2026-09-22 - Board of Aldermen Special Meeting

00:28[laughter]

00:46Okay.

00:48What about me?

00:50>> I said every time you you record it.

00:52Every time

01:05I chamber and duly noticed in two places

01:08including the city's website in

01:09accordance with the requirements of RSA

01:1291A

01:14colon 2 Roman numeral 2.

01:17Uh I am presiding today because uh

01:20Alderman Wilshshire had a emergency.

01:24Um the prayer will be offered by city

01:27clerk Dan Healey and Alderman Cle will

01:30lead us in the pledge to the flag.

01:32>> Almighty God, we have the high honor and

01:35the serious duty to manage the affairs

01:37of our beloved city. Fill us, oh God,

01:40with a spirit of unity and

01:42understanding, which enables us to face

01:44our multiple problems, with a serene

01:46mind, with justice and charity for all,

01:49so that any and all decisions made by us

01:52will always be for the [clears throat]

01:53betterment and greater happiness of all

01:55our fellow citizens. So help us, God.

01:58Amen.

01:59>> Amen.

02:00I pledge algiance to the flag of the

02:03United States of America and to the

02:06republic for which it stands. One nation

02:08under God, indivisible, with liberty and

02:12justice for all.

02:16>> All right, let's start the meeting by

02:17taking a roll call attendance.

02:20>> Alderman Cle

02:22>> here.

02:24>> Alderman Rean

02:25>> here.

02:26Aldwoman Smith.

02:29>> Alderman Tibo

02:31>> here.

02:32>> Alderman O'Brien

02:34>> present.

02:36>> Alderman Greg.

02:38>> Alderman Dow

02:39>> present.

02:41Alderman Sullivan

02:42>> here.

02:44Alderman Senate.

02:48>> Alderman Johnson

02:49>> present.

02:50>> Aldwoman Kelly.

02:52>> I'm here. I'm attending remotely because

02:54I'm feeling under the weather. I can

02:55hear everyone and there's no one in the

02:58room with me. My son is adjacent.

03:04>> Alderman Morgan.

03:08>> Alderman Lopez.

03:12Alderman Wilshshire.

03:16>> Alderwoman Smith

03:18>> present.

03:22Alderman Morgan. here

03:26>> and Alderman Clemens

03:27>> here.

03:29>> 11 present, four absent.

03:31>> Thank you. Also in attendance uh is

03:34corporation councel Steve Bolton. Um we

03:37also have for tonight we have a

03:39discussion about the updated an update

03:43on building development in the city. And

03:45so I'm going to recognize Tim Cummings,

03:47community development director Matt

03:49Sullivan and economic development

03:51services director Liz Hannah.

03:54Uh, thank you. Uh, um,

03:57Alderman Clemens. Uh, Tim Cummings,

03:59director of administrative services. I'm

04:00just going to help facilitate and kick

04:02this evening off by giving, uh, everyone

04:05a little rundown of the of the Q card.

04:08Um, if it's acceptable to to the body

04:10here, the way I think it should work is

04:13um, having Tim Lamir, the project

04:15manager for the garage project, uh, go

04:18through, give his project update. that

04:20would allow director Hanam and director

04:22Sullivan to go through the various

04:23development projects. Uh and then um

04:26specifically with the Elm Street Middle

04:28School, I believe it just goes handinand

04:30glove with the KEF auditorium update

04:32which will be part of the regular board

04:34of alderman meeting um at the at the

04:38bottom of the hour. So if if it's the

04:39pleasure of the group, I would suggest

04:40that that might be the best way to

04:42handle this. And if that's acceptable, I

04:43would ask that Tim Lamir come up and and

04:46uh start us off this evening with an

04:48update on the Elm and High Street

04:49garages.

04:50>> That sounds good.

04:50>> Great. Thank you.

04:57>> Uh good evening. As Director Cummings

04:59mentioned, I'm Tim Lamir. I'm the

05:00owner's project manager for the Elm

05:02Street garage project. And let's see if

05:06the clicker works from here. I just have

05:08a few slides for you. Um, right

05:11[clears throat] now this is a uh

05:13three-phase construction project for the

05:16Elm Street and High Street garage

05:18repairs.

05:20Phase one is uh mostly structural

05:23repairs at both garages and that is

05:25about 90% complete right now. Phase two

05:29is only at Elm Street and that is a uh

05:32office renovation and expansion project.

05:36That project is at uh final design and

05:38currently being handed off to

05:39construction.

05:42And phase three is a building facade and

05:45wifying project on both garages as well.

05:47And uh that one is highly visible and

05:50you can kind of see its progress as it

05:52goes, but it's about 30% complete.

05:57U just a quick budget and schedule

05:58update. Uh, [clears throat] this project

06:01is funded with a $15 million bond and

06:05right now it's allocations are uh 11.1

06:09million for phase 1, 2.8 million for

06:12phase 2, and 1.1 million for phase

06:15three. And I I've also listed just

06:18general completion dates, but phase one

06:20is wrapping up this fall.

06:24Phase two is expected to be complete in

06:26the summer of 2027. And phase three

06:30um will have most of the work performed

06:33this fall, but with some work yet to be

06:36performed in the spring of 2027.

06:41And just a few um just a few example

06:44photos from each phase, but phase one

06:46being a highly technical structural

06:48repairs project. Here's a couple

06:50examples of um some repairs that have

06:54been shown to the infrastructure

06:55committee in the past, but these are um

06:58spot repairs as as needed from our

07:01structural engineer on both facilities.

07:03But in the upper left, you can see some

07:05areas painted out for um some concrete

07:08demolition and replacement. And then on

07:10the bottom right is uh for the

07:13structural uh beams that hold up the

07:16parking levels. uh some spot repairs the

07:19the steel that holds up these these

07:21beams

07:23as we [clears throat] haven't started

07:24construction yet for phase two but this

07:26is kind of a schematic view of uh the

07:29office expansion. So you see you'll see

07:30a bump out of a new brick facade coming

07:32out of the Elm Street garage. This uh

07:35rendering is on the uh Garden Street

07:38side across from the Yolk restaurant

07:43and a current fix picture of uh the High

07:46Street garage in phase three of some of

07:49the facade improvements that have been

07:52performed there. That this is a a fairly

07:54recent picture. This is probably a week

07:55ago. So, um, and that's just

08:00[clears throat] the the general update

08:01on the Elm Street and High Street

08:03parking garages.

08:05>> So, great.

08:06>> Thank you. Do we have any questions?

08:11Okay, seeing none, uh, Director

08:13Cummings.

08:18>> Uh, I think I'll just hand it over to

08:19Director Sullivan first and then we'll

08:21go from there.

08:22>> Okay. Not sure which one is next.

08:27Yep.

08:27>> Or director or director Hannah. Either

08:29one. [laughter]

08:30>> I guess I'll get us started. Um we we

08:33kind of combined all of the Milliard

08:35projects. So I'm going to give you an

08:37update on Nimco and Bagshaw and then I'm

08:39going to hand it over to Director

08:41Sullivan um for the Bida parcels uh on

08:44the south side of the Milliard. Um so uh

08:48Nimco was um originally bid out uh about

08:53a year and a half ago. um or we we

08:56originally uh signed the agreement a

08:58year and a half ago and about three

09:00months ago. We had an amendment um that

09:02shows um let's see

09:06here. There we go. Um what the new plan

09:09is. Uh we had originally planned for one

09:11building um and we have decided to break

09:14it into two buildings um because the

09:17Bagshaw building um was purchased by the

09:20same developer and it made more sense to

09:22create sort of a grid street system than

09:24to try to keep the windy road um and and

09:27go kind of um an S and then another S

09:31and then another S. Um so we broke the

09:34the two buildings into or one building

09:37into two buildings. Um and they will be

09:39phased. So phase one will be closest to

09:42the riverfront and that'll be roughly

09:45150 units. Um and then we have 100 units

09:49in phase two. Um and that will be done

09:52directly after um the phase one. We are

09:56retaining ownership of that parcel where

09:59phase two is going to be until they are

10:02um ready to actually start construction.

10:04So, we're breaking it into two pieces.

10:06Um and then they are also doing the dog

10:10park for us um along with a few parking

10:13spaces down there. Um and that will um

10:18according to our our MDA that will need

10:20to be completed before the first

10:23building gets their um certificate of

10:26occupancy. So that will be kind of part

10:28of phase one will be the dog park, the

10:30public improvements. Um and then we

10:34don't have a lot of information about

10:35Bagshaw right now um because it is uh a

10:39private to private development um

10:42purchase. Uh we do know that there is

10:44likely going to be two buildings on that

10:46site um to continue the grid system

10:49north to south there um for the street.

10:52Um but we don't have exact unit counts

10:55yet and we don't know exactly likely it

10:58will be a garage in one of the

10:59buildings. Um so we're we're still in

11:02the process of figuring that out. they

11:04are planning to put their um their plans

11:08uh into the um planning board process uh

11:12in the next month or two. So, we are in

11:16getting ready to see both of those

11:18buildings come or all four of the

11:20buildings, sorry, uh to come to uh the

11:23planning board this fall. Um

11:26any questions there?

11:29>> All right. Uh Alderman Morgan,

11:32>> thank you. One quick question only

11:34because I can't read it. Um they it is

11:37my understanding that there's also some

11:40kind of a uh human playground, not just

11:43a dog park. That would also be a public

11:46amenity that they are doing in for phase

11:48one.

11:49>> No. Okay.

11:50>> So the the um plan the overall plan for

11:54the the riverfront um in the master plan

11:57is to have some sort of human playground

11:59as well. Um but that was not included in

12:02this agreement. Um so they are just

12:05going to be doing the the dog park

12:07piece. Um and then we are planning on um

12:11also putting a bond out uh which is why

12:14we expanded the TIFF district in that

12:16area so that we don't have to do any

12:18general fund obligation bonds. Um so

12:21that that would be coming down the line.

12:24Um, and that might be something that we

12:26could negotiate within um, Director

12:29Sullivan's piece at the the um, bid of

12:32parcels. So, um, just as part of the

12:35NIMCO process, it's not included.

12:38>> Okay.

12:40>> Uh, Alderin Johnson,

12:41>> thank you very much. Um, and I ask this

12:44question all the time. I'm consistent.

12:46Do we have an idea where we're going to

12:49be bringing people to to live in these

12:51apartments? And what are we doing about

12:54attracting more businesses to the city

12:57versus retail so people can afford to

12:59live in these apartments when they're

13:01about $2,000 a month?

13:04>> Yes. So, um I will definitely um be

13:09sharing the the business recruitment

13:11plan that we have. Um I got it just

13:15about three weeks ago. Um so we are

13:18starting to do business recruitment. Um

13:20I will be planning to share that with

13:22the PEEDC committee um either next month

13:26or the following month depending on the

13:28schedule but um I will be sharing that

13:30whole plan of um what types of

13:32businesses we are recruiting and how we

13:35are going to recruit them as well. So I

13:38I hear you. Um in this area there isn't

13:40a plan for in in the Nimco area there

13:43isn't a plan for primary jobs or any of

13:46that just in these two buildings. Um but

13:50there there is opportunity in other

13:52buildings in the area. So

13:57for right now,

13:58>> please continue if you like.

13:59>> No, I'm going to just leave it at this

14:01right now. I'm going to bite my tongue,

14:02I think. Thank you.

14:04>> Uh yes, Alderman Sullivan.

14:06>> Thank you.

14:08>> So, [clears throat] um just want to make

14:10sure that I understand. So, phase one

14:14is paused. I say paused because it was

14:17taken down to the ground and nothing has

14:19been built. So it is paused because why?

14:23Where whose whose uh court is the ball

14:26in right now?

14:27>> Right now

14:28>> to move this forward

14:29>> right now um once we got the MDA

14:32amendment approved, it is now in their

14:34court. So they are working on uh

14:37bringing their plans to the planning uh

14:40planning committee um or planning board

14:43this fall. So, we should have full plans

14:46um in the next two months likely. Um so,

14:52it wasn't really um it wasn't really

14:55paused. The building did come down

14:57because it had to come down. So, um they

15:00actually did us a favor by taking it

15:02down earlier than they had planned um

15:04because of the the fire that happened

15:06there. Um and it was just becoming a a

15:09major safety hazard. So they they

15:11offered to take it down if we we took a

15:13little bit off the price um price point.

15:16So they took it down much earlier than

15:17they had planned. Um so it we're still

15:21on track moving forward. Um we are

15:24hoping to get shovels in the ground in

15:26the springtime um based on uh planning

15:30board approval later this fall.

15:33>> Yeah, please continue.

15:34>> Thank you. Just so I understand phase

15:37one and phase two, those are both NIMCO.

15:39Phase one is not NIMCO and phase two is

15:41not um Bagshaw. Correct.

15:43>> No. Correct. They're both Nimco on on

15:45the Nimco property. That that big open

15:47space below that is the Bagshaw

15:49property.

15:51>> Um yes,

15:51>> if you can see the Y

15:53>> sort of the outline there is the Bagshaw

15:56property.

15:56>> Okay. Thank you. All set. Thanks.

15:58>> Uh anyone else?

16:01>> Okay. Thank you very much.

16:02>> Thank you.

16:07Oh, actually same presentation.

16:10It's just the third slide in this

16:11presentation that I'm going to cover.

16:17>> And then the next Perfect.

16:20Thanks everyone. Matt Sullivan,

16:21community development director. Um

16:23before I forget this thought, um

16:25Alderman Sullivan was kind of asking

16:26this question about whose ball or whose

16:29court is the ball in on this on the the

16:31Nimco project. And I was thinking about

16:34that. It's funny. We often look at it

16:36that way, but where we're at, certainly

16:38with the Nimco project, it's like

16:40watching a game of tennis doubles, but

16:43then having two balls involved because

16:46there are multiple components happening

16:48at the same time and then adding

16:49additional players. Because with the

16:50Nimco project, there are really several

16:53things going on at the same time.

16:54There's a dog park design happening

16:56that's iterative between the developer

16:57and the city. There's an environmental

17:00issue being resolved in the property

17:01that's between the city, the EPA, and

17:03the developer. There's the planning

17:05board process that's being resolved. So,

17:08there are really multiple pieces of that

17:10project that are being worked on

17:12simultaneously. And I think the hope

17:14certainly from the developer and from

17:15the city as well is that we can kind of

17:18keep those going at the same pace so

17:20that ultimately when a planning board

17:21application is imminent, all the other

17:23issues are resolved and the package can

17:25be submitted as a whole. And that's kind

17:26of the trick. Um, you know, certainly

17:28the EPA issue is referenced on the

17:30previous slide. There's environmental

17:31contamination at the NIMCO site. That's

17:34been a little bit of a challenge in the

17:35project, but our hope is that we can

17:37resolve that on a track that keeps the

17:39developer in a position where they can

17:41actually proceed to the planning board

17:42on the course they initially set out.

17:44So, that's sort of just the way that I

17:46think about it and I want to to sort of

17:48share that perspective if it's helpful

17:49at all.

17:50>> Appreciate it.

17:50>> Yep. Absolutely. Um, relative to the

17:52bidder parcels, we call them this

17:54because these are actually city-owned

17:56parcels that or I maybe I should say I

17:58call them this uh because these are

18:00parcels that were ultimately selected by

18:01the board of alderman and you sort of

18:04discharged their disposition to the

18:06business and industrial development

18:07authority about two years ago or so. You

18:10had a resolution uh to do so. And when

18:12you did that, you gave Bida the

18:15authority to release an RFP to try to

18:17find a developer that made sense for

18:18these two properties. And I'll I'll

18:20actually scroll back here in a second.

18:23These are the two properties in green at

18:26the bottom of this map. The former

18:27police training facility and the uh

18:29parking lot adjacent to the uh two

18:32larger mill buildings owned by Mr. Steve

18:34Bonet. Those are the two properties in

18:36question here. Um you disposed those to

18:39Bida. you gave them the guidance you'd

18:41like to see housing also that we need to

18:43or bida needs to provide some level of

18:45uh parking opportunity for the public

18:47when disposing of the property. Uh and

18:50there was actually an interesting

18:51condition of that resolution as well

18:52that said there needed to be at least

18:54one h if the project were housing that

18:57at least one unit needed to be capable

18:59of accepting a housing choice voucher.

19:01This is something that the board worked

19:02through about two years ago. The good

19:05news is that uh Bidder worked really

19:06hard over the last year uh to release an

19:09RFP. They went out to the development

19:11community and ultimately received two

19:13proposals uh both very high quality

19:17strong proposals from two different

19:18developers. Very different proposals

19:20both in the sort of the scale and the

19:23type of housing and the purchase price

19:24that was proposed. Ultimately, Bida,

19:27this was actually communicated via memo

19:29from director Hannam. Bida did

19:31preliminarily select a lancing Melbourne

19:33group, LMG, a group that's familiar to

19:35you, the group that did the high street

19:37school street project and has been

19:39involved in submitting for other

19:40projects around the city as well. Uh,

19:42negotiations commenced in mid 2026

19:44subsequent to director Hannam's uh, memo

19:47that was issued. Uh before I get into

19:49sort of what I what I refer to as the

19:50critical issues, I want to just point

19:52out these two images shown here are very

19:54very high high highlevel concepts of

19:57what the millard could look like. But I

19:59did want to particularly call out um

20:02this pointer most likely doesn't work.

20:04It doesn't work on the screen of course.

20:06Uh but to the in the colored image at

20:08the bottom the parcel the the two large

20:11vertical buildings all the way to the

20:12right represent the two beta parcels.

20:14You'll see there large two large multif

20:16family buildings proposed there.

20:18Similarly, on the drawing to the upper

20:20right, the two buildings at the bottom

20:22of that image are the beta multifamily

20:24buildings. You'll see there's a

20:25component of public space, parking, and

20:27multifamily. The reason I say these are

20:29concept is because these show a layout

20:32of buildings in the other sections of

20:33the millard that we don't actually

20:35anticipate being built in this fashion

20:36moving forward. It's simply a way to

20:38look at how the Millyard could be built

20:40out in the future. What these images are

20:42intended to show instead is really just

20:44what is proposed on the bida parcels

20:46themselves and it's really two multif

20:48family buildings. Part of the

20:50decision-making in selecting LMG

20:53certainly was the idea that they have

20:55secured additional land in the millard.

20:57Uh they are a developer that's that's

20:59experienced with this type of

21:00development and they're capable of

21:01building out the type of uh buildings

21:03that are proposed here. But I do think

21:06one of the development goals in the same

21:07way that we adopted the amendment to the

21:09TIFF is to have a larger cohesive vision

21:11and ultim ultimate buildout of the

21:13Millyard area. And so LMG uh that's

21:16certainly a reason why uh one of the

21:18reasons why LMG was selected as the

21:20preferred developer here. But I want to

21:21point out that they don't own all of the

21:23property in the Millard. There are other

21:24owners as part of the Millyard

21:25Association. Steve Bonnet, as I

21:27mentioned, mention owns two buildings in

21:29this area. Uh this is very much a work

21:31in progress. And so while we're picking

21:33development sites along the way,

21:35ultimately the goal is to have a larger

21:37more more cohesive buildout of this

21:38area. A couple critical issues on the

21:41bit of parcels that we're working

21:42through our negotiations. U phasing

21:44within the Milliard as a whole is a

21:46critical issue. As you build on one end,

21:48you need to mobilize resources

21:50appropriately. In the same way that we

21:52structured the Nimco development deal to

21:54break into two phases, the bit of

21:56parcels may similarly need to be phased

21:58or we'll need to find a place in the

22:00phasing plan for the larger Milliard

22:02buildout. We're working through some of

22:03those details right now with the

22:04developer and we'll have more for you

22:06because this development agreement will

22:07come back to you for review. Of course,

22:10parking lot was a critical or parking

22:12was a public parking was a critical

22:13issue identified in the resolution that

22:15gave Bida uh charge of these parcels.

22:18The ability to provide public parking

22:19access is something that the developer

22:21does need to do with a a multifamily

22:23proposal. As I mentioned, affordable

22:25housing is interesting here. It's that

22:27one housing choice voucher unit as

22:29opposed to the typical uh 20%

22:31requirement, but we're working through

22:33some of those details with the developer

22:34right now. There's an existing building

22:37there, the former police training

22:38facility. Uh it's had a lot of other

22:40uses. Bronzecraft, I think elevator,

22:43Stanley elevator was there at one point

22:44in time. I could be a little wrong in

22:45the on the brand, but um that's to the

22:48the southernmost point. Uh there's a

22:50demolition that needs to happen there.

22:51We're talking about whether or not

22:52that's something the city takes on or

22:54the developer takes on. We have some

22:55brownfields grant funds that might make

22:57that process a little easier, but

22:58something that needs to be negotiated.

23:00There's also the potential that the the

23:02preferred developer could potentially be

23:04interested in acquired acquiring

23:05adjacent sites. That's not something

23:07that's in any way committed at this

23:09point in time. It's not something that's

23:10necessary in order to move forward with

23:12with LMG as the preferred developer, but

23:14again, it is a consideration when it

23:16comes to building out the larger vision

23:18of the Milliard. And so, if they are to

23:20gain site control of those adjacent

23:21properties, it changes what you can do

23:23on the bit of parcels. It unlocks

23:25development a little bit more and it

23:27unlocks the ability to do additional

23:28green space and public park area. You

23:31know, I don't want that to be lost on

23:32the fact lost on this conversation that

23:34when you look at that image image in the

23:36bottom middle. It's very conceptual of

23:38course, but there's a whole lot of green

23:40space there. And that's something that

23:41we've emphasized through the

23:43conversations with the developer that we

23:45need to reestablish in this area. It's a

23:47very industrial look when you're down

23:49there right now. Uh and we'd like to

23:51reestablish some of the green space and

23:52parkland so that it does tales dovetales

23:55nicely with my falls park as well.

23:57And then two other really critical

23:59items, but ones that are really sort of

24:01in motion right now. One, the idea that

24:03if the developer takes charge of these

24:05parcels sooner rather than later, but

24:07there is a phasing plan that puts the

24:09development of these parcels a bit later

24:11in the Millard. Is there a way we can

24:13use some of the parking lot space in

24:14this area generally to make it more

24:17active, more engaging, uh make it more

24:20safe for users down here while we work

24:22on this larger development plan? And so

24:24I'm calling that temporary activation,

24:26but that's really a a term that I've

24:28stolen from director Hanam. Really what

24:30this means is can we do something

24:31different in this area to make it a

24:33little more uh vibrant and exciting as

24:36Nimco is built out, but perhaps this

24:38area of the Milliard remains stagnant

24:39for a little bit of time in the phasing

24:41plan. And then finally, more than

24:42anything, public improvements. What is

24:43the city going to get here? What sorts

24:45of pedestrian connections, green space,

24:48and other public facing improvements is

24:50is this developer willing to provide?

24:52Those are things that we're negotiating

24:53right now as part of the development

24:54agreement. Uh, and we'll actively be

24:57doing so over the next, I would say, six

24:58to nine months. So, that's sort of where

25:00we're at with the bidder parcels. I'm

25:01happy to answer questions on this and

25:03any other millard going on. I also just

25:06wanted to mention um, you know, we were

25:07asked this evening to focus on these

25:09projects, but uh, there are other things

25:11going on. Uh, there are other

25:13developments approved by the planning

25:14board that are moving forward,

25:15particularly in the realm of housing.

25:17103 Temple. Uh that project will begin

25:19construction, we believe, over the next

25:21few months, which is very, very

25:22exciting. That's an additional two

25:24approximately 200 units over off of

25:26Temple Street. The Mohawk Tannery

25:28obviously is something the remediation

25:29is progressing, but that that project

25:31remains on track. There'll be an update

25:32at the infrastructure committee meeting

25:34in October, if I'm not mistaken, on the

25:36remediation uh for uh Chairman O'Brien

25:39and Vice Chairman Dow. So, please feel

25:41free to join that conversation in

25:42October. Uh, additionally, we uh,

25:45recently the Avery Lane project opened

25:47on the east end of NSHA. That was done

25:49by the Tamposi Holdings Company. That's

25:51about 100 units of fully affordable

25:53housing. Really excited to see that

25:55project moving forward. The housing

25:57authority is underway on Maynard Homes

25:59phase 1, which is approximately 175

26:01units of affordable housing. And we

26:04expect that a Maynard Homes phase 2 may

26:06be coming shortly. Uh, so there are many

26:09things going on, but we were asked only

26:11to focus on these this evening, but I

26:13just want everyone to have a broader

26:15context for the amount of housing that

26:16is full is actually under construction

26:18across the city right now beyond just

26:20the planning board approvals that are

26:22out there that you may hear about. So

26:23happy to answer any questions that folks

26:25may have, but thank you for the

26:26opportunity for the update tonight.

26:27Alderman Dow.

26:29>> Yeah. With [clears throat] the U bag and

26:32Nimco and Bida. Um, when could we expect

26:38the first availability of of housing?

26:41>> I'm going to ask Director Hannum to

26:42answer that question. I I I believe I

26:44know the answer, but I'm going to leave

26:46to the expert.

26:48>> Sure. Liz Hanam, economic development

26:50director. Um, we anticipate the

26:52construction for that first building

26:54will take about 18 months. Um, and we're

26:56hoping that we can get shovels in the

26:58ground later this spring. So, we're

27:00thinking about two years from now. Um,

27:04at the at the earliest probably.

27:08>> J,

27:10>> uh, Alderman Sullivan,

27:11>> thank you. Uh, back to the bidder

27:13project. I know that uh this probably

27:18fairly uh you know up to speed as far as

27:22you know the history of it but

27:25we we're going through the recode

27:27situation. The state law has changed. Um

27:30what's the current count for uh units

27:33right now? Did you mention that or how

27:35has it changed over the years?

27:38>> Great question. Um

27:40the current count is I want to say it's

27:43up in the air. I think it's and the

27:44reason I'm gonna say that I can tell you

27:47what's in those buildings right there,

27:48but I think we're very much in the

27:50middle of negotiation and I'm hesitant

27:51to present a number because that number

27:53could change. But we're thinking between

27:55100 and 150 units at maximum. That's

27:58really what we think the site can can

28:01hold. Part of that is though, Alderman

28:03Sullivan, that

28:05the way that the RFP was released was

28:08for these two parcels only. the ability

28:11to park everyone on this site and house

28:14everyone on this site. It constrains it

28:17substantially. In the event that this

28:19were part of a larger development plan

28:22and there were parking available in

28:23other areas of the Milliard, that unit

28:25count could change. [clears throat] Uh

28:28but that's generally what we're looking

28:29at for unit count here. These are and we

28:32learned through the bit of process and

28:33the due diligence that they undertook

28:36that these are heavily constrained

28:37parcels by wetlands boundaries by access

28:41by simple geometry and the shape that

28:43they take on and so they're not ripe for

28:46housing development but it can be done.

28:48Unfortunately you're going to be limited

28:50to sort of that 100 to 150 unit count.

28:53>> Yes, please continue. I um and maybe I'm

28:56misremembering, but I I want to say when

28:59we first started it wasn't even near

29:00that amount. I I want to say it might

29:02have been in the dozens

29:05uh in that area. So, is that because of

29:07the recode? Is that because of the state

29:09law? I mean, it's it's not attributable

29:13to either of those. I think what it is

29:15is attributable to the fact that

29:16additional due diligence was done and

29:19that [clears throat] we actually

29:21solicited feedback from from developers

29:23who who do this kind of thing. And I I

29:24want to be clear though I think that the

29:26dozen because that sort of I remember

29:28that whenever that conversation was I

29:30don't remember exactly but

29:31>> I think we were looking at a slightly

29:33different layout and potentially

29:34different type of multifamily at that

29:36point in time. Um, we internally thought

29:39this unit count could be lower as well

29:41based on all the constraints and

29:43everything going on here. I still

29:45question whether this unit count can be

29:47done, but it's certainly higher than

29:50364850.

29:52Uh, but whether it's 150 or not is

29:54something I think we we need to learn

29:55more about.

29:56>> Okay. Thank you.

29:57>> Yeah. Uh, Alderman Morgan,

30:01>> thank you. Uh, Director Sullivan, I have

30:02two questions, so I'm going to ask them

30:04together, so you can

30:05>> sure answer however. Um,

30:09is there any kind of language that would

30:11hold the developers to a tighter

30:13timeline? You had mentioned some other

30:15developers elsewhere in the city that

30:16seem to have progressed at a quicker

30:19timeline. Um, maybe they have easier

30:22land to work with. Um, and the second

30:24question is, what support does staff

30:26need in order to support these projects

30:28to move forward with more urgency?

30:32That's a those are great questions. Um

30:37the challenge with these two properties

30:40specific Alderman Morgan is that

30:44I think the city will be faced with the

30:46decision of whether or not it wants to

30:49accelerate these two buildings or these

30:52two properties at the expense of a

30:54larger and perhaps more intelligent

30:57buildout of the Milliard.

30:59What I mean by that is we may need to

31:02wait and we've had this conversation

31:03with Bida in public session. We we may

31:06need to wait for these buildings to

31:08happen in the interest of a of a

31:11stronger and smarter buildout of the

31:13millard if all these pieces fall into

31:15place.

31:17So I want to be really clear that

31:19although we'd love to press go on this

31:21right now, I'm not sure that's really

31:23the best thing for the for the community

31:25and for the vision for this area. Um,

31:28what I think the alderman can do is

31:32continue this conversation with staff so

31:35that we're kind of talking about why we

31:36might be going in that direction and

31:38asking questions about why why we would

31:40delay potentially. Even now, we have

31:43sort of a natural phasing in our minds.

31:45Nimco is the highest priority.

31:48Bagshaw is a lesser priority in some

31:51ways partially because it's not city

31:52interest involved. Bida is sort of at

31:55the same level, but in the event that

31:57other parcels are acquired, I think we

31:59need to revisit all of that. What public

32:01improvements are proposed and what makes

32:03sense from a buildout perspective. And

32:05so I guess my biggest ask is be prepared

32:08for a larger conversation about how this

32:11entire Milliard area is best built out

32:14and recognize that to make that happen

32:17there may needs to there may need to be

32:19a phasing plan accepted by the alderman

32:22to some extent but we don't know enough

32:24about that just yet. But I think you see

32:26the first signs of that with the Nimco

32:29master development agreement amendment

32:30that you adopted. you you did agree to

32:32phasing in the interest of I think

32:35hopefully a stronger project. Um and I

32:38think you might see that follow suit

32:40here. So that's I guess that's my ask.

32:41Be prepared for a conversation about

32:43this larger area and how expectations

32:46may need to change for buildout based on

32:48that larger vision.

32:50>> Thank you.

32:50>> Y

32:52>> uh Alderman Dow.

32:53>> Yeah. Two questions. one,

32:55[clears throat] as we're going through

32:56all this planning, are we coordinating

33:00with the neighbors, uh, the fence

33:03company, that building that has, I

33:05think, church in it, and I don't know

33:07what else is in that building, and and

33:09also the

33:11um office building at the end. Are we

33:14coordinating with those people to keep

33:15them informed on what's going on? That's

33:18question one. Question two is if if all

33:21of these building projects start going

33:25simultaneously and I won't they won't

33:27start at the same time but the there

33:29could be overlap. Do we have enough city

33:32staff to handle the inspections,

33:37the reviews, and all the work that the

33:40city has to do because

33:42we don't want things hung up because

33:44they can't get approvals down the hall

33:47here.

33:49Um to to Alderman Dow's first question,

33:52if I may, Mr. Chair, the the the answer

33:54is yes. We have kept many of these

33:57property owners informed. We've had

33:59meetings with them on site. Uh we met

34:01Mr. Bonnet in the middle of the parking

34:02lot last year. I remember it well. Um

34:05the one exception there, and you know, I

34:07don't mind saying this on the public

34:08record, is the fence company. We've

34:10actually had sort of ships passing the

34:12night communication with, but not as

34:14much engagement with them as I' as I'd

34:16like to see. So we need to go back to

34:17that to those folks and and have

34:19additional conversation. But we have

34:21kept the the most of the abuing land

34:24owners in check in in communication and

34:27also director Cummings has invited us to

34:29participate in Millyard meeting

34:31conversations and so we've had

34:32conversations with the other Millard

34:33owners about this and about the TIFF

34:35district amendment that you approved

34:37earlier this year. So they've generally

34:39been in the loop about what's going on

34:40here. Alderman Dow. Um we haven't

34:43communicated to them about what the sort

34:45of development plan is for Bida just yet

34:47just because we we don't necessarily

34:48know but that communication will need to

34:50happen and certainly as a larger

34:51buildout of the millard happens they'll

34:53need to understand all of that. They're

34:55frankly they have direct interest in it

34:57uh as an association. Um and then to

34:59your question about staff capacity and I

35:01think you're focused on the building

35:02department. What we've really moved

35:05towards in the last couple years thanks

35:06to Bill McKenna and others over here is

35:09we we do have the staff capacity. We

35:11commit to having the staff capacity for

35:13larger projects like this. The one

35:15exception actually is institutional work

35:17like the hospitals that can be very very

35:18technical and challenging. But what we

35:21offer developers, and they have a

35:22frankly a statutory right to, we offer

35:25them the ability to do third-party

35:26review and third-party inspections if

35:29they would like to move faster than what

35:30our development or review timeline can

35:33accommodate. And although that may seem

35:35costly,

35:37that time is often more valuable than

35:40the actual cost of them hiring a third

35:41party reviewer. So, we will make that

35:43decision at the beginning of the

35:45process. will sit down to meeting and

35:46say if you'd like to see these plans

35:48reviewed in the next month, you're going

35:50to have to pay for third party review.

35:52We work with them to select third party

35:55reviewer and they proceed through that

35:56process and it moves very smoothly. So

35:58that's an option that we would give

35:59them. We've given it to other projects

36:01as well.

36:02>> Okay. Thanks.

36:03>> Yep. [clears throat] Any further

36:05questions? Alderman Morgan,

36:08>> I have one more. Um, I thought when I

36:11saw this this meeting come up, special

36:14special board, that we were going to

36:16talk about the Elm Street School and we

36:19talked about the Elm Street garage.

36:20Maybe I missed that.

36:23>> My understanding to director Cummings's

36:25comments at the beginning is that the

36:26Elm Street School will be discussed

36:28under the KEF auditorium commission

36:29agenda item on the regular board

36:31meeting. And I believe that's the

36:32believe that's the case.

36:34>> Thank you. Of

36:35>> course.

36:36>> Any further comments or questions?

36:40All right. Well, uh, thank you very

36:42much. Um,

36:45Director Cummings, did you have anything

36:47else this evening or are we concluded?

36:50>> Uh, nothing else at this time.

36:52>> Okay. So, at this time, I'll be looking

36:55for a motion. Uh, Alderman Cle.

36:58>> Yes. I'd like to make a a motion to um

37:01that the September 22nd, 2026 special

37:04meeting of the board of alderman be

37:06adjourned. And that will be by roll

37:08call. Thank you.

37:10>> So the clerk could please call the role.

37:12>> Alderman Cle.

37:13>> Yes.

37:14>> Alderman Rean,

37:16>> yes.

37:17>> Aldwoman Smith,

37:19>> yes.

37:20>> Alderman,

37:21>> yes.

37:22>> Alderman O'Brien,

37:23>> yes.

37:25>> Alderman Dow,

37:26>> yes.

37:27>> Alderman Sullivan,

37:28>> yes.

37:30>> Alderman Johnson,

37:31>> yes.

37:32>> Reporting stopped. Alderwoman Kelly,

37:36>> yes.

37:38>> Alderman Morgan,

37:39>> yes.

37:41>> Alderman Clemens,

37:42>> yes.

37:43>> 11 yay, zero nays.

37:44>> Okay. And we are adjourned at 7:22. The

37:48next meeting will start in 8 minutes.

```*