The regular meeting of the Riggins Urban Renewal Agency was called to order by Board Member and Chairman Robert Crump. Other Board Members present included Tom Anderson, Larry Barnard, Carolyn Friend and Norm Klobetanz. Member McClure was absent. Richelle Barger attended as a guest.
The minutes were read and approved as read. The financial statement was presented with a balance of $3642.25 as of August 31. After discussion, motion was made by Anderson, seconded by Klobetanz to pay the City Administration OPA through August 08 $2050.00, the City Water Study OPA $397.52, and the City Sewer Engr Report OPA $907.79 leaving a balance of $286.94 in the account. Voting yea, Anderson, Barnard, Crump, Friend and Klobetanz. No nays.
The WhiteWater Park Feasibility Study, as completed by Rec Engr & Planning, was reviewed. A brief review of the study brought up several areas of question. It was a general consensus of the group that a more in-depth review of the study was needed. A meeting was set up for Tuesday, Sept 16th at 3:00pm, to more thoroughly review the document. The study will be e-mailed, along with a copy of REP’s contract scope of work, to each member as well as Judd DeBoer and Brian O’Morrow. Richelle Barger requested a copy also, and the Agency agreed.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
CLERKS NOTES ON WWP FEASIBILITY STUDY REVIEW:
A special meeting of URA members, Brian O’Morrow and Judd DeBoer was held to review the White Water Park Feasibility Study prepared by Recreation Engineering and Planning. All Board Members were present, with the exception of Larry Barnard. Richelle Barger and Linda Heiter were also present.
The group reviewed the document and agreed that it met the contract scope of work, and that the report indicated that the project was feasible. However, there were several areas of question and comments that the group agreed should be forwarded to REP. The group felt that the additional information requested and suggested expansion of some parts of the document would make it more usable when applying for construction grant funding.
The comments and areas of question are as follows:
(1) More ADA information relating to access and ADA facilities would provide greater grant opportunities.
(2) Address the conflict between fishing and kayaking, which will share the peak season.
(3) Maintenance and long-term liability of the structure in a free flowing river.
(4) Questions about the structure of the bridge – effect on bridge and potential flooding of the upriver properties.
(5) No mention of amenities such as bathrooms, etc.
(6) More information on parking
(7) The permit section was lacking – need to address more thoroughly added additional agencies and inquiring if permits are even possible.
(8) Future amenities such as picnic areas, bathrooms, parking sites, etc.
(9) Undetermined maintenance costs
(10)Economic Benefit section expanded
(11)List of projects completed in free flowing rivers
(12)Identify grant funding sources
These items, along with individual member concerns, will be compiled and sent to REP for their review.
In discussing the future construction of the park, Linda Heiter visited with the group as a potential grant writer. Judd DeBoer also agreed to inquire about grant writing services.
It was agreed that the City or URA could try to obtain grants for the project and the private property used for the development could be used as match.