City Council regular meeting — July 25, 2023

Affordable Housing Officer Sasha Vrtunski said this is the consideration delaying consideration of the land use grant application for Aston Flats LLC (46 Aston Street) until the land use incentive policy has been revised and addresses micro-apartments. Background:

• Aston Flats LLC applied for a Land Use Incentive Grant (LUIG) for their micro-apartment development at 46 Aston Street in the fall of 2022.
• Due to the timing of committee meetings and holidays, the LUIG application was first considered by the Housing & Community Development Committee (HCD) in February 2023.
• Micro-apartments typically comprise 200-350 square feet.
• The current LUIG Policy does not address micro-apartment projects and the City has not developed any specific policies or practices for these types of units.
• After their initial review of the LUIG application for the project located at 46 Aston, HCD requested that the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) make a recommendation on how micro-apartments should be considered under the LUIG Policy.
• AHAC and staff are recommending delaying consideration of LUIG applications and awards for micro-apartment projects until the LUIG Policy is revised and includes clear standards for micro-apartment projects.
• HCD approved the recommendation to delay consideration of LUIG applications on May 16, 2023, with a 2-0 vote.
• On June 20, HCD approved the recommendation 2-1 to delay consideration of the application for the 46 Aston project until the LUIG Policy has been revised to include micro-apartments.
• On June 27, the Policy, Finance & HR Committee reviewed the application but did not take a vote on the 46 Aston Project.
• AHAC also recommended that if Council wanted to proceed with consideration of micro-unit applications, that developers should fully address all of the committee’s concerns and commit to setting aside 50% of the affordable units for voucher holders.
• AHAC’s specific concerns included:
• Whether the incentive should be adjusted to account for the smaller unit size.
• The demand for smaller unit size, limited kitchen/shared kitchens among those people seeking affordable housing.
• Whether micro-housing projects need subsidies in order to be built.
• Micro-apartments meeting qualifications for vouchers of the issuing agency (HUD, VA, etc.) and the applicable rent payment standards.
• Staff and the developer have verified that these units will meet the requirements for voucher units. The other concerns expressed by AHAC remain unaddressed.
• Council voted on June 27, 2023 to suspend LUIG applications for micro-apartment projects until the LUIG Policy is updated.

Review:

• A LUIG application has been submitted for 46 Aston Street per the LUIG Policy as updated and adopted by City Council on June 22, 2021.
• The development consists of 231 rental micro-apartments and community space. These units are expected to be between 200-350 square feet.
• Housing represents 100% of all rentable square footage.
• Of the 231 proposed residential units, 47 rental apartments (20%) will be affordable, serving individuals and families earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The affordability period will be 21 years to match the 21 year grant period.
• The project encompasses one parcel on Aston Street in the Central Business District. Currently the parcel is .64 acre (PIN 9648-39-6557) with an existing building on it. The building will remain and two new parcels will be created totalling .47 acre.
• Estimated Tax Value of the property is $24 million post-completion.
• The project, as presented to staff, meets the following

Eligibility Requirements:

• The proposed development consists of two or more dwelling units for rent;
• At least 20% of the units will meet the affordability standards set by the City of Asheville for households earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).
• The affordable units will be affordable to and leased to income-eligible households for at least 20 years.
• The proposed development is located inside the city limits.
• The proposed development provides residents convenient access to jobs, schools, and services.
• The proposed development is over the 70% residential threshold in use based on square footage not to include a parking structure if applicable.
• Per the LUIG Scoring Matrix and based upon the policy, the project will receive 20 total points for affordability, 10 points for rental assistance, 50 points for the location, 15 points for energy efficiency, 10 points for Universal Design, for a total score of 105 points. Per the policy, this will equal 21 years of grants in the amount of the City Property Taxes payable on the 46 Aston Street Development.
• As a part of the LUIG program, 50% of the affordable units will accept vouchers, which generally benefit households at 50% AMI or below. When Housing Choice vouchers are utilized, this also opens up a unit in Public Housing where there are waiting lists.
• All units in the project will be micro-units.

Proposal:

• Affordable Rental Housing
• The proposed project will provide forty-seven (47) affordable units (20% of the total units) to individuals and families earning at or below 80% AMI, with 23 (50% of the affordable units) accepting rental assistance, for an affordability period of twenty-one (21) years. Under this category, the project qualifies for 20 points.
• Rental Assistance
• The proposed project will accept 24 Housing Choice Vouchers / Rental Assistance in the community, and possibly consider more. The proposed project will house one person from the Homeless By-Name List for 5 points. Under this category, the project qualifies for 15 points.
• Locational Efficiency
• The proposed project is located in the Central Business District (30 points), within a ¼ mile of a 30-minute transit stop (10 points), within 1 mile from a job or urban center (downtown, hospital district) (5 points), and within a .5 mile from a Transportation Amenity (schools, Transit Center) (5 points). Under this category, the project qualifies for 50 points.
• Energy Efficiency
• The developer has committed to using Energy Efficiency (EE) / Energy Star Certification and green building certification. Under this category, the project qualifies for 15 points.
• Universal Design: The project has committed to using Universal Design for 20% of the units, which qualifies for 10 points.
• Staff has scored the project with 105 points. Analysis
• Delaying the decision about a LUIG for 46 Aston is not a reflection of the overall quality of the project. This project will provide housing in a central location where residents can access many services and jobs without having to own a car.
• LUIGs are intended to subsidize the affordability of a portion of the units, not to enable a project to be built.
• In response to AHAC’s concerns, the following have been addressed:
• The developer has confirmed with the Housing Authority and the Veteran’s Administration that the units will qualify for voucher use.
• According to the HUD Voucher Handbook on Special Unit types, these units are not categorized as Single Room Occupancy, so they are categorized as efficiencies or studios instead.
• Several of the concerns raised by AHAC remain unaddressed:
• The market demand for these units by people who need affordable housing is untested.
• It is uncertain as to whether subsidies are needed for the rents to be affordable or if the market price itself will fall within affordable rates.
• It is not clear in the policy as to whether the incentives should be of a lower amount due to the smaller units sizes.
• A previous micro-unit project, 217 Hilliard, was approved in 2022 for a LUIG with the same developer. At the time Staff and HCD did not raise concerns regarding providing a subsidy for these types of units, with a total of 80 units, and 16 affordable units, for a total subsidy cost of $592,790.
• The developer has delayed construction due to rising costs, but is working to get it underway in the near future.
• The Hilliard project was taken through the LUIG process in June 2022 and there have been 4 standard-unit LUIGs approved since then.
• Overall, the increased number of total LUIG approvals and the larger subsidy being requested here, combined with the lack of clarity around the role of subsidies for micro-units have created questions for both staff and AHAC about LUIG and micro-apartments. Committee(s):
• Housing & Community Development Committee
• June 20, 2023
• approved the recommendation 2-1 to delay consideration of the application for the 46 Aston project until the LUIG Policy has been revised to include micro-apartments.
• Policy, Finance & HR Committee
• June 27, 2023
• declined to vote on the project. There were two members present and no consensus on the vote. Pro(s):
• The LUIG Policy was not developed with this type of development in mind and does not address some of the issues it brings up, like smaller units, limited kitchens and the amount of the incentive granted.
• Delaying consideration of this LUIG will give time for the LUIG Policy to be revised in a more holistic way and give City Council more information to consider about these types of projects.
• With more time, input and also expertise from our Affordable Housing Plan consultants (starting in August/September), the City can more carefully consider how scarce City resources are being spent on affordable housing subsidies and what types of subsidies are the highest priority.
• Approving the staff recommendation will be in line with the Council action on June 27, 2023 to suspend consideration of LUIG micro-apartment applications until the policy is reviewed. Con(s):
• A delay in a decision about the LUIG for 46 Aston will compromise certainty for the developer around subsidies for the affordable units.

Fiscal Impact:

• Approval of the staff recommendation to delay consideration and approval of this application has no fiscal impact.
• If HCD and City Council approves the application, the fiscal impact is as follows:
• The two parcels totalling .47 acre that will be created have a current tax value estimated at $921,273 and pays city property taxes of approximately $3,173 annually.
• Under the estimated tax value of $24 million post-completion, the annual city property tax will be approximately $96,720.
• For 21 years and 47 affordable units at or below 80% AMI, the City will grant back a total of $1,953,152 which equals $41,566 per unit of subsidy which is lower than the estimate of up to $80,000 in subsidy for 80% AMI homes as noted in Council Work Sessions and a subsidy cap noted in the LUIG Policy.
• After year 21, the City will receive the approximate $96,720 annually in city tax revenue (depending on future property tax increases, etc.). Please note the City will still receive property taxes of approximately $3,173 per year in years 1 -21.
• Land Use Incentive Grant payments are planned as part of the annual budget process. Staff Recommendation
• Staff recommends that City Council delay consideration of the application for the Land Use Incentive Grant application for Aston Flats LLC / 46 Aston Street until the LUIG Policy has been revised and addresses micro-apartments. Ms. Vrtunski said the key takeaways from this presentation are (1) Land Use Incentive Grant (LUIG) application for a micro-apartment project at 46 Aston includes 47 units (20%) to be affordable for 21 years at 80% or below (total of 231 units) with a total grant of $1,953,152; (2) The current LUIG Policy does not address micro-apartment projects; (3) Council voted 6-0 on June 27 to temporarily pause consideration of LUIG applications for micro-apartment projects until the LUIG Policy is revised; (4) Staff recommends that City Council delay consideration of the LUIG application for 46 Aston Street until the policy has been revised; (5) On June 20, HCD voted 2-1 to delay consideration of the application for 46 Aston Street micro-apartments until the policy is revised; and (6) The LUIG Policy will be revised as part of the Affordable Housing Plan update in Fiscal Year 2024
• The contract to select a vendor for this project is also being considered at the July 25 Council meeting. The background is as follows: (1) February 2022: City Council approved a LUIG for 217 Hilliard, a micro-apartment project. The project had a total of 80 units, with 16 affordable at 80% AMI for 20 years. The total incentive grant is $592,790. To-date, the project has not completed the necessary permitting for construction (a) The LUIG Policy is technically silent on micro-units; and (b) When reviewing this application, staff saw benefit in using 217 Hilliard as a pilot because of the relatively small grant size ($29,640 per year for 20 years)
• The total grant for 217 Hilliard was $592,790 compared to the proposed $1,953,152 grant for 46 Aston; (2) September 2022: Aston Flats LLC applied for a LUIG for their development at 46 Aston Street. Because of committee timing and holidays, the request was heard by HCD in February 2023; (3) February 2023: HCD reviewed the application and the Committee requested that AHAC review the LUIG Policy in regards to micro-unit requests (not the project itself); (4) March and April 2023: AHAC discussed the LUIG Policy and considerations related to micro-units; (5) May 2023: AHAC voted 12-0 recommending the delay in consideration of LUIG applications and awards for micro-apartment projects until the policy is revised and includes clear standards for micro-apartment projects (a) AHAC also recommended that if Council wanted to proceed with consideration of micro-apartment applications, that developers should fully address their concerns and commit to setting aside 50% of the affordable units for voucher holders. AHAC’s concerns included: (i) Whether the incentive should be adjusted to account for the smaller unit size; (ii) The demand for smaller unit size, limited kitchen/shared kitchens among those people seeking affordable housing; (iii) Whether micro-housing projects need subsidies in order to be built.; and (iv) Micro apartments meeting qualifications for vouchers of the issuing agency (HUD, VA, etc) and the applicable rent payment standards; (6) May 2023: In alignment with staff and AHAC’s recommendation, HCD recommended delaying consideration of LUIG micro-apartment applications (2-0 vote); and (7) June 2023: Council voted 6-0 to delay consideration of LUIG applications for micro-apartment projects until the LUIG Policy is updated. The timeline for LUIG Policy review has not yet been determined with the Affordable Housing Plan Consultant. Staff has communicated that this item is top priority in the planning process. She then gave the project background of 46 Aston Street as follows: (1) The development consists of 231 apartments and community space on .47 acres of land at 46 Aston Street; (2) Housing represents 100% of all rentable square footage; (3) Of the 231 residential units, 47 rental apartments (20%) will be affordable, serving households earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for a minimum of 21 years (affordability period matches the grant term); (4) The developer estimates a taxable value after construction at $24 million; (5) All units in the proposed development are microunits/studios; and (6) As proposed, the total grant would be $1,953,152 or $93,007 per year at a subsidy of $41,566 per year. Policy considerations for 46 Aston Street include (1) Delaying the decision about a Land Use Incentive Grant for 46 Aston is not a reflection of the overall quality of the project. This project will provide housing in a central location where residents can access many services and jobs without having to own a car; (2) The following concerns expressed by AHAC have been addressed: (a) The developer has confirmed with the Housing Authority and the Veteran’s Administration that the units will qualify for voucher use; (b) According to the HUD Voucher Handbook on Special Unit types, these units are not categorized as Single Room Occupancy, so they are categorized as efficiencies or studios instead; and (c) The developer committed to set aside all 47 affordable units for voucher holders; (3) Several of the concerns raised by AHAC remain unaddressed: (a) The market demand for these units by people who need affordable housing has not yet been proven in the community; (b) Confirmation on the need for subsidies in order to ensure affordable rents; (c) The role of the LUIG program is to subsidize the affordability of a portion of the units, not to enable a project to be built; and (d) Clarification on if incentive amounts should be lower to account for smaller unit sizes; (4) June 2023: HCD reviewed the project and voted 2-1 in favor of staff”s recommendation to delay consideration of this application until the LUIG Policy is updated; and (5) June 2023: The Policy, Finance & HR Committee declined to to take action on the application. She then showed an aerial view of the property. Pros include (1) Delaying consideration of this LUIG will give time for the policy to be revised in a more holistic way and give City Council more information to consider about these types of projects, including input from the Affordable Housing Plan consultants (starting in August/September); and (2) Approving the staff recommendation will be in line with the Council action on June 27, 2023 to suspend consideration of LUIG micro-apartment applications until the policy is reviewed. Cons are (1) A delay in a decision about the LUIG for 46 Aston will compromise certainty for the developer around subsidies for the affordable units; and (2) Because the LUIG Policy does not currently address this type of project, staff recommends that City Council delay consideration of the application for the Land Use Incentive Grant application for Aston Flats LLC / 46 Aston Street until the LUIG Policy has been revised and addresses micro-apartments. Because the LUIG Policy does not currently address this type of project, staff recommends that City Council delay consideration of the application for the LUIG application for Aston Flats LLC / 46 Aston Street until the LUIG policy has been revised and addresses micro-apartments. There was discussion on whether the incentive should be lowered to account for smaller unit sizes and request that the consultant working on the revisions to the LUIG policy address this question, and the market demand for these units.

of a resolution to approve LUIG application for Aston Flats LLC for 46 Aston Street. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Ullman and carried on a 6-1 vote, with Councilwoman Mosley voting “no.” When Mayor Manheimer asked for public comment at this time, she received none. Councilwoman Roney would support the application moving forward because she heard that there will be vouchers set aside and she wanted to be consistent in seeking voucher units. And, this being close to transportation is a plus because that is a big part of affordability in our community.

for Aston Flats LLC for 46 Aston Street until after the LUIG policy is revised. This motion was seconded by Councilwoman Smith. David Moritz, developer of this project and the 217 Hilliard project, and Barry Bailik both spoke in support of moving forward with approving the LUIG application. Mayor Manheimer, Vice-Mayor Kilgore, Councilwoman Turner Councilwoman Ullman all spoke in support of moving forward with the application request, for various reasons, some being, but are not limited to: the length of time the LUIG policy will take to be revised; the length of time this particular application has been waiting for a decision; the risk of this project not being constructed due to finances; and need to move forward with this dense housing downtown. In response to Councilwoman Roney, Mr. Moritz explained they do have financing for the first project (217 Hilliard). He explained they still have support of their vendor and are now negotiating with two local contractors. The motion made by Councilwoman Mosley and seconded by Councilwoman Smith to delay consideration of the LUIG application failed on a 3-4 vote, with Mayor Manheimer, Vice-Mayor Kilgore, Councilwoman Turner and Councilwoman Ullman voting “no.”

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zoeUxoJfJsHxpSnH3zPPZllhATFLVja5McxVjbqkyak/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1LZBdxCkvd3rjuVjkgJ93-mXRAqng2YLirdQJaz4K-pQ/edit?usp=sharing Background:

• The City has a commitment to ensuring a clean and healthy environment.
• It has become increasingly difficult to recruit and hire qualified Facility Attendants.
• There are 7 recreation facilities that require cleaning services.
• A Request for Proposal process was conducted in June 2022 and included outreach to Minority & Women Business Enterprises (MWBE’s).
• T&T Cleaning was selected based on the qualifications, understanding of the scope of services, cost, and availability.
• The first year of the contract has been successful.
• The intention is to renew the contract for up to three (3) additional years.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• In June 2022, MWBE outreach was conducted through the Request for Proposal (RFP) process to solicit proposals from vendors.
• Six vendors responded to the Request for Proposals, with four respondents being MWBE’s.
• The vendor selected is a MWBE.
• Funding for this service is provided through the Parks and Recreation operating budget. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Recreation facilities are clean and safe.
• The stability of hiring a contractor to perform this work. Con(s):
• Long-term cost of a required service.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for the first year of this contract was $51,146 for a 10-month contract and (estimated at $89,000) is available in the Parks and Recreation Department operating budget.
• Future years will be planned for during the annual budget development process, for a total of not to exceed $395,062.58 over four (4) years.

Background:

• The previous contract amendment to add funding to cover the additional patching and pavement failed to include the mobilization and traffic control line items. The contractor had not previously requested payment for the mobilization and traffic control line items, which resulted in these items not being accounted for in the previous contract amendment.
• Upon the start of resurfacing operations, two unforeseen issues with Sulphur Springs Road were discovered.
• Sections of the road were not built upon a gravel base, but were instead built upon an improper base of red clay. This issue has led to approximately 385 tons of necessary patching, while the original estimate was 160 tons. The road is a layer of asphalt over concrete.
• The issue was discovered when the asphalt was milled away and the concrete was found to be in very poor condition. Several areas were in such bad shape that construction equipment would fall through the concrete and sink 1-2 feet into the clay underneath the concrete. This condition was most prevalent between Lucy S. Herring Elementary School and Haywood Road.
• Sulphur Springs Road has had several utility projects performed since the resurfacing contract was advertised.
• The pavement in the impact areas was found to have very little crown (slope) or even a reverse crown. Proper crown assures positive drainage, which improves structural longevity and safety.
• In some areas a 5-6 inch layer of asphalt had to be applied to establish a standard 2 percent fall from the road center to the curb. The increase in required asphalt depth will lead to an approximately 20% overage in asphalt tonnage.
• The area was annexed in 1917 and the original construction of the road predates the city’s records.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• N/A
• This is a contract amendment. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Approval of the amendment will allow for Sulphur Springs Road to be properly repaired. Con(s):
• This construction work, although performed via a contractor, will also use City staff administrative time to ensure the work is properly performed.
• The work will be a further disruption to a neighborhood that has experienced a lot of construction recently.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted as part of the 2016 General Obligation (GO) Bond program and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• The current contract with Smith and Lloyd Landscapes, LLC has provisions for two one-year renewals with each renewal having a 3 percent price increase.
• The original contract was for $30,000.00. The first renewal was $30,900.00 and the second renewal will be for $31,827.00. The total contract value if both renewals are used will be $92,727.00.
• The contract is for mowing of City-owned planting medians and parcels scattered throughout the City.
• Bids for the original contract were opened on May 27, 2021 and four bids were submitted: Smith and Lloyd Landscapes, LLC of Mills River, NC $30,000.00 Rivertop Contracting of Swannanoa, NC $32,368.00 Classic Cleaning, LLC of Raleigh, NC $38,377.00 BuckTom Services of Asheville, NC $49,980.00

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• For the original contract, 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.
• Staff also checked the NC Historically Underutilized Business and the NC Dept. of Transportation MWBE databases for potential contractors.
• Two companies in an identified disparity group were found and directly contacted. Neither of the companies submitted bids. One company in an identified disparity group outside of the ten-county search area submitted a bid.
• Subcontractors are not used on this contract. Committee(s):
• N/A Pro(s):
• Will help maintain City medians and parcels. Con(s): None Fiscal Impact: Funding for this contract is available in the FY 2023-24 Public Works Department operating budget.

Background:

• Water Resources
• Water Production Division operates three water treatment plants (WTPs) that produce clean, safe drinking water for the citizens of the City of Asheville, Buncombe and Henderson Counties.
• During the treatment process, each of the plants remove impurities which result in the creation of residuals.
• The residuals (sludge) are stored in lagoons at each facility and are removed on a yearly basis.
• This is essential and maintains operational flexibility, meets the standards of the Water Resources Department’s ISO 14001 certification, and maintains a healthy environment for our local communities.
• This agreement is for an initial period of 3 years with (2) possible one year renewals, and an amount not exceeding $500,000 per year or $2,500,000 over the term of the contract.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• The City of Asheville Water Resources Department issued RFP
• 298-WTPSludgeRemovalFY23 on May 19, 2023, requesting proposals for the removal of water treatment residuals (sludge), from the North Fork, William DeBruhl, and Mills River Water Treatment Plants.
• Due to the specialized nature of the sludge removal process and equipment, staff were unable to locate any contractors within the MWBE hubs that could complete the project.
• Staff did however provide a list of (5) MWBE contractors that have the ability to haul sludge.
• Staff worked in coordination with the City of Asheville’s MWBE/ABI to verify that all proposals were responsive and provided documentation of outreach efforts and showed MWBE vendor participation where possible.
• Three bids were submitted and BioNomic Services, Inc. was the lowest, responsive bid.
• BioNomic Services, Inc., submitted affidavits to verify they would self perform all work and will not require the use of subcontractors. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• The adoption of a resolution to authorize a general services agreement between the City of Asheville Water Resources Department and BioNomic Services, Inc., will allow the Water Resources Department’s Water Production Division to continue to operate as designed to provide safe clean drinking water to our customers in the City of Asheville, Buncombe and Henderson Counties.
• Each of these systems are permitted and regulated through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and are subject to those requirements.
• Reduce the risk of compliance violations.
• Maintain a clean and healthy environment. Con(s):
• Failure to remove sludge will impact the amount of water produced at each water treatment plant
• Decanted water may impact environmental regulations.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract is available in the Water Resources Department operating budget.

Background:

• Due to staffing shortages, the Asheville Police Department has a surplus of police related gear and equipment.
• The Asheville Police Department (APD) purchased ballistic rifle plates in 2016.
• The vests have a 10 year warranty and are set to expire in 2026.
• All officers currently have rifle plates issued to them and we do not anticipate filling all vacancies before the surplus vests are expired.
• The UNCA campus police do not currently have something comparable to the rifle plates.
• The equipment is well used but still functioning.
• Other equipment includes,used handcuffs, flashlights, winter coats, and rifle slings, all of which are no longer the style or brand that the APD issues.
• The radios are no longer compatible with the APDs Radio Management Program.
• UNCA has expressed a need for these items. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Build partnership with a local agency who has expressed a need for the items.
• Get possibly life saving equipment into the hands of an agency that could use it. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• Some equipment might have nominal resale value as surplus property, however, enhancing the capacity of a local law enforcement agency to perform its duties, and the goodwill the City would gain by donating this equipment, far outstrips its monetary value.
• Donated items are not what is currently issued, will expire before being able to be issued, or are not compatible with other equipment.

Background:

• A request for proposals was advertised in January 2021 for Rental Equipment Services.
• 6 Contracts were executed in July 2021 with 6 different vendors offering different types of equipment.
• H&E Equipment was one of the contracts executed, with a not-to-exceed amount of $85,000.
• This contract has been renewed twice.
• This contract is utilized by multiple departments to rent equipment needed for various tasks and projects.
• The $85,000 not-to-exceed limit is projected to be reached soon; and therefore needs to be increased.
• The City’s Procurement, Purchasing and Contracting Policy requires Council approval for General Service Contracts valued at $90,000 or greater.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• At the time this contract was initially advertised, 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.
• No MWBE firms submitted bids with this prime contractor and all work will be self performed by the prime contractor. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Departments will continue to be able to access equipment needed to complete tasks via rental on an as-needed basis.
• The City will not need to purchase various equipment that may only be needed for short or intermittent periods. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• The fiscal impact will vary depending upon utilization, but will not exceed the contract limit of $170,000.
• Each rental will be paid for by the user department from their operating budget.

Background:

• The City of Asheville has owned the property located at 30 Buchanan Place, known as Lewis McCormick Field, since 1984 and leases the property for operation as a minor league baseball stadium.
• The Asheville Tourists are a Minor League Baseball team in the South Atlantic League and are an affiliate team of the Houston Astros.
• Major League Baseball (MLB) released updated facility standards for Minor League Baseball stadiums in 2020.
• In January 2022, the City Council authorized a two-year lease agreement with DeWine Seeds-Silver Dollar LL for the Tourists to continue operation out of McCormick Field.
• The lease was for a shorter duration in order to allow for planning to align with new MLB facility standards.
• In February 2023 City Council held a work session to review the MLB mandates, opportunities and constraints related to proposed improvements at Lewis McCormick Field.
• In March 2023 during two different budget work sessions, funding options for improvements at McCormick Field were discussed.
• On March 14, 2023, the City Council authorized the City Manager to sign a funding letter of commitment to MLB regarding the City’s intent to bring McCormick Field into compliance with new facility standards.
• Buncombe County Tourism Development Authority (BCTDA) is slated to vote on the final portion of the financial commitment funding model on July 26, 2023.
• In April 2023 a Request for Qualifications was publicly advertised seeking professional services qualifications for the design of improvements at Lewis McCormick Field.
• Nine professional design firm submittals were received and evaluated based on their qualifications, experience and technical approach.
• The evaluation of those submittals, ranked by a six member evaluation committee, resulted in Ewing Cole, Inc. being the highest ranked firm.
• The evaluation committee consisted of members from the City of Asheville, Buncombe County Government, BCTDA, the Asheville Tourists Baseball Club and a neighborhood/community non-profit leader.
• Negotiations with Ewing Cole, Inc. resulted in an agreed fee of $3,700,000.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• Staff performed outreach to minority and women owned businesses, through solicitation processes using the State’s Interactive Purchasing System and requesting prime contractors to reach out to Minority & Women-Owned Business Enterprise (MWBE) service providers for subcontracted services. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Provides for sidewalk construction in an area with a demonstrated need for safe pedestrian access.
• Utilizes grant and lease funding to maximize the local funding on a City owned asset. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• A disparity study determines whether a governmental entity is awarding public contracts in a manner that disproportionately excludes or limits participation by minority, women‐owned, and disadvantaged business enterprises (M/WBEs).
• Such a study compares the utilization of M/WBEs with the availability of M/WBEs in the relevant market area.
• A disparity study is legally required for the City to continue its race and gender conscious Business Inclusion Program.
• On September 27, 2022, the City Manager entered into a contract with Miller 3 Consulting, Inc. for consulting services to complete the City’s Fiscal Year 2023 Disparity Study.
• The data analysis portion of the Disparity Study has required additional analysis from the vendor that was not contemplated with the initial project scope.
• A contingency to increase the contract by $34,473 is needed to satisfy the additional work required by the vendor.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• N/A Committee(s):
• N/A Pro(s):
• Contracting with this company provides outside expertise that enables the completion of a new Disparity Study, required by law, to be conducted at least every (5) five years in order to continue any race- and gender-conscious contracting program.
• A contingency to increase the contract allows the consultant to conduct the additional data analysis necessary to complete the study. Con(s):
• None.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract amendment is available in the Community & Economic Development Department operating budget.

Principal Planner Will Palmquist said that this is the consideration of an ordinance to amend the conditional zoning of 509 Biltmore Avenue for the purpose of increasing the amount of allowed signage. This public hearing was advertised on July 14 and 21, 2023. Project Location and Contacts:

• The project site totals 32.6 acres located at 509 Biltmore Ave (PINs 9648-43-7691, 9648-44-5476, 9648-43-3912, and 9648-53-0061).
• Owner: MH Mission Hospital LLLP Summary of Petition: Project Site
• The project site consists of four properties totalling 32.6 acres located at 509 Biltmore Ave and are identified in the Buncombe County land records as PINs 9648-43-7691, 9648-44-5476, 9648-43-3912, and 9648-53-0061.
• The project site is the location of Mission Hospital.
• The site is currently zoned Institutional
• Conditional Zone (INST-CZ) and the existing signage is approved under Ord. No. 3944 adopted on January 25, 2011.
• The applicant is seeking an amendment to the conditional zoning in order to increase the number and square footage of signage that was approved under the original conditional use permit.
• The Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan designates the Future Land Use of the project site as “Employment / Anchor Institution”.
• A change in the FLU designation will not be required. Overall Project Proposal
• The project is seeking approval for the installation of a total of 41 signs throughout the Mission Hospital campus.
• Of these 41 signs, 32 are existing and 9 are new proposed signs.
• The signs are a variety of types, including monument, wall, and directional signage.
• The total square footage of the signage is 1,380 s.f., with 973 s.f. of existing signage and 407 s.f. of new, proposed signage.
• The existing and proposed signage is summarized as follows: Type Message Quantity Status Location Total s.f. Face Lit Logo / Letters "Mission Hospital" 1 existing CH-1 69 Illuminated Letters "Emergency" 2 existing CL-20, CL-21 166 Destination ID Entrance Number 9 8 existing, 1 proposed DID-24, 32, 34, 36, 42, 49, 50, 55, 140 Primary Directional Directional Arrows 5 3 existing, 2 proposed DIR-P-11, 17, 19, 42 58 152 Secondary Directional Directional Arrows 7 5 existing, 2 proposed DIR-S-26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 31.1 154 Entrance Wall ID Entrance Number 8 existing EN-4, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 7.2 152 Illuminated Icon Various 5 1 existing, 4 proposed ICON- 47, 75, 76, 77, 78 372 Monument Illument "Emergency" 1 existing MON-E-15 28 Monument Illument "Mission Hospital" 1 existing MON-F-16 66 Wall Sign Directional Arrows 2 existing WS-NI-37, 39 84 Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and Other Plans: Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan (2018)
• The proposed amendment to the conditional zoning supports a number of goals in the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan, including:
• Make Streets More Walkable, Comfortable and Connected
• by improving wayfinding signage for pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Provide Resources to Connect Businesses and Workforce
• by working with colleges, institutions and local hospitals to deliver contextually-sensitive design and development decisions as those institutions expand
• The proposed amendment is compatible with the Future Land Use designation of “Employment / Anchor Institution” which is proposed, in part, as “a type of campus district named for the often large land parcel areas with more or less a single cluster of uses and activities. These areas include the hospital/medical campus of Mission Health’.. Committee(s):
• Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC)
• June 7, 2023
• approved (Vote 5:0).

Staff Recommendation:

• Staff recommends approval of this conditional zoning amendment request based on the reasons stated above. Mr. Palmquist reviewed the existing zoning, the aerial imagery and the future land use map. He then reviewed the master sign plan, outlining the type of sign, message, quantity, status, location and total square feet. . He then explained how the project was consistent with the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted unanimously to approve the project with conditions. Conditions include that the existing conditional use permit (Ordinance No. 3339) shall remain in effect with the following additional provisions: (1) total signage for the site shall not exceed 41 individual signs; (2) total signage area not to exceed 1,500 square feet; and (3) sign design and location to substantially conform to the Master Signage Plan. He said that staff concurs with the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the conditional zoning. In response to Councilwoman Roney, Mr. Palmquist said that there is some flexibility in the signs for future multimodal transportation options. Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 5:48 p.m., and when no one spoke, she closed the public hearing at 5:48 p.m. Mayor Manheimer said that members of Council have previously received a copy of the ordinance and it would not be read.

Urban Planner Clay Mitchell said that this is the consideration of an ordinance to amend the Unified Development Ordinance to establish a single unified table of permitted uses that merges several disparate tables in the Haywood Road Form Code, the River Arts District Form Code, as well as the Land Use Impact Table.This public hearing was advertised on July 14 and 21, 2023. Background:

• The UDO currently has several disparate and separate locations where permitted uses, special conditions and expressly prohibited uses are located.
• Changes that occurred in these separate locations resulted in confusion over use definitions and terminology and increasing concerns regarding administration of the table of land use impacts
• which govern changes in use and non-conforming rights.
• Creating a unified table of uses has been considered as part of several City staff amendment lists for years but has not been implemented to date.
• Following several internal meetings among Development Services and Planning and Urban Design, the project was initiated to complete the modification as a non-substantive formatting amendment to align all tables of uses into one central table.
• During the project, staff noted uses that were redundant or not defined.
• These uses were merged with existing defined uses to eliminate confusion.
• An additional minor change includes the addition of the use of Mobile Food Vending, to the Haywood Road Form Code.
• This change corrects an error in the original drafting of the table and has been consistently interpreted as applicable since the table’s adoption pursuant to a formal zoning interpretation issued on October 1, 2014.

Comprehensive Plan Consistency:

• This proposal aligns with a number of themes within the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan as a foundation for current and future UDO use and updating. Primarily, this update supports the theme “Resilient Economy”. Although the amendment makes no substantive changes to the code, the following goals of the Future Land Use section are applicable to this zoning amendment:
• Goal 19: Facilitate real estate development that maximizes public benefit. (Asheville Comprehensive Plan).
• Goal 19

Strategies:

• Ensure consistency in the enforcement of development regulations. (Id).
• Update the land use plan periodically to ensure all necessary land use types are provided for.
• “Provide greater land use predictability and transparency” with a more coherent UDO document for administration and use. (Asheville Comprehensive Plan).
• Create a logical framework for future zoning and development by ensuring that future substantive amendments are applied in a strategic and coherent fashion while avoiding piecemeal changes that can cause confusion. Council Goal(s):
• Improve/Expand Core Services.

Committees:

• Planning & Zoning Commission: Informal Introduction: 050323, Formal Hearing: 060523 (continued to 062123), Formal Hearing: 062123
• Approved, 6:0 .

Pros:

• Improves the consistency, clarity and access to UDO for applicants, the public and staff.
• Supports the goals of the comprehensive plan aimed at providing greater predictability and transparency in Asheville’s regulatory process.
• Supports the Council goal of Improve/Expand Core Services.
• Creates a single-point of access for all use related matters that avoids confusion for the public and staff alike.

Cons:

• N/A

Staff Recommendation:

• Staff recommends approval of this zoning text amendment request based on the reasons stated above. Mr. Mitchell said the background and context is (1) Comprehensive UDO update is planned in the future; (2) Substantive changes deserve and require significant engagement; (3) Structural and maintenance updates are equally important; and (4) Changes can and should be undertaken if improvements to customer service and operations result. The Table of Use Unification Qualifies: (1) There are 4 separate existing tables; (2) There are 3 additional lists of uses; (3) Unification can occur without changing the substance of the UDO; (4) Unification improves consistency and access to our UDO for all; and (5) Staff were able to complete the project internally. Issues identified are (1) Separate tables of permitted uses and lists creates confusion for customers and landowners; (2) Separate tables has created redundancy and confusing subsequent amendments; (3) A single unified table promotes consistency; and (4) A single unified table allow for future changes to be more effective and efficient. The proposed changes are (1) The change expands the primary Table of Permitted Uses to be the only table of permitted uses in the UDO; (2) All uses and references to special standards for all districts will now be located in one table in a single section of the UDO; (3) The list of land use impacts by type, used when determining non-conforming use replaced, will now be located in this one unified table with similar format; and (4) All redundant tables, lists, and text will be eliminated in many sections of the UDO. The pros are (1) the amendment reduces redundancy and complexity while correcting formatting and typographical errors; (2) A new unified table provides easy access and understandability for property owners and customers; and (3) A single, unified table makes future amendments more efficient. No cons are noted. He then explained how the amendment complies with the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan and the Council goal of improve/expand core services. Staff concurs with the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommends approval of the proposed zoning text amendment. Councilwoman Roney was pleased that we have all the tables in one place for many reasons, and Mr. Mitchell confirmed to her that there are no changes in the lodging use. Mayor Manheimer opened the public hearing at 5:56 p.m., and when no one spoke, she closed the public hearing at 5:56 p.m. Mayor Manheimer said that members of Council have previously received a copy of the ordinance and it would not be read.

Background:

• The City’s most recent Affordable Housing Plan was created in 2008.
• The contract amount for the plan will be $146,517.
• The City budgeted $97,000 for this effort, and will fund the contract at $96,517.
• Dogwood Health Trust has granted the City an additional $50,000 to make the planning effort more robust.
• The Affordable Housing Plan will be informed by the work of the Housing and Community Development Committee, Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, Thrive Asheville, the Community Reparations Commission, and the Missing Middle Housing Study.
• City staff have been working with Thrive Asheville to assess affordable housing program outcomes. Thrive is examining data from the Housing Trust Fund, Land Use Incentive Grant projects and housing permit data citywide. This data will help inform recommendations in the Affordable Housing Plan because it highlights the efficacy of the City’s existing affordable housing tools including an assessment of the number of units produced and populations served.
• The Affordable Housing Plan will assess current needs and set a direction for the next 5-10 years.
• The planning process will involve the residents affected by the housing crisis and address community priorities.
• The plan will review the effectiveness of existing City policies and programs and identify gaps in the City’s current affordable housing toolbox. Specific policies assessed will include:
• Land Use Incentive Grant
• Housing Trust Fund
• Policies for Implementing Affordable Housing on City-Owned Land
• A new comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan will also provide a foundation and guidance on how best to allocate funds from a potential future affordable housing bond referendum.
• The Request for Proposals (RFP) review team consisted of representatives from the following departments: Community & Economic Development, Planning & Urban Design, Equity & Inclusion, Community & Public Engagement (CAPE) and a representative of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC).
• The selection criteria included: Experience and qualifications of the team, relevant past projects, project understanding and approach, community engagement plan, cost proposal and completeness and responsiveness of proposal.
• After a thorough review of the submitted proposals, Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. was the top ranked firm of the selection team.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• The City utilized standard outreach methods, including posting on the State’s Interactive Purchasing System.
• Staff reached out to local MWBEs that are registered for this type of consulting work to inform them about the solicitation.
• The City received six proposals, five were deemed responsive and moved forward in the selection process.
• The selected firm is a national, non-profit organization. Committee(s):
• Housing and Community Development Committee
• May 22, 2023, information only, no vote was taken. Pro(s):
• An updated Affordable Housing Plan will give the staff, community and Council guidance for housing investments for the future and can help with bond planning if the City Council elects to float an affordable housing bond.
• The plan will assist the City in leveraging its affordable housing tools to achieve the maximum benefit for our community.
• With the current affordable housing crisis, it is important for the City to have clear priorities for affordable housing programs and funding.
• The planning process will provide an opportunity to engage the community in a comprehensive and coordinated way to help determine the future of Asheville’s affordable housing programming. Con(s):
• None identified

Fiscal Impact:

• The total cost of the plan is $146,517.
• The Community and Economic Development Department has allocated $97,000 of its contracted services budget for the plan.
• The City has received a grant from Dogwood Health Trust in the amount of $50,000 to supplement the $96,517 in the Community & Economic Development Department budget.

Background:

• The City’s Fleet Division plans to increase the number of electric vehicle purchases in accordance with the decarbonization goals outlined in the City’s Municipal Climate Action Plan.
• To accommodate the electric vehicles, the City needs vehicle charging equipment.
• The work from this contract will provide the electrical infrastructure and site preparation for electric vehicle chargers, dedicated to City of Asheville Fleet vehicles, at the following locations:
• Public Works Building A parking lot – 161 S. Charlotte Street
• Fleet Management parking lot
• 173 S. Charlotte Street
• City of Asheville Motor Pool Lot
• 99999 Eagle Street
• Facilities Maintenance parking lot
• 75 Shelburne Road
• Bids were advertised on May 12, 2023. Two bids were received by the bid opening deadline on June 8, 2023:
• Utility Partners of America, LLC (Greensboro, NC) $336,744.00
• Haynes Industrial, a division of M.B. Haynes Corp (Asheville, NC) $339,460.00
• The Utility Partners of America, 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.
• No MWBE firms submitted bids with this prime contractor. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• This infrastructure is a necessary step in the transition of the City’s vehicle fleet away from fossil fuels–reducing Fleet’s carbon footprint in accordance with the City’s sustainability goals.
• The electrical design is engineered to support the installation of additional chargers in the future. Con(s):
• Due to an uncompetitive market and the risks involved in underground work, the bids came in higher than estimated and above the budget planned for this project.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.
• Additional resources from the Green Savings Program have been identified to fully fund this project, allowing for charging infrastructure to be installed at all four sites listed above.

Background:

• The City of Asheville received a federal grant through the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for design and environmental documentation of pedestrian and bicycle improvements on Coxe Avenue in the total amount of $420,000 grant plus the local match of $105,000 for a grand total of $525,000.
• City Council Resolution No. 20-61 authorized the City Manager to apply for, and if awarded, accept funding from the French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization for transportation projects including Coxe Avenue Complete Street that included a federal ask of $9,040,000; a City match of $2,260,000; for a total project budget of $11,300,000.
• In October 2021, the City of Asheville advertised a request for qualifications for engineering and design services for the Coxe Avenue Streetscape Project.
• The selection of a design and engineering firm for this project took longer than it would for a typical project because of the multi-step NCDOT review process required for the NCDOT grant funding. NCDOT’s vetting process included lengthy reviews for advertisement, consultant ranking, and a scope/fee review prior to the negotiation of the final scope and fee for design services.
• A seven member selection committee evaluated qualification packages from sixteen different design teams based on the team qualifications and relevant project types.
• The highest ranked team is led by Kimley-Horn and includes Brooks Engineering (Asheville based), Vaughn & Melton (Asheville office), Ellum Engineering (WBE).
• The negotiated fee is $472,526.94 and includes surveying services, below grade utility explorations, conceptual design, public outreach, design development services, utility coordination, stormwater design, cost estimating and final construction bidding documentation services.

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, direct contact of firms on City, HUB, and NCDOT Minority & Women-Owned Business Enterprise (MWBE) lists
• The highest ranked team does have a woman owned business on the team, Ellum Engineering, which will be performing approximately $27,000 worth of subcontracted services. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Provides for the design of pedestrian and bicycle improvements on Coxe Avenue, as well as additional infrastructure upgrades.
• Allows municipal funding to leverage significant grant funding opportunities with Department of Transportation and Tourism Product Development funding. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.
• Funding for the construction of this project is planned in the City’s Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2024-25.
• Current funding sources include 80% NCDOT grant funding and a 20% City match. A future TDA funding request is anticipated to replace allocated TDA funding that was redirected to McCormick Field.

with TranSystems Corporation in the amount of $417,432.72, for New Leicester Highway construction engineering and inspection services; and further authorizing the City Manager to execute any change orders that may arise during the project up to the contingency amount of ~10% ($41,000). Background:

• In 2018, the City of Asheville received a grant from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for reimbursement of 80% of construction funds for the New Leicester Highway sidewalk project up to $2,904,000.
• City Council Resolution No. 23-91 authorized the City Manager to execute a construction contract with NHM constructors, LLC for the New Leicester Highway Sidewalk project.
• City of Asheville staff publicly advertised for Construction Engineering and Inspection services, as required for a professional service selection process.
• Nine professional engineering submittals were received and evaluated based on their qualifications, experience and technical approach.
• The evaluation of those submittals, ranked by a five member evaluation committee, resulted in TranSystems Corporation (formerly SEPI Engineering) being the highest ranked firm.
• Negotiations with TranSystems Corporation resulted in an agreed fee of $417,432.72
• The North Carolina Department of Transportation has reviewed and approved the negotiated fee as well as the draft agreement with TranSystems Corporation.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• With all federally funded projects, the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program is required for construction services, but not professional engineering services such as this agreement.
• The federally established DBE goal for this project is 5% participation for construction services, which will be exceeded for the construction portion of the project.
• Because this agreement with TranSystems is for professional services, the DBE participation is not considered. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• Provides for sidewalk construction in an area with a demonstrated need for safe pedestrian access.
• Utilizes federal funded grant dollars to maximize the local funding. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• This is a 2016 Bond sidewalk project that connects the front of the Shiloh Recreation Center and nearby transit stop to the community garden.
• Bids were initially advertised on May 16, 2023. Informal bidding concluded on June 13th, and 3 bids were received:
• Cinderella Partners Inc, Indian Trail, NC. $241,375.10
• Appalachian Paving and Concrete, Swannanoa, NC $263,350
• Smart Builders Construction, Asheville, NC $329,910
• Cinderella Partners Inc. was the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.
• Construction will begin this summer and be completed by fall 2023.

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.
• Additional outreach was performed by staff to small business owners.
• Cinderella Partners is a women owned business out of Indian Trail, NC. Committee(s):
• None. Pro(s):
• Project works towards fulfillment of the General Obligation Bond.
• Will provide a sidewalk connecting community amenities that adds to pedestrian safety. Con(s):
• Possible reduced levels of service for automobiles during the day while being constructed.
• Staff time will be used to administer the project until its completion.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• Inclusive playgrounds include people with physical disabilities, multi generations and people with cognitive disabilities such as autism spectrum disorder and ADHD.
• The playground replacement will occur during the fall through spring, and will be replaced before the start of the summer camp season.
• Bids were initially advertised on May 10, 2023. Only two bids were received at the bid opening deadline on June 22, 2023. The City could not open due to city policy and general statues.
• The project was readvertised on June 23, 2023, and the City received and opened bids on July 6, 2023. Two bids were received, as listed below:
• J. Bartholomew Construction, Inc., Hendersonville, NC $ 586,000.00
• Smart Builders Construction, Asheville, NC $ 441,516.00
• Smart Builders Construction is 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.
• One MWBE firm submitted bids with this prime contractor. North End Stump grading subcontractor will comprise approximately 7% of the construction contract. Committee(s):
• None Pro(s):
• The construction will occur during the off season for the therapeutic recreation program summer camps.
• Provide the first inclusive playground in the City of Asheville. Con(s):
• The playground will be closed during construction.

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• The 2016 Transportation General Obligation (GO) Bond Referendum included funding for sidewalk replacement along Vermont Avenue.
• The Vermont Avenue Sidewalk Project will replace the existing, substandard sidewalk between Olney Rd. and Haywood Rd.
• In June 2021, the City Manager executed a small design contract for the engineering associated with the Vermont Ave sidewalk project.
• Between 2020 and 2022, eight different public and neighborhood meetings were held regarding the Vermont Avenue Sidewalk Project.
• In February and April of 2022, Council received an update on the design progress of the Vermont Avenue sidewalk project.
• In February 2023, tree removal took place to prepare for the construction portion of the project.
• In June 2023, construction bids were advertised for 30 days, and only two bids were received. Because a minimum of three bids are required, the bids were returned unopened.
• The project was readvertised for bids and received three bids on July 6, 2023.
• The following three bids were received:
• Asheville, NC based Smart Builders Construction, Inc for $442,236
• Indian Trail based Cinderella Partners, Inc. for $396,253.21
• Fairview, NC based T.P. Howard Plumbing Co. Inc. for $476,000.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• Staff performed outreach to minority and women owned businesses through a solicitation process which included 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.
• Cinderella Partners Inc. is the general contractor for this project and is a Woman Owned business. Committee(s):
• n/a Pro(s):
• Provides for sidewalk construction in an area with a demonstrated need for safe pedestrian access. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• Funding for this contract was previously budgeted and is available in the General Capital Projects Fund.

Background:

• The Community Reparations Commission has recommended that the City and County undertake a comprehensive audit targeted to cease the harms impacting the African American Community of Asheville and Buncombe County.
• The City Council adopted a resolution committing to conduct the recommended audit on January 24, 2023, followed by a vote from the Buncombe County Board of Commissioners on February 7, 2023.
• With assistance and support of City staff, Buncombe County issued an RFP for qualified firms to conduct this audit.
• Staff from both local governmental agencies, as well as representatives from the CRC, have participated in the review and selection process for the firm selection.
• Buncombe County will contract directly with the winning firm to conduct the audit, and have requested support and cost sharing from the City of Asheville.
• This interlocal agreement will bind the parties to share equally in the costs of the audit, up to a total amount of $174,375 (the City’s total cost share for the audit would represent up to $87,187.50). The interlocal agreement would also permit either party to request additional scope of work to be performed at the sole cost of the requesting entity.
• The jointly selected firm is minority owned.

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• Targeted outreach was made to firms noted for their research and compliance expertise.
• All bidders were minority owned. Committee(s):
• Equity and Engagement Pro(s):
• Fulfills the recommendation of the Community Reparations Commission
• Assists the City and County with determining policies, practices, or other areas of ongoing harm to the African American Community. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• That portion of the audit costs to be paid by the City has already been allocated to reparations, and no additional funding is needed.

Background:

• The City Code, Sec. 12-53, prohibits leaving or allowing to remain unattended any equipment, packages, bags, or other personal belongings on City property, and any such property is subject to removal.
• The ordinance contains an exception that allows persons to leave or allow to remain unattended any bicycles, carts, strollers, or other means of personal transportation, so long as they are secured in such a way as to not obstruct streets or sidewalks, and do not interfere with the use of city property.
• This exception was likely intended to allow persons to temporarily store bicycles or other means of transportation, however, it has led to situations where bikes have been abandoned and/or left affixed to bike racks for extended periods of time.
• This places significant limits on the City's ability to address these situations in order to ensure that others are able to utilize public bike racks, and minimize the nuisance of abandoned property at these locations.
• This amendment would still allow for the temporary use envisioned by the ordinance, but would prohibit leaving any bike or other means of personal transportation on City property for longer than 168 hours (7 days).
• Notice will be provided via signage affixed to City bicycle racks. Those signs will include contact information to learn where removed property may be reacquired.
• Per state law no ordinance containing a criminal penalty may be passed during the same meeting it is introduced.
• For that reason, this ordinance will be introduced on June 27 and then voted on July 25

Vendor Outreach Efforts:

• N/A Pro(s):
• Remove loophole in order to empower City staff to address nuisance situations, ensure greater access to public bike racks, and prevent undue abuse of ordinance provision intended to encourage clean transportation options. Con(s):
• None

Fiscal Impact:

• None.

Mayor Manheimer said that members of Council have been previously furnished with a copy of the resolutions and ordinances on the Consent Agenda and they would not be read.