- I call to order tonight's meeting of the Board of Public Works for March 24th, 2026. First on our agenda
- is opening of bids. I assume we have no bids to open. Okay. Next is messages from board members. Any
- messages from the board tonight? All right.
- Moving along, we will go to agenda item number three, which is appeals. And we have requests for appeal
- of notice of violation issued to Wells and Wells on September 20th, 2025. From engineering. So just
- to give some background on this, it will be appeal. So the summary of this would read,
- Engineering staff finds that Wells and Wells had both an approved extension and advanced written notice
- of the deadline of potential enforcement action as it relates to this NOV or notice of violation. The
- roadway restoration work was not completed within the permitted timeframe and staff does recommend upholding
- the notice of violation and the associated penalties.
- So the right-of-way permit associated with this work was approved by the board on May 20th of 2025,
- and then issued June 5th of 2025 for roadway and utility work along East 19th Street, North Lincoln
- Street, and North Washington Street, all associated with the Hub 2 project. The permit included a phased
- schedule for roadway closures and restoration work with a scheduled completion date of September 19th, 2025.
- At the request of the contractor the board approved an extension. I'm sorry, that was a September August
- 12 for the first one, and then requested an extension to September 19, giving the final date for restoration
- to be completed of September 19 of 2025.
- Prior to the extended deadline, engineering staff notified the contractor on September 12th, 2025 that
- the failure to reopen the affected streets and restore the roadway surfaces by the approved date could
- result in an enforcement action. Despite the notification, roadways weren't restored within the permitted
- timeframe. Documentation photographs associated with the notice of violation show that the base asphalt
- did not occur, paving did not occur until September 20th through 24th of 2025, days after the approved
- completion deadline.
- With those thoughts in mind we support upholding the notice of violation Yes, I believe we
- have representative of Wells and Wells here if you'd like to make a statement to the board or now would
- be your time Yeah, Jesse Graber with Wells and Wells construction representing Wells and Wells and core
- development
- the owners. So first of all, I do actually want to thank Kyle and Zach and Maria and the entire
- transportation board for working with us so diligently on the project. It has been difficult. We acknowledge
- and do not dispute the fact that the project for the basically the public improvements of that block
- through private development did to go past our permitted timeframe. I'm not going to take a lot of your
- time. I just have a few bullet points here that I would like for the board to consider and transportation
- to consider. We applied for a grading permit in the fall of
- to the community that you know this road work was
- I do just want to comment, and this is not negativity or criticism, but at no point in time during the
- entire planning process was a restriction that this work had to be completed during a summer break ever
- made known until we applied for the road permit. Had we known that the work being required over the
- summer break was going to be a requirement,
- we could have phased the initial project differently, but by that point in time, it was far too late
- in the planning and process. So the road work being completed during summer break was a requirement
- that came up when we applied for the road work permit. We acknowledged that our contractors agreed to
- it, but what we did not anticipate was that IDEM would take
- the full three months to approve the sewer permit. What we did not anticipate was the amount of rock
- that was in the street. We beat out about $500,000 worth of rock to put those public improvements in.
- And what we did not anticipate was the six days that the site was shut down to gas line leaks that both
- the fire department and Centerpoint Energy responded to with emergency calls.
- We would ask the board's consideration that the dollar amount of the fine be applied towards the improvement
- of Washington Street from 19th along the west side of Washington Street that is not a part of our
- Work-in-process or approved plans, but we recognize as a developer and contractor that the west side
- of that street is not in a finished state Probably was not fully addressed by by Plan by our plans and
- by the design of the project fines are
- punitive to our subcontractors. And Crider and Crider, the subcontractor on this, worked six to seven
- days a week, 80 to 90 hours a week trying to achieve this goal. It was not achievable by reasons outside
- of their control. We recognize as a developer that we did impact the community as
- As a compensation, we would like to use the money to improve towards an improvement of Washington Street
- that has been brought up by transportation and by Maria and Kyle. If that is agreeable to the board,
- we would be happy to buy that offsetting the fine amount towards capital improvement of that street.
- I'll jump in here. You know, we wouldn't be able to just negotiate that on the floor of a board meeting
- at this point in time, having no prior requests of that type. Does the board mind if I ask a couple
- questions of the petitioner? Is that okay? So of the appellant, sorry.
- You're stating that the holdups were with IDEM and others, and this will impact the subcontractors who
- are working so hard at this. What I'm confused about is that we were working directly, that the engineering
- staff was working directly with you and Wells and Wells to set the timelines for the extensions. They
- let you know when the deadlines would need to be met. You know, how does that fall to a subcontractor
- to be at fault? Why would Crider and Crider be at fault at that point in time?
- They were present at the very initial meeting with transportation provided and agreed to the dates.
- In hindsight, we would have asked that Crider and Crider pull the permit, but historically Wells and
- Wells construction as the general contractor pulls the permit. They say that businesses pay no taxes
- and businesses pay no tariffs. General contractors don't really ever pay
- fines either, you know, these do flow down to the subcontractors that that's impacted. And we do,
- you know, we're cognizant of the fact that, you know, they they put in the effort, they had agreed to
- dates that were not achievable, but they were not achievable because of conditions that were hidden
- and unknown at the time. Okay.
- We've had construction projects come to this board in my 12 years that have known time and time again
- that this community has rock under every road and that you're gonna have to beat it out and you're gonna
- have to do these things as part of these developments. Based on what's been, what I know is the engineering
- staff is working with Wells and Wells to try to set dates that could be achievable. We were certainly
- hopeful this work would have been happening before the students return. Then we got into the football
- season, kept trying to work with you folks to get it done.
- quick fashion. Based on what I've heard, I don't know that we would recommend anything other than upholding
- the fine as has been presented by the engineering department. I don't think this is one where we could,
- given the timelines and everything else, start considering other types of, you know, trying to make
- other public improvements and things. You know, I just don't see how that could be negotiated at this
- point in time, given that it's
- eight months after when these fines were issued and such. So we did the eight months past was not our
- timeline. I'm saying since October, November, December, January, February, March, six months later from
- when these fines were issued to start trying to think about other negotiated improvements and such.
- I don't think that's a route that we well, that was that was an offer that was made to transportation
- prior to the fines even being issued. Okay.
- And the fact that it's six months later, we appealed as soon as we were notified of the fines. It was
- initially denied. We requested again for the appeal. It was then reconsidered. And we're here at your,
- we understand that we're asking for your grace in this situation, but had we not had gas leaks from
- Centerpoint,
- You know that did shut the site down for six days. We wouldn't be standing here. You know today we would
- be within our time frames. And I certainly don't want to drag other city departments into this but you
- know city Bloomington utilities was working in the streets while we were supposed to be paving. I mean
- it truly was a
- difficult Project with many unforeseen circumstances some very last-minute changes that was requested
- by CBU Gas leaks that shut us down You know late permits by the state they all came together and you
- know, my team did a
- do everything that they could possibly do during those home football games to provide safe passage for
- the students on the sidewalks, you know, all the way to the extent of snow fencing around the entire
- site and providing, you know, safe passage on the sidewalks. And those sorts of things would be required
- from any major development. I mean, that's beside the fact. You know, that's required as part of any
- major development. You know, where I'm struggling with trying to make any sense of it is that
- The petitioner was the one asking for the extensions the extensions got granted. Those were they agreed
- upon dates You know the the gas mains and other things those are I don't understand how if if those
- timelines are agreed to what different I'm just struggling to understand how that impacts what the contractor
- Wells and Wells agreed to to have this road restored well if we have a
- We did not have work durations. We had deadlines, which we acknowledge. We acknowledge. There's no question
- about the fact that we had deadlines. Had we had those six days back from the site being shut down by
- services, again, we would have met the deadline and beat the durations. Can I ask a relevant question?
- What were the dates of that
- and the associated shutdown? I would have to check, I don't have those dates with me, but I know there
- was three separate occurrences with the fire department and CenterPoint for repairing gas leaks in the
- road. Were they prior to the first extension request? That's what I was getting at. One was prior to
- the first extension request, two were after. And what were the causes of the gas leaks?
- The gas line in the street is one of the original old cast iron gas lines. It's extremely close to the
- surface of the road. And as construction took place, any vibrations, we don't have a direct knowledge
- of what caused them. They were not hits. They were not utility strikes. It was gas line.
- the gas line itself leaked through deterioration of the existing line. I have a couple of questions
- for staff, if I may. One question about the fine table. And if I'm reading this correctly, the fines starts
- at the original amount, in this case $100, then it goes twice, then twice again. The fine table we show,
- or we have, shows Lincoln $100 and then it goes to 400 instead of just up to 200, which would be doubling
- the 100 amount. Why is it going up four times instead of twice? I did print out the Notice of Violation,
- but unfortunately it's the wrong violation, so I don't have a direct answer without that in front of me here.
- I can say that the process for those is an evaluation of an occurrence on a per day basis on a per block
- phase. So if we start at $100, we should move to 200, 400, et cetera. This is a complicated site, as
- Jesse mentioned. So for this NOV, thank you. Sorry, it's going from the top down. Yeah, so the formatting
- we worked around
- Obviously, it's not super clear. So yeah, those are violations of the same day, different locations
- associated with the same project and the same violation type. Then it doubles the second day, correct?
- Correct. And does this not quadruple? Or am I reading this totally incorrectly? It's every violation
- by the permit holder. And so there were two violations on the 20th. So 100, it doubled.
- 200, next violation is a doubling of 400. So on 921, it became 400. Oh, it's not the 100 that gets doubled
- to two and the 200 that gets. Right, so I just started with Lincoln as the first location for the next
- following day there. So every violation doubles across the days. Is that, like, there are multiple violations
- happening. It says the quick violations are twice the previous fine of two minutes.
- Yeah, in code it dictates whenever we're looking at a closure request, it's per block phase. So those
- are two separate occurrences on the same day for separate locations assigned to the same contractor,
- if that makes sense. Okay, and I was reading it across, and then the Washington would be a second. Okay,
- I understand now, thank you. My second question is the notice of violation was September 20th. The appeal
- was written on December 11th, which is still longer than the seven days. Can you talk us through just the,
- The appeal was initially denied. It's getting to us late. Correct. So there were a series of NOVs and
- subsequent appeals that all came in in the same time frame. This was the first one of those four appeals
- that had gone through. The dating was scant to support not hearing it. And once we got that reviewed
- by legal, they brought it back to our attention. They said, hey,
- what we would like to hear this. At the same time, as we were working through these multiple NOVs for
- this particular site, we were realizing that we needed to improve some of our internal process on how
- those are communicated to the developers and who and when and how decisions of the board on appeals
- are then communicate. So not only how we communicate when they're heard and how they need to be submitted,
- whether it's engineering staff or public work staff that take those in. So we've been working on our
- internal process for this. So when, and Miranda might have to jump in to correct me when I say this,
- when a notice of violation is issued, it gets sent directly to the parties that are being issued the
- NOV. From there, the appeal says it should come to the public works department.
- Sometimes the appeals at that point in time were going to engineering because the developers or the
- permit holders were working very closely with engineering. Engineering issued it, and so there was just
- some confusion on the dates and times of when each one was communicated about, and so we did just decide,
- hey, we're gonna hear the appeal. It might not have met our deadlines, but given some of that confusion
- since then, we've come up with an internal process of who communicates what when, including the decision
- of the board when the appeals are heard,
- how that official communication goes back to the appellants and such. So, yes. Yeah, it was a situation
- where a letter was mailed to our office in Champaign, but it was over obviously Thanksgiving break.
- So it literally was not opened. The letter wasn't even opened and received by our office until after
- the appeal deadline had passed. And that's when
- you know, we had reached out to Kyle and his team and and started that process basically the first of
- December, which leads us here to today. So I have a question just about generally some of the factors
- that caused your delays, because there are several things issued here about the delays that have been
- caused. Were any of these items, did any of these items take place?
- between the August 12th and September 19th time of the permit extension Yes, and which ones took place
- during that time two of the gas leaks the city Bloomington utility work on Lincoln which was an excavation
- of the street and then And it's not an unknown. I 100% agree. It's not an unknown but the continued
- rock excavation that just
- Was far beyond the borings that we if you recall we had a hearing for an approval to do 10 borings on
- the street and you know, we had 10 borings on basically eight acres and it was not it was just not indicative
- of the quantity or the height of the rock in those areas it
- Even, yes, we've worked in Bloomington. I busted out $2 million worth of Rocket Hub 1. We know it's
- here. You know where it's not? Under the garage where I spent a million dollars trying to find it, so.
- You know Bloomington. It is, if you take 10 borings on an eight acre site, you don't know what's down
- there. But you can't dig up the street to explore it either, you know.
- So it was those three factors between the permit and the extension, but the extenuating circumstance
- of the IDEM state permit being issued on July, which allowed us to begin utilities, was the driving
- factor to the situation. I follow up question to... Manicure. The CBU work,
- that took place between the 12th and the 19th. Were you aware that it was going to happen before the
- 12th? No. You thought all the CBE work was done? We weren't aware it was happening at all. They don't
- ask us, so. It was work that was not associated with the project? No, it was not. So obviously these things
- happen, you know, surprising elements happen. When engineering had the conversation on September 12th,
- so this was a week prior to the expiration of the permit, my sense is engineering had a sense that the
- project was not going to wrap up in time for the deadline.
- What was that conversation like in the sense of, was there a discussion about a permit extension?
- And if so, what was the result of that conversation? We had asked, we were told that it wasn't, that
- an extension of an extension was not allowed. So while there was cooperation and,
- And what we felt and still feel was an understanding of the conditions of the situation. I also understand
- that, you know, if an extension of an extension is simply not something that's able to be written,
- everybody's hands at that point in time were kind of bound. You know, I do, you know, just want to readdress
- that, I mean, we poured asphalt
- In in the rain. I mean we we kept the plants open for this project. The crews and the superintendents
- involved in this did everything they could possibly do and and I I mean I live in Bloomington.
- I live here. I'm on the job site.
- every single day and there's nothing as the project director and the liaison directly back to the owner
- in Chicago. I mean, there's nothing that I know of that could have been done that could have prevented
- this situation. So, you know, we're not here to fault anybody. We're just asking for your consideration
- in the situation.
- I have a follow-up to a follow-up, I think. The CBU work, if it was not related to the project, do we
- know if it happened prior to that conversation on September 12th, between the 12th and the 20th?
- It did, and we were in conversation with Kyle and Maria about that as well. And I am not going, we have
- a great working relationship with every department here. I'm not going to blame CBU for the reasons,
- it's just,
- Those are all of the reasons. I think it's questions for Kyle. Setting and negotiating timelines and
- deadlines. There's been a lot of discussion about that late item permits. When a developer, when a contractor
- permit holder comes and says,
- This is my anticipated schedule. Do you say, great, we're gonna hold you to that? Or is there discussion,
- negotiation? If there are extenuating circumstances, a late state permit, do they ever come back and
- say, we need to reevaluate the timeline that we gave you?
- Sure, I would say first and foremost, it's completely context-based. The approval of the original permit
- was under the basis that we would be able to get it completed prior to the IU school year starting.
- We saw the initial push to September from that August date and thought, you know, we can make this work.
- And if I can be frank, this was a situation where we really just needed to rein the project back in.
- the state of the road and I completely understanding there's not much space to operate there with, but
- we essentially had what amounted to gravel roads on Lincoln, Washington and 19th before the intermediate
- layer of asphalt was laid. And that's why we don't see 19th Street listed in the notice of violation
- because we did have that intermediate layer of asphalt to make it at least passable for the traveling public.
- I do not believe you were a part of the very original meeting that we had with transportation, okay.
- These dates were not the dates we came and asked for. We were told no, it was dead in the water. We
- asked for three months. We were given eight weeks. And that's not atypical for projects. Understand,
- understand. But to your question,
- It was, but we didn't have a choice because the sewer line and the storm line ran directly through the
- project. The project was dead in the water without the reroute. And that goes back to one of my opening
- statements. It's just an unfortunate confluence of situations, but the entire project was dependent
- upon rerouting the storm
- in the sewer around the street that ran through the project. And it was at our permit application that
- the limitation of constructing all of that infrastructure during the school break was first made aware.
- As a developer, we had no choice but to accept those constraints or the project was dead.
- And we have no choice here either, but to abide by your decision. But again, without repeating, those
- are all the factors that went into. And yes, it was a gravel street, but every single night and every
- single morning and every single time a resident needed to get to their residence, it may have
- been inconvenienced, I get it, construction,
- tends to do that, but at no point in time was a resident ever denied to the point that we rented, bought
- 10 parking passes at the home two suites and gave them to a certain address of individuals that created
- some cause for concern and paid that out of pocket for their parking.
- parking and again, did everything that we could possibly do to make it as small of an inconvenience
- as possible while it was a gravel street. I have a question for staff. This is a question I feel like
- I should know the answer to, but I don't fully understand the nuances of the fee schedule. Are there
- fees associated with this permit, like the issuance of this permit, any costs associated with the permit
- for the contractor or the permit holder?
- Yes, absolutely. So there is a cost associated with any excavation within the right of way based on
- paved or unpaid surface that is going to be disturbed. There's a cost for every week of a sidewalk,
- lane, street closure. So all of those are based on the timeline that's given to us by contractors. Do
- you happen to know, and it's OK if you don't, this was not asked at any point prior, what the cost of this
- permit was, like even roughly, but it's okay if you don't have that number. If you promise not to quote
- me. I believe lane closures are $200 a week. Permit fees $100 for the review of said permit. I couldn't
- even make a guess as to what the actual disturbance was.
- I can say that, you know, once this extension came in and, you know, we were reviewing everything and
- trying to play catch up to make sure that everything was driving from our internal systems. We did ask
- that Wells and Wells, you know, paid for the extension and the time they went past on all that to which
- they have done since then to their credit.
- I do, yes. The original permit fee was somewhere in the $4,200 range. Since then, we have paid an additional
- $10,000 in permitting for the use of the street during construction. So we're about right at roughly,
- if you don't quote me, roughly $15,000 in permitting directly attributed to the streets and the street
- use and work there.
- And that was for the permitting for the dates of, let's see, June 5th through what ultimately was September
- 19th? In fairness, it's permits for the duration of the project. So it extends, it includes this period,
- but extends past it, yes. Okay. Additional questions from the board?
- All right, I'll make a suggestion and knowing that staff has approached wells and wells about the possibility
- of investing this fine amount into other improvements near the site.
- and knowing Mr. Graber is local. If it's okay with Mr. Graber, we'll table this for right now. And it's
- not to say that it won't come back and come to the board for the same exact decision we would be seeking
- tonight. But I'll give it the two week. I think we can give it the two weeks for engineering to discuss
- and determine if that amount being invested in the west side of the road makes sense for us. I don't
- know that it does. I'm not sure where things stand there. That's the first we've heard of it at this level.
- I think if we can just do that for two weeks. If two weeks from today you could agree to be here again
- and maybe at that point in time we can have this all figured out in terms of how to do that. But I guess
- I'd ask you to table it for now and then we'll come back in two weeks with either an update to the board
- on what took place or was agreed to or if we would ask for a final decision on the appeal at that time.
- So just a motion to table. Is there a motion to table?
- I move that we table the request for appeal of notice of violation issued to Wells and Wells on September
- 20th, 2025. Second. Hearing a second, I'll take the roll. Cox-Deckard? Aye. Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye.
- Motion to table passes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks. You betcha.
- Next on our agenda is petitions and remonstrances. This is time for the public to make comment on anything
- that is not on our agenda. Seeing no one in council chambers, if there is anyone on Zoom, feel free
- to use the raise hand function or chat. All right, moving along to the consent agenda, we have minutes
- from January 13th, 2026.
- Minutes from January 27, 2026, Resolution 2026-014, Mobile Vendor Travel and Tom's Coffee, Right of
- Way Special Event for the Tuesday Farmer's Market, Right of Way Special Event for the Saturday Farmer's
- Market, Right of Way Special Event for the Bloomington Handmade Market, Outdoor Lighting Service Agreement
- with Duke Energy for South Southern Pines Court, Public Improvement Bond Estimate and Street Lighting
- Plan Waiver for Oakstead Subdivision,
- Supplemental number three to construction contract with Crossroads Engineering for Beeline Extension
- Project. On-call service agreement with Blood, So, Rigort, Cooper, and James for engineering services
- and payroll. Is there anything that needs to be removed from the consent agenda tonight? Does the board
- have any questions on tonight's consent agenda? Is there public comment on the consent agenda? Anyone on Zoom?
- All right, is there a motion? I move that we approve the consent agenda for this meeting on March 24th
- of 2026. Second. I will call the roll. Cox-Deckard? Aye. Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye. Motion passes. First
- on the new business agenda is the Pete Ellis discovery transfer with NDOT. Good evening, Neil Popper
- with Engineering.
- This is an Indiana Department of Transportation project. It's on State Route 45. It includes the intersection
- with Pete Ellis and Discovery Parkway, which is the city's infrastructure. The project dates back to
- before the hospital relocation and identification of some safety concerns in that area. This memorandum
- of agreement would temporarily transfer portions of Pete Ellis Drive and Discovery Parkway from the
- city to NDOT.
- for construction and then after project completion those roadways would transfer back to the city. The
- memorandum of agreement also clarifies the city's maintenance responsibilities for the sidewalk and
- multi-use paths that are being constructed in the area.
- An aspect of this project that has gotten a lot of public attention is the plan to remove 15 mature
- oak trees on the south side of SR 45 on Pete Ellis. We've had significant coordination with NDOT and
- we are going to be able to save eight of those 15 trees. This transfer agreement wouldn't normally be
- required to approve the tree removal that has been discussed a lot, but
- we've been coordinating with our urban forester and typically that would be more of a staff-level approval.
- But given that it's wrapped up in our discussions with NDOT and there's been so much attention on it,
- we did want to bring it in front of you specifically just for that transparency, just wanting you to
- be aware of it and that it is a part of this project. We discussed that at the work session yesterday
- and noted that it would
- probably occur any day now and today was actually the day that it started occurring. There has been
- work out there today. I haven't seen it myself. I don't know the extents and for sure that they made
- it into any of the city trees, but I'm guessing that they did. Unfortunately, the agreement that is
- in your packet is still not final. We discussed at the work session that there's a typo in the signature
- line. There's some language on the permitting and inspection that we've been trying to clean up with NDOT.
- However, due to the time constraints on the project and in our reaching agreement with NDOT, we do want
- to approve this agreement, at least in principle, and vote to allow a temporary transfer under the terms
- as written, pending future approval of the memorandum of agreement in its final form.
- This will allow NDOT to begin managing work that's occurring in that right-of-way, begin working in
- that right-of-way, avoiding delays to the project. Staff is recommending that we approve the agreement
- as it's written, allow us to indicate at least this high-level agreement to NDOT, and know that this
- would come back to you again shortly in its new final form for the formal approvals.
- Staff, that's what engineering and the legal department have worked out and support, and I would be
- happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Questions from the board. Regarding the trees, since that
- is an issue that has had a lot of attention and there's been a lot of conversation and compromise in
- the way that the trees are handled. Is there a planting plan? Like, do you know if NDOT is
- planning to plant new trees that don't interfere with the right of way. NDOT is planting a small number
- of trees. I don't know that there are any planned replacements actually in these areas where the trees
- are being removed, but we have been working with the Parks Department. One of the things that they have
- said is that
- The most important thing to them was protecting as many trees as we could. They had had a goal actually
- of protecting seven or eight of them and we achieved eight. They also said replanting is what we would
- typically require in a project and what we want. But what's most important is if we have a space where
- we can replant, we don't mind as the city going back in and replanting some of those trees ourselves.
- That's not a huge cost to replant them given that this is
- or will become city right of way again, we'll have the authority to go in and replant some of those.
- So the answer is there are some replacements, but not to a scale that we want. That agreement at least
- hasn't been reached yet, but we do have the ability and the intention of replanting some trees there.
- Very good. Not a question, but I just wanted to say these improvements have been a long time coming
- and only exacerbated.
- I can't talk tonight, by the hospital and changes in that area. And I think East 10th Street has seen
- a lot of improvements with the pedestrian improvements further to the east on Smith. So thank you for
- your work and thank you for everyone's involved in saving these atries. Thank you.
- And just to clarify, this is kind of a phase of NDOT's plans for that whole area, so their project stretches
- from the bypass to just a little ways east of Pete Ellis, and then continued improvements up past Smith
- and further would be a future phase. Any other questions from the board? All right, is there public
- comment on this?
- Again, if you are on Zoom, feel free to use the raise hand function or chat. None on Zoom. All right,
- is there a motion? I move that we approve the Pete Ellis discovery transfer with NDOT. Just a clarifying
- question. Do we need to phrase that in a specific way, since it's not an actual contract approval, such
- as the board approves the contract
- concept of the of the transfer So in staff's discussions with legal we kind of asked, you know, what
- would the motion look like and ultimately the answer was let's just approve it as written just pretend
- It's a normal item just basically approve it but knowing that it would come back again in the future
- approve but not sign Yeah, it's just not being signed. It's not in that case second. All right
- Thank you for clarifying. I will call the roll. Cox-Duckard? Aye. Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye. Motion passes.
- Thank you. Sorry, Miranda. Next, we have the contract with Sarah Road Mitigation Project with Echo Logic.
- Hello, Sarah Gomez with the engineering department.
- here to award the project for the Sarah Road mitigation. The project includes the removal and replacement
- of 22 dead native trees and the treatment of woody invasive species at an IDNR permitted mitigation
- site for a former city project from Buttonwood to College Mall Road.
- Quotes were received at noon on Monday, January 15th, 2026. The quotes were as follows. Steve Chafin,
- $14,655. EcoLogic, $35,395. Sorry, $35,395.47. And Habitat Solutions, $52,335.
- Although Steve Chafin was the lowest bidder, it was unresponsive in meeting the city insurance requirements
- for the quote, and EcoLogic was the second lowest responsible and responsive bidder, and engineering
- recommends awarding the contract to EcoLogic. Thank you. Questions from the board? Question here. Sarah,
- I'm at a loss. Where is this located? I'm a little confused.
- Let's see, just south of where Moores Pike and College Mall intersection is at, the trail that comes
- down goes over a creek, and there's a pedestrian bridge, and to the right-hand side, if you're headed
- south, there is about an acre of land that has what looks to be dead trees and shrubbery. A little triangle
- there at the lighted intersection? Yes, correct. And those were, that was a minute,
- Those were a mitigation planning from another project. Correct. So the Sarah Wood Sarah Road project,
- I believe it was in 2019, goes from Buttonwood to College Mall Moores Pike intersection. And that was
- for that trail extension along there, including that pedestrian bridge, as well as it's associated with
- I'm sorry, I'm forgetting the name of the street, but in any case,
- There were a number of trees that were taken down as part of that project. And so the IDNR said we need
- to have a mitigation site where we can plant other trees because of those trees will not be able to
- be replaced in their current location. Great. Thank you. Yes.
- Could you just mention briefly the project schedule, how long it will take for what phases of this?
- I see it in the service agreement, but it says three one-day visits between April and November. Correct.
- So they'll come in and it's a process of each item has to be taken care of separately. So there'll be
- multiple times where they'll come in and they'll do their invasive species spraying.
- for the kind of ground cover invasive species in shrubs. And then they'll have to do that a number of
- times. And then they'll come back out for tree removal. And then they'll come back again for tree planting.
- Yeah, got it, thank you. And we had talked yesterday during the work session about the fact that there
- is a renewal clause in the agreement that if the work should have
- should have to continue beyond the planned timeline that we do have the opportunity to renew for another
- potentially additional two one-year terms if something was needed during that time. Correct. Great,
- is there public comment on this item?
- Is there a motion I Move that we approve the contract for say road mitigation project with eco logic
- Second I will call the roll Cox Decker. I roach. I grown I motion passes. Thank you. Thank you Next
- is the contract with precision concrete for sidewalk cutting Yep, Adam Wason on behalf of our Street
- Division at Public Works. This is a contract with
- Sorry, with precision concrete for sidewalk cutting. This is a annual project and contract that we put
- out for sidewalk trip hazard mitigation. And we will have precision start this work here this spring.
- The amount not to exceed is 300,000 and we'll focus on roughly 4,500 plus trip hazards in this contract alone.
- Thank you, questions from the board.
- I just wanted to voice that this has been a really successful partnership. We've seen a lot of improved
- sidewalks for greatly reduced costs compared to something like a replacement through this. I'm amazed
- by the fact that they're going to have the opportunity to correct the 4,500 plus trip hazards that's
- going to make a huge difference for walkability. Just appreciate the city's work to make this happen
- so that we have the improved sidewalks.
- Thank you. Any public comment on this item? All right, is there a motion? I move that we approve the
- contract with precision concrete for sidewalk cutting. Second. I will call the roll. Cox Deckard? Aye.
- Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye. Motion passes.
- Next we have the right-of-way closure request for Duke Energy on Grant Street, Dunn Street, and Sixth
- Street. Hello, Zach Bell, Engineering. Duke Energy is requesting lane and sidewalk closures on Grant
- Street, Dunn Street, and Sixth Street from 511 26 to 706 26 for work on IU's circuit loop. There will
- be 10 total work zones. They have supplied traffic control,
- and communicated to adjacent businesses and all affected people. I also reached out to them about the
- reasoning for the night work and encouraged them to apply for a noise permit. Thank you. Questions from
- the board. There was some confusion yesterday about the accessibility of the supplemental documents.
- I don't see them on the drive. Was that something that I should be seeing on the track? Miranda scrolling
- No, this is a section and I can take this section out the relevant materials included in the packet
- section is a was on the standardized template And that is if if they provided those items that we should
- have those However with the maintenance of traffic plan. It is a portion of the MUT CD that they normally
- provide to us as Duke Energy so
- What happened here is we use a template document for the accessibility of these staff reports. We should
- have just removed that last section for this one and not included it at all, but then it looked like
- it should have been hyperlinked like the rest of them. Yes, so that was on us. So that's part of the
- kinks we're working out with this new program here. We talked about that in our coordination meeting
- today, actually, so.
- And I'll just add, so we talked about this a little bit in the work session yesterday. This is a major
- project for Duke to, for the transmission lines that go into Indiana University. Starts in the alley
- there behind Village Deli and Osterio Raggo, moves out to Grant Street, goes up to Sixth Street, back
- over towards campus and down behind the Von Lee. Major project, we've been coordinating with Duke for
- some time on this. They know they need to work with all the adjacent property owners, maintain access, work with
- you know, work through all that. So big project in coordination, also with all of our other downtown
- projects that we've got going this summer. So lots of work to take place, but all in the name of good
- progress and such. So thank you. Did Duke Energy give an indication that they did believe that there
- would be some additional noise, whether that be from the trucks or any kind of boring activity? No,
- no, I only encourage them to do that because of the
- time period that they did. I have not heard back from them on the noise level specifically with this
- application. All right, yeah. And I think we had discussed the possibility that the nature of the closure
- may not indicate active work or noise being created. But if they do determine that, it would be good
- to have us approve. Yeah, I expect to hear back from them soon. Any other questions from the board?
- All right, public comment on this item? None on Zoom. Seeing none, is there a motion? I move that we
- approve the right-of-way closure request for Duke Energy on Grant Street, Dunn Street, and Sixth Street.
- Second. I will call the roll. Cox-Dekard? Aye. Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye. Motion passes. Thank you. Next,
- we have the right-of-way closure request.
- and noise permit for City of Bloomington Utilities on Gates Drive. Good evening, Kyle Wall from Engineering
- again. City of Bloomington Utilities is requesting road closure and a noise permit for starting around 7 p.m.
- on Thursday, April 9th until Friday, April 10th.
- morning along North Gates Drive, so pretty adjacent to the IU credit union on that stretch of road there.
- So it's just a single night closure, no sidewalks are planned to be impacted with a detour route planned.
- So that's just south of the roundabout there near Circle Prosko and north of, I think it's Whitehall
- crossing there.
- Questions from the board. Is there public comment on this item? All right, is there a motion I move
- that we approve the right-of-way closure request and noise permit for city of Bloomington utilities
- on Gates Drive I Will call the roll Cox Deckard. I roach. Hi, Korone. I motion passes. I
- Our final item of new business tonight is a right of way closure request for A&A Concrete at 1307 and
- 1317 South Henderson Street. Zach Bell again, engineering. A&A Concrete is requesting sidewalk closures
- totaling up to two weeks for sidewalk replacement at 1307 and 1317 South Henderson Street. I've spoken
- with Angelo the applicant. His intended start date at this moment, which is tentative, is April 1st.
- I'm also in discussions with him about finalizing the traffic control there. We're going to base it
- off a typical application. He's also going to notify the local schools. The detour, the sidewalk detour,
- will route pedestrians around the eastern sidewalk, via the western sidewalk, and cross at Hillside
- and Henderson and Grimes and Henderson via the curb ramps.
- Okay, thank you questions from the board As long as we're talking about packets and accessibility just
- a quick question so in a case like this the staff report written in Verbal and if there are no additional
- documents because nothing is accessible Currently yes
- In our discussion this morning, we're going to provide more information on which portion of the MUTCD
- that they will be using, making sure that we, in addition to duration, we get sort of a window of time
- that they're going to be using. If it's an approval of something that you're approving a two-week closure
- for, say, the month of April at some point, we're going to be including more of that information in
- that staff report.
- And that's where you'll see that come down. But yes, currently if we're using portions of the MUTCD,
- if we include just one page, we have to make that page accessible. Otherwise we have to give you guys
- the entire document in its entirety to not have changed the, to change the accessibility of that. So
- you'll start to see more where it's just a staff report with an explanation of where that closure will be versus
- a map of that closure at this time until we can. That's very helpful, thank you. Is there any public
- comment on this item? None on Zoom. Is there a motion? I move that we approve the right of way closure
- request for ANA Concrete at 1307 and 1317 South Henderson Street. Second.
- I will call the roll. Cox Deckard? Aye. Roach? Aye. Caron? Aye. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you.
- Now we're on to staff reports and the 2026 fiscal year sidewalk improvement plan.
- again, Public Works. We talked about this some yesterday in the work session, but just wanted to bring
- this for the board for official acceptance. So each year we have a certain amount of limited dollars
- amount of dollars and limited resources towards sidewalk improvement citywide. For several years, we've
- come to you with our kind of annual sidewalk improvement plan to identify the locations and the types
- of repairs we'd like we plan to make in a given year. As you
- Approved tonight. We have the $300,000 contract for trip hazard removal. We also have plans for as part
- of our paving season to do operate updated ADA compliant ramps 122 of those. Over the next several paving
- seasons and then
- We also have trip hazard repairs that we've listed by location in the document as well. Beyond that,
- we have a sidewalk assistance program for residents that are in income eligible areas of the community
- development block grant geographic zones.
- And so that's $100,000 that we make available for matching program for residents that are in low income
- areas wanting to make sidewalk repairs that are their responsibility will help offset their costs.
- So overall, we are
- presenting this to you tonight as our annual plan. It is possible that some of this would get moved
- into a subsequent year or if resources don't allow for a certain project to be made, we'll add that
- to a plan for next year and update the board with that. Otherwise, I'm happy to answer any questions
- and appreciate your support of all of our efforts here. Thank you.
- Next on the agenda is the approval of claims any questions that can you actually if you're so inclined
- We'd ask that you make a motion to just accept the sidewalk improvement plan. Oh my apologies The Paving
- list. Mm-hmm. It's a three-year period. Yes. Is that typical? It's like rolling three years. So next year's
- sidewalk plan will be 27 28 29 yeah we're working on three years we'd love to work on a five-year plan
- but depending on any given winter and what road decides that it's going to deteriorate more quickly
- than planned that changes year to year but yes that's exactly what we're trying to do in the the road
- sections listed that's the
- the blocks that are being paved and the number of curb ramps that are associated with those. Yes. Okay.
- So for the 2026 paving list on the two 11 look there's 11 specific locations for paving there that will
- have updated ramps in the amount of 44 total. Thank you. And one thing we discussed during the work
- session was that these are all
- repair sites and not new. Yes, that new will be
- taken care of by the City Council. Yes. So sidewalk connections and requests for new sidewalks go through
- a completely separate process. That's not part of our annual maintenance and repair budget. I'll just
- reiterate what we talked about a little bit yesterday was sidewalk repairs and maintenance falls to
- the adjacent property owner per city code as the responsible party for those. The one area where we
- do make our investments is that one of the areas where we make our investments specifically is if the city
- So this tree between the roadway and the sidewalk and the tree plot, which is city owned, if that's
- what's causing the damage, that's where you're going to see us doing the trip hazard repairs. Those
- are all going to be mostly all related to street tree related heaving of sidewalks and such. So that's
- where we really try to focus our efforts and then work with the private property owners on what their
- responsibilities would be. One more question for me, sorry. The maps that are included.
- What are they supposed to represent? These are Sorry, I wasn't focused on the maps James I was focused on the
- these these might be these might have been included by mistake okay sorry I was only focused on the
- staff report trying to just look at that associated it does not associate directly with the paving list so
- I will get back to you on exactly what those are. Those were submitted by Danny. Danny's not in today,
- sorry. I'll follow up with you on that. The main point and the information that's most relevant to this
- is the locations and the information located in the actual staff report. Thank you. All right, any public
- comment on this item? None on Zoom. All right, now is there a motion?
- I move that we approve the 2026 a fiscal year sidewalk improvement plan Second, I will call the roll
- Cox Decker. I wrote I Caron I Motion passes. Okay. I think I figured it out But definitely follow up
- for sure to make sure I think those maps are the locations in which the sidewalk grinding is gonna occur
- So they'll go into those neighborhoods and find the trip hazards that qualify for remediation in those
- geographic areas those
- Those are some of the targeted areas. Yes, but I will follow up and make sure that I'm correct in that
- response. Excellent. Now we will move to claims. Does the board have any questions on claims tonight?
- Is there any public comment on claims? None on Zoom. Seeing none, is there a motion?
- Move that we approve the claims for tonight's meeting in the amount of four million eight hundred eighty
- nine thousand three hundred fourteen dollars and seventy one cents second I Will call the roll Cox Decker.
- I Roach I Caron I motion passes and seeing there's nothing else on the agenda. I will call for adjournment. I