projects. In March 2020, the City repaid the interim GO bond ($22.2 million) by issuing 20 year, fixed-rate bonds.
• The FY 2019-20 budget did not include appropriations for the refunding of the 2018 GO bond draw program debt with long-term debt because the amount to be refinanced and the timing were not yet determined when the FY 2019-20 budget was adopted.
• This technical amendment incorporates this appropriation into the budget in order to ensure that the General Fund does not exceed the approved annual budget in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).

Council Goal:

• Financially Resilient City Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Amends the FY 2019-20 budget in order to ensure statutory budgetary compliance. Con(s):

None Fiscal Impact:

• There is no net fiscal impact from this technical budget amendment. It will simply amend the FY 2019-20 budget in the General Fund to reflect the receipt of refunding proceeds from the bank and the subsequent payment to bondholders to defease the prior debt issuance.

Background:

• The City of Asheville is currently in the process of renovating various aspects of the downtown transit station at 49 Coxe Ave.
• Recently completed portions of the renovation project include a complete renovation of the interior waiting room and ART staff space; new paint, furniture, and lighting on the platform, and new static signage for the platform bays and building.
• Outstanding items include the addition of solar panels to the roof (to be completed this summer), ADA improvements to the sidewalks and ramps adjacent to the transit station on the west side, and the addition of digital real-time arrival/departure signage to improve the rider experience.
• The City issued a request for proposals February 13, 2020,and received 5 proposals.
• The vendor was selected by a committee of transit staff from the City, ART and City IT staff.
• Installation of the signage will be done under a separate city contract.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• A Request for Proposals was issued and posted on the City’s bid page as well as the State Department of Administration Historically Underutilized Business website.
• No bids were received from disadvantaged or minority businesses.
• Electrical work and installation of the signage will be bid separately and will include additional outreach to local disadvantaged and minority businesses. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Digital signage will be placed at the transit center inside the passenger waiting area and outside on the platform to provide riders with real-time transit arrival and departure information, as well as rider alerts and messages.
• The digital signage will improve the rider experience and provide additional opportunities for the City and ART to communicate with riders. Con(s):
• The cost of the signage.

Fiscal Impact:

• The contract is for 3 years with options to renew for two additional years for a total of 5 years.
• The total 5 year cost of the contract is $188,068. This includes $137,573 in hardware and $6,995 in annual software licensing, support, and maintenance fees for the first year. Years 2 through 5 would include an annual payment of $10,875 for software licensing, support and maintenance.
• The contract allows for additional signage purchases to be made as funding is available in order to expand the system.
• The hardware component ($137,573) of the project is to be funded primarily through previously awarded Federal Transit Administration funds budgeted as part of the transit center renovation project. The City is responsible for 20% of this cost ($27,514), which is also budgeted in that same capital project. Annual maintenance, support and licensing fees are included in the Transit Operations Fund budget and will be funded with City funds.

Background:

• On August 22, 2017, Council approved Resolution No. 17-185 Esri, Inc. for a three-year contract for GIS Software Maintenance.
• This new contract would allow the City of Asheville to continue building an award-winning GIS program using Esri software for GIS dashboards, Map Asheville, the open data program, water utility management, Public Works asset management, Equity mapping and storytelling, and other initiatives.
• Currently, Esri software is also providing a central data repository and dashboard for the coordinated COVID-19 response.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• Esri provides a competitive enterprise license agreement for public sector clients. Changing the City’s underlying GIS infrastructure would result in significant costs in terms of lost productivity and the need to rebuild existing GIS assets.
• While City staff keeps a close eye on the enterprise GIS software market, there are few alternatives and none that can provide the same level of value compared to Esri. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Increased support of departmental business requirements via greater options for GIS software licensing
• Ability to install additional software without additional purchases
• Hold the line on increasing software maintenance costs Con(s):
• If continued funding is not appropriated, some staff will lose the ability to utilize GIS software and data.

Fiscal Impact:

• The first year is $55,500; $5,500 will come from the Water Service Fund and $50,000 will come from IT Services GIS Application Service funding.
• Funding for the first year of the contract is included in the adopted Fiscal Year 2019-20 Budget.
• The total for the three-year contract is $178,155, including sales tax.

Background:

• The Fonta Flora State Trail is the second state trail in North Carolina. It starts in Burke County at Lake James and is planned to extend through McDowell and Buncombe Counties to terminate in Asheville.
• The City Council of the City of Asheville approved the adoption of the Fonta Flora State Trail extension to Asheville on December 13, 2016, via Resolution # 16-273.
• The Friends of the Fonta Flora State Trail, Inc. is a newly formed non-profit organization designed to support local jurisdictions to coordinate and hasten the planning and implementation of the Fonta Flora State Trail from Morganton to Asheville.
• The Board of Directors is currently being formed and will be made up of elected officials, economic development officials, and trail builders from the three county area.
• Vice-Mayor Gwen Wisler, liaison to the Greenway Committee, was invited to sit on the board for a three-year term. Committee(s):
• All committees suspended until further notice due to COVID-19. Pro(s):
• The City of Asheville will have a representative on the Board of Directors.
• State trail status should provide high level planning and funding opportunities to governing entities that are involved with the state trail. Con(s):
• Time commitment would be required for the city’s representative.

Fiscal Impact:

• There is no fiscal impact for this action.

Background:

• This project, New Haw Creek Sidewalks, is part of the original Bond Sidewalk Bundle B design contract consisting of three other active GO bond sidewalk projects with Mattern & Craig, Inc.
• The City originally entered into a contract in the amount of $573,725 for Bond Sidewalk Bundle B design services (Resolution 17-261, dated November 27, 2017), and later expanded the scope of services to meet the requirements the Federal grants that were awarded to supplement the project budgets. The first contract amendment resulted in a revised contract of $680,375 (Resolution 19-109, dated May 14, 2019)
• Design consideration, to date, for the Haw Creek sidewalk envisioned the sidewalk being constructed on the west side of the road past Dogwood Grove then crossing to the east side of the road.
• Certain challenges with constructing on the east side of the road prompted the suggestion to further evaluate construction on the west side allowing crossings at intersections of Beverley Road and Bel Road.
• Site investigation of the original alignment identified obstructions. The full significance of these obstacles was not realized until a design review workshop in February 2020.
• Understanding the significance of the east side obstructions prompted an investigation of a new alignment. After preliminary design work on the new alignment, it was determined that the new alignment is feasible and recommended.
• This amendment to the design services contract will include additional survey as well as additional drainage and retaining wall design required for constructing on the west side of Haw Creek. The cost of this additional work is $39,405, bringing the total cost of the design contract for the four projects to $719,780.
• The additional contingency of $35,500 is being requested to cover unexpected changes which may occur in the design of this and the other three active projects in this bond package.
• New Haw Creek design will be complete in August 2020, with construction completion in May 2020.
• Johnston Boulevard design will be complete in November 2020, with construction completion in January 2023.
• Onteora Boulevard design will be complete in October 2020, with the construction completion in April 2021.

Vendor Outreach:

• During the establishment of the original contract, staff performed outreach to minority and women owned businesses through solicitation processes which included posting on the State’s Interactive Purchasing System and encouraging consultants to reach out to Minority & Women-Owned Business Enterprise (MWBE) service providers for subcontracted services. No MWBE firms submitted qualifications for consideration as the prime consultant. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Design of sidewalk that will meet City and National standards
• Improve mobility and safety on city streets
• Adhere to federal guidance and project federal funding Con(s):
• Construction will be disruptive to adjacent residences and businesses

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract is already included in the 2016 General Obligation (G.O.) Bond Program and has since been supplemented by federal grant funding at an 80% Federal/20% City level.

Council Goal:

• Financially Resilient City Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Allows the City to move forward with the Capital Improvement Program as funds are spent Con(s):

None Fiscal Impact:

• The initial draw on the GO bonds for costs incurred to date is $5.1 million. At current variable rates associated with this facility (roughly 1.92%), the annualized interest expense on the initial draw is $98 thousand. As further draws are made on the bonds, the interest expense will increase accordingly. Funds are included in the City’s FY 2020-2021 proposed debt service budget to cover these costs. They are also included in the City’s multi-year capital improvements debt model.

at 137 Broad Street from Community Business I to Community Business I/Conditional Zone to include an adjacent parcel for the construction of a new mixed-use building until July 28, 2020. This motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Wisler and carried unanimously by roll call vote. E. PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO UPDATE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS

Background:

• The City of Asheville entered into a contract with Passport Labs in February 2017 for a video-based customer answering / “call for assistance” service within the four City-operated parking garages.
• The fee structure paid is dependent on the number of “call for assistance” buttons placed at each parking garage exit, as well as the hours within a day that each assistance point is monitored.
• At the beginning of the contract, not all garage exits were equipped with “call for assistance” buttons, and all in-place buttons were only being monitored during evening and weekend hours.
• During May 2018, additional “call for assistance” buttons were installed, and all exits used by hourly garage customers were enhanced to 24/7 monitoring.
• Parking Services raised all parking garage gates on March 18, 2020 due to COVID-19 response. No use of the video call for assistance service has been recorded since then, although the garages have remained open for patrons.
• The contract expired in February 2020 and the requested additional funds would allow Parking Services to pay for services through May 31, 2020.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• N/A
• This is a current contract. Committee(s):
• None. Pro(s):
• Enables the City to continue to provide timely assistance for parking garage customers.
• Provides “face-to-face” customer support. Con(s):

None Fiscal Impact:

• The cost of increasing the contract value in order to maintain 24/7 customer assistance is included in the current Parking Services Fund operating budget.

Council Goal:

• Financially Resilient City Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Improved employee safety, ensuring that employees are not responsible for carrying cash to the bank.
• Compliance with State Statute through the use of Smart Safes on site.
• Efficient use of City resources, APD officers will not be needed to escort Water Resources deposits to the bank. Con(s):

None Fiscal Impact:

• Contracted service costs not to exceed $160 thousand over a five year period. Each department or division has included these costs in their respective budgets.

Director of Community Development Programs Paul D’Angelo said that this is consideration of support of a request by Beaucatcher Vista LLC to utilize the Housing Trust Fund to construct affordable rental housing at the property located at 2 Restaurant Court. Review::

• Kirk Booth d/b/a as Beaucatcher Vista LLC has proposed the development of a 40-unit, 100% affordable multifamily property on a 1.31 acre parcel located at 2 Restaurant Court (PIN #9658-08-2350) in Asheville directly off of Tunnel Road. All 40 units are intended to be 1 bedrooms, with 30 of the units set aside for households at or below 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) and the remaining 10 for 80% AMI households.
• Since 2009, Mr. Booth has completed 9 affordable housing projects in partnership with the City of Asheville resulting in 136 affordable units. This will be his second project using a factory-built product manufactured by Clayton Homes in Tennessee. The technology promises a faster, more efficient construction process, with on-site responsibilities restricted mostly to installation and finishing. He anticipates the units will be available by early 2021.

Proposal:

• The developer seeks a loan of $1,000,000 from the City’s Housing Trust Fund (HTF). In addition, the developer has requested a Land Use Incentive Grant (LUIG) award estimated at $289,481.85, which request will be considered at the May 26, 2020, Council meeting. Loan commitments from TruPoint Bank for $1,910,600 and Buncombe County for $296,334 have already been secured. The development partnership is committing the property (valued at $786,000) as equity.
• The units will be located in two separate buildings framing an interior breezeway, and set back towards the rear of the property facing resident parking. All units will be approximately 450 square feet, and possess full baths, kitchens, and enclosed bedrooms.
• Units will be made available to qualified affordable residents, as well as persons possessing rental assistance. The developer has a demonstrated history of close engagement with the Asheville Housing Authority, Homeward Bound, and other entities providing resident placement and rental assistance. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• The project produces 40 units of affordable housing at a location near the City’s core, with good access to transit and essential services. The developer’s commitment to set aside the majority of these units for 60% AMI households and citizens utilizing rental assistance addresses one of the City of Asheville’s highest stated needs.
• The per unit HTF subsidy of $25,000 per affordable unit ($32,237.05 of combined City subsidy) which is lower than the current estimate of up to $80,000 in subsidy for 80% AMI homes as suggested at the Affordable Housing Workshop on September 6, 2019.
• Mr. Booth is an experienced developer, and familiar with City of Asheville affordable housing programs and the expectations associated with them.
• The developer’s use of a modular construction product promises a less risk versus a fully site-built construction process. Con(s):
• None.

Fiscal Impact:

• The project would require $1,000,000 from the City’s Housing Trust Fund.
• The loan will be structured to require full repayment of principal and interest (accruing at 2% annually) over a term of 20-years. In response to Vice-Mayor Wisler, City Attorney Branham said that this action is to approve a Housing Trust Fund loan. If the land use incentive grant requested is not approved, the development would no longer be viable and there would be no Housing Trust Fund loan for this development. When Mayor Manheimer asked for public comments, none were received. Mayor Manheimer said that members of Council have been previously furnished with a copy of the resolution and it would not be read.