HomeMy WebLinkAboutCash In-LieuPage 1 of 16
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and
Intersection Level of Service Waiver Text Amendments
Public Hearing Date: Zoning Commission and Planning Board public hearing is October 4, 2016 at 6 pm. City Commission public hearing is October 24, 2016 at 6 pm.
Project Description: The establishment of standards for accepting funds in-lieu of required construction of capital facilities and the establishment of procedures and criteria for granting a waiver from the intersection level of service requirements.
Project Location: Applicable throughout the City of Bozeman
Recommendation: Approval
Recommended Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities Motion: “Having reviewed and considered the text of the ordinance, staff report, application materials, public comment all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for Application 16377 and move to recommend the City Commission approve the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities text amendment.”
Recommended Intersection Level of Service Waiver Motion:
“Having reviewed and considered the text of the ordinance, staff report, application materials, public comment all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for Application 16377 and move to recommend the City Commission approve the Intersection Level of Service Waiver text amendment.”
Report Date: September 30, 2016
Staff Contacts: Mitch WerBell, Assistant Planner Chris Saunders, Interim Director of Community Development Craig Woolard, Director of Public Works
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
49
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 2 of 16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unresolved Issues 1) If amendments are not adopted, certain intersections operating at a level of service of less than “C” may be required to be improved by a private developer as an off-site improvement. a. Current development, otherwise in conformance with the growth policy, can be delayed as a result of the wait period for intersection improvements by City according to capital improvement plan. b. Current development, otherwise in conformance with the growth policy, can be delayed stalls as a result of significant costs to private developer to improve intersections not listed on capital improvement plan. c. City or Montana Department of Transportation does not possess necessary right-of-way for intersection improvements, therefore preventing development approval or necessitating variance.
Project Description and Background Subdivision and site development generate new demands on the City’s infrastructure (capital facilities). By law and municipal code, subdividers and other site developers must mitigate impacts to the City’s capital facilities. The Unified Development Code includes provisions for necessary mitigation including the construction of new capital facilities, extension of existing capital facilities and financial guarantees for completion of required capital facilities. The code also provides procedures for zoning and subdivision variances, which may create exceptions from public infrastructure requirements. When a variance to capital facilities is granted for a particular development, proportional impact mitigation does not occur. The City requires the construction of infrastructure to mitigate impacts and protect the public health, safety and welfare. Funds-in-lieu: On occasion, planned public works by the city may render the installation of capital facilities by private development fiscally disruptive and inefficient. The intent of this text amendment is to provide an additional option for private development to meet regulatory requirements for capital facility impact mitigation. There is a separate administrative manual which will help implement this ordinance. See Appendix B for background information. A summary of the funds-in-lieu of capital facilities text amendment follows: 1) Section 1 - Legislative findings for the changes. This does not amend the text. 2) Section 2 - Revise Section 38.39.070. – Payment for extension of capital facilities.
50
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 3 of 16 a. Clarify that the City may require subdividers or other site developers to mitigate the impacts by the extension of existing capital facilities or the construction of new facilities. b. Establish that the review authority may determine on a case-by-case basis that payment of funds in-lieu of capital facilities is a method of meeting obligations for installation of infrastructure and ensures public health, safety and wellness. c. Include other site development with subdivision as land use actions that generate impacts. d. Establish that a variance is not required to be reviewed or approved as part of a funds in-lieu of capital facilities request. e. Establish the deadline for a submittal of such request and what constitutes a material change for such request. f. Establish the review authority’s procedures for reviewing, making findings on six criteria of evaluation and making a final decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny a funds in-lieu of capital facilities request. The findings of the review authority must be considered in any final action on a development application. g. Establish that funds paid in-lieu of capital facilities must be held in an appropriate fund dedicated to the type of work for which the funds were paid. h. Establish that the City may require the filing of special improvement district waivers as part of the request. i. Establish the required costs and possible contingency amounts that must be included as part of the request. j. Establish situations where refunds would not be granted. Intersection level of service: The Unified Development Code requires all arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets to operate at a minimum level of service (LOS) “C” as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual. Associated intersections must have a minimum LOS of “C” in the design year (15 years after private development approval). Current exceptions to this standard include existing intersection LOS variances and intersections constructed to maximum lane and turning movement capacity. The City has experienced an unprecedented amount of growth and, as a result, both population and trip generation have increased. Some proposed residential and supporting commercial and industrial developments cannot be completed based on a large number of roadways and intersections at or beyond capacity. The City Commission annually adopts a five-year capital improvements plan (CIP) that identifies transportation system projects, schedules and funding. A variety of sources including
51
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 4 of 16 transportation impact fees and arterial and collector district assessments fund transportation system improvements. The Fiscal Years 2017-2021 Capital Improvements Program identifies failing roadways and intersections as transportation network priorities. CIP funding allows for significant improvements to the City’s overall street infrastructure; however, the current pace of development exceeds the rate of CIP transportation project completion. The Department of Public Works has taken a variety of measures to address development-related transportation impacts in conjunction with capital improvement projects. The proposed amendment to the intersection level of service requirements helps in addressing the City Commission’s transportation policy direction by authorizing the Director of Public Works to grant specific waivers to the minimum intersection level of service requirements under certain circumstances. A summary of the intersection level of service waiver text amendment follows: 1) Section 1 – Revise 38.24.060.B.3.b to establish procedures for an exception from intersections meeting minimum level of service standards in association with a development application. a. Establish that the review authority may grant a waiver from acceptable minimum level of service “C” for an intersection after determining that the granting is in the public interest and is not contrary to public health and safety; intersection improvements are scheduled for construction within three years on the adopted capital improvement plan; all right-of-way necessary for the intersection is secured by the City or Montana Department of Transportation; and a financing plan has been approved by the City Commission. b. Designate a valid period of one year for any waiver. c. Establish that a waiver applies only to the property for which it was granted. d. Clarify the ability to pursue a variance if a waiver is not granted by the review authority. e. Specify that any variance granted applies only to the development for which it was granted. f. Remove references to existing criteria for review authority accepting a level of service less than “C” based on existing variance(s). 2) Section 2 – Revise 38.34.010.E to change the title of the director of public service to the “director of public works” as a review authority for specific development processes. a. Add the development process of funds-in-lieu of capital facilities to the review authority (director of public works).
52
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 5 of 16
Alternatives 1) Recommend approval of the text amendments as written. 2) Direct use of alternative wording. 3) Continue the public hearing and request additional information from staff. 4) Do not recommend approval of the text amendments.
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 2 Unresolved Issues ................................................................................................................................... 2 Project Description and Background .............................................................................................. 2 Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS .......................................................... 6 SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS .................................................................................. 6 Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ...................................................................................... 6 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ............................................................................ 11 Section 76-1-606, MCA (Effect of Growth Policy on Subdivision Regulations) ........... 11 Section 76-3-501, MCA (Subdivision Purposes) ...................................................................... 13 APPENDIX A - AFFECTED ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY PROVISIONS ............................ 15 APPENDIX B - POLICY BACKGROUND ................................................................................................ 15 APPENDIX C - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ....................................................................... 16 FISCAL EFFECTS .......................................................................................................................................... 16 ATTACHMENTS ........................................................................................................................................... 16
53
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 6 of 16
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Having considered the criteria established for a text amendment, the Staff recommends approval as submitted. The Zoning Commission and Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing on the text amendments on October 4, 2016 and will forward a recommendation to the City Commission. The meeting will be held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the text amendments on October 24, 2016. The meeting will be held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.
SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following criteria. As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant. The criteria below include separate findings for each text amendment where necessary. In considering the following criteria, the analysis must show that the amendment accomplishes zoning criteria A-D. Zoning criteria E-K must be considered and may be found to be affirmative, neutral, or negative. A favorable decision on the proposed application must find that the application meets all of criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In addition, the application must be evaluated against subdivision criteria 1-17. A favorable decision on the proposed application must find that the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria 1-17.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Yes. The proposed text amendments are in accordance with the adopted growth policy. No conflicts with the goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan have been identified. An analysis of consistency with several goals and objectives follows.
Objective G-1.2: Ensure that adequate public facilities, services, and infrastructure are
available and/or financially guaranteed in accordance with facility or strategic plans
prior to, or concurrent with, development.
54
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 7 of 16
Objective G-1.3: Require development to mitigate its impacts on our community as
identified and supported by evidence during development review, including economic,
health, environmental, and social impacts. The acceptance of funds in-lieu of constructing infrastructure will allow for an additional option for development to financially mitigate its impact on the community and for coordination with the City on projects scheduled for construction on the adopted capital improvements plan (CIP). These projects have secured financing. The intersection level of service (LOS) waiver amendment will ensure that intersection improvements have secured funding prior to development by linking the proposal with an intersection improvement scheduled for construction within three years on the CIP.
Objective LU-4.4: Review and revise the City’s regulations to encourage and support
sustainability in new construction and rehabilitation or redevelopment of existing
areas. The proposed amendments will encourage infill development and allow specific developments to proceed after meeting strict criteria. The funds in-lieu program will promote sustainability by allowing private development to contribute to planned public improvements by construction timing coordination and cost-sharing. The program will remove the fiscal and physical wastes associated with required installation of certain temporary improvements that are subsequently removed as part of a larger public project. The amendments will not affect the discretion of the review authority to require the installation of capital facilities where necessary.
Goal T-1: Transportation System – Maintain and enhance the functionality of the
transportation system.
Objective T-1.3: All development activity shall comply with the right-of-way standards,
road locations, and other policies set forth in the transportation facility plan to ensure
that an orderly, efficient, effective transportation system is continued and to avoid
future problems with inadequate transportation services and options.
Objective T-2.4: Seek and provide adequate funding to improve and maintain the
functionality of all elements of the transportation system. The criteria for accepting funds in-lieu of capital facilities and granting a LOS waiver includes conformance with projects scheduled for construction within three years on the CIP. By default, the coordination of installation with planned public improvement projects will require fewer disruptions in public services and will promote enhancement of transportation system functionality through larger stand-alone
55
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 8 of 16 construction projects. This strategy eliminates the need for small piecemeal construction activity. With the acceptance of funds in-lieu in specific circumstances, the additional funding will aid in improving elements of the transportation system when timing is appropriate and maintaining functionality by delaying the installation of improvements. The amendments are in accordance with the Objectives T-1.3 and T-2.4 by allowing an alternative means of contribution towards an orderly, efficient and effective transportation system based on the standards and policies in the transportation plan. A project-specific waiver may be appropriate when funding and right-of-way have been secured.
Goal PS-1: Facilities and Services- All public facilities and services provided under the
authority of the City of Bozeman shall be provided in a reliable, efficient, cost-effective
and environmentally sound manner.
Objective PS-1.4: Balance maintenance of existing facilities with the need to provide
new facilities so that existing users do not suffer a reduction in service quality in order
to provide services to new development.
Objective PS-1.5: Provide for public central sewer collection and treatment facilities
for all existing and future land uses within the planning area
Objective PS-1.6: Provide for storm drain, flood control and treatment facilities for all
existing and future land uses within the planning area.
Objective PS-1.8: Provide for a safe and adequate water supply, distribution, storage
and treatment facilities to support water demand projected by planned land uses in
the planning area. The amendments will support the provision of reliable, efficient, cost-effective and environmentally sound public facilities by giving the review authority broad discretion to determine how to best provide public facilities in association with subdivision or other site development. Additional mechanisms may be employed to guarantee adequate streets, water, and sewer and stormwater facilities for all existing and future land uses.
Goal PS-3: Establish regular and sufficient funding sources to acquire, develop, and
maintain public services, and meet the community’s needs. The funds in-lieu of capital facilities program will generate additional funding to be used towards acquisition, design, construction and maintenance of public services.
Goal RCC-1: Coordinate policies and actions between public entities to increase
effectiveness and efficiency of implementation of the Bozeman Community Plan.
56
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 9 of 16
Objective RCC-1.3: Coordinate planning activities and standards within the planning
area so that streets, parks, and other public services are adequately provided for and
the long term needs of the public are met. The proposed amendments will add greater flexibility to meeting regulatory impact mitigation standards by occasionally allowing coordination with planned public improvements. Coordination across public entities increases efficiency and effectiveness of public services.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Yes. The proposed text amendments secure safety from fire and other dangers. Funding and coordination with planned improvements to essential public services will balance development impact mitigation and security from fire and other hazards. Repeated disruption of services and interference with traffic due to construction increases the likelihood of crashes or other negative impacts. Coordination between public and private work lessens this hazard.
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Yes. The proposed text amendments promote public health, public safety and general welfare. The Bozeman Community plan states, “Some level of risk is present in all locations and times despite efforts to prevent harm. Individual developments are not solely responsible for the correction of risks which are common to all. They should equitably participate in common solutions to common problems. However, the presence of common risks, such as inadequate public services, may prevent approval of a development until the hazard has been removed or corrected.” The funds in-lieu of capital facilities program will add an additional tool for private development to meet requirements for development mitigation and security of public health, safety and general welfare. Both amendments will require the review authority to formally determine that accepting funds in-lieu of capital facilities or granting an LOS waiver is in the public interest and is not contrary to protecting public health, safety and general welfare.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and
other public requirements. Yes. The proposed amendments facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. The current code allows for the review authority to determine the applicability of public infrastructure requirements and specifically identify the circumstances under which extension or construction of capital facilities or its equivalent will be required. The establishment of the funds in-lieu of capital facilities program will offer an additional option, under
57
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 10 of 16 certain circumstances, for a developer to meet public infrastructure requirements while mitigating impacts from a development. Providing an alternative to variances due to unreasonable burdens on individual developments ensure that development will be contributing to infrastructure needed for that development. If variances are granted all participation is typically lost. Both text amendments require the review authority to determine that proposals are consistent with planned public improvements on the adopted CIP through the review criteria language.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
F. Effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Yes. The proposed text amendments have a positive effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. The amendments will allow the installation of street and intersection capital facilities to be coordinated with planned public improvements under specific criteria and when there will not be a negative effect on the transportation network. The review authority’s ability to require construction of transportation and intersection improvements when necessary will not be impacted by these amendments.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Yes. The proposed amendments promote compatible urban growth. Additional options for meeting public infrastructure requirements in the city will reduce sprawl and incompatible growth. These processes will be linked to planned capital improvements which support the growing city. Development of land in the city will still be subject to the underlying growth policy and zoning which are adopted to promote compatible urban growth.
H. Character of the district. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Neutral. The proposed text changes do not address uses for specific properties.
J. Conserving the value of buildings. Neutral. The amendments will likely not directly affect the value of existing buildings in a negative manner. Potential infill, redevelopment and approval of pending development applications may increase property values as a result of meeting infrastructure requirements with alternative options.
58
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 11 of 16
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional
area. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
Section 76-1-606, MCA (Effect of Growth Policy on Subdivision Regulations)
1. Subdivision regulations adopted after a growth policy has been adopted
must be made in accordance with the growth policy. Yes. The proposed amendments are in accordance with the adopted growth policy. No conflicts with the goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan have been identified. An analysis of consistency with several goals and objectives is found under Zoning Criterion A.
Section 76-3-102, MCA (Subdivision Purposes)
2. Promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by regulating the
subdivision of land. Neutral. The Bozeman Municipal Code regulates and details procedures for subdivision. The proposed text amendments will not modify monumentation, public notice or design standards. The review authority’s decision to allow payment of funds in-lieu of constructing capital facilities or grant a waiver from the intersection level of service (LOS) requirements or will be made during the subdivision review process. Public health, safety and general welfare must be ensured with either proposal prior to a decision of approval or approval with conditions. If that determination cannot be made, the review authority will deny the proposal and require construction of capital facilities prior to the filing of the final plat.
3. Prevent the overcrowding of land. Neutral. Overcrowding occurs when demand for service exceeds the ability to meet that demand. Existing subdivision regulations require proportional matching of mitigation to proposed intensity of use. The proposed amendments will allow for alternatives to installation of facilities by subdividers through payment of funds or a waiver to intersection LOS requirements when planned improvements are scheduled for construction by the City. These amendments will not eliminate the requirement for
59
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 12 of 16 installation of capital facilities when it is determined by the review authority that existing services do not have capacity for the proposed use.
4. Lessen congestion in the streets and highways. Yes. The proposed amendments lessen congestion in the streets and highways. The revisions will not eliminate the requirements for street or sidewalk improvements. The funds in-lieu program will allow for financial contribution and coordination with planned public improvements to create a more orderly, efficient installation and prevent disruptions in public street service from repetitive construction projects. The criteria for the granting of an intersection LOS waiver includes the requirement that intersection improvements to bring the LOS up to “C” or greater are scheduled for construction within three years on the most recently adopted capital improvement plan (CIP). Coordination of construction timing with planned public intersection improvements will reduce congestion in the streets. The review authority must find that the granting of a waiver will not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest. The amendment will not remove the requirement of construction of intersection improvements when deemed necessary for safety and for the public interest of reducing transportation system congestion.
5. Provide adequate light, air, water supply, sewage disposal, parks and
recreation areas, ingress and egress, and other public improvements. Yes. The proposed amendments will provide adequate light, air, water supply, sewage disposal, parks and recreation area, ingress and egress, and other public improvements. The amendments will not change subdivision requirements for light, air and parks and recreation areas. There are many transportation network upgrade priorities that overlap infrastructure projects driven by subdivision and other site development. The revisions will provide an alternative means of development mitigation through payment of a proportional share of money which may be used for the street, water, sewer and stormwater improvements.
6. Require development in harmony with the natural environment. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
7. Protect the rights of property owners. Yes. The proposed amendments protect the rights of property owners. The revisions add alternative means of compliance with existing subdivision regulations. Due process procedures and protections are included in the draft text. Therefore, the amendments will not negatively impact procedural due process for property owners.
60
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 13 of 16
8. Require uniform monumentation of land subdivisions and transferring
interests in real property by reference to a plat or certificate of survey. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
Section 76-3-501, MCA (Subdivision Purposes) This section requires local governments to adopt regulations that reasonably provide for:
9. Orderly development within the jurisdictional area. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for orderly development within the jurisdictional area. Repeated disruptions of facilities for small incremental projects or destruction of constructed improvements for subsequent incremental improvements are not orderly. Payment of funds in-lieu of capital facilities will offset impacts of certain subdivisions of land while minimizing the frequency of disruptions to service and facilities. A trend of recent development proposals has shown impact to multiple intersections operating at a LOS of less than “C” with each proposal. Many deficient intersections are not scheduled for priority funding and construction due to the number of capital improvements required across the city. The proposed amendment will allow certain subdivisions to receive a waiver from the intersection LOS requirement when funding is secured through impact fees and arterials and collector assessments on the CIP. Allowing an LOS waiver will permit certain subdivision and other site development to proceed in an orderly fashion, reserving variances for infrequent and truly limited proposals.
10. Coordination of roads within subdivided land with other roads, both
existing and planned. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for coordination of roads within subdivided land with other roads, both existing and planned. The funds in-lieu of capital facilities amendment will include eligibility for street improvements. The funds will be applied to financial programs dedicated to the same type of work which will help with future coordination of planned street construction and extension as part of overall transportation system upgrades. Generally, fewer disruptions in service will occur when street improvements are planned as part of a larger, single-phase project. The intersection LOS waiver will grant an exception to private development constructing off site intersection improvements when those improvements are planned for construction as part of the CIP.
61
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 14 of 16
11. Dedication of land for roadways and for public utility easements. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not directly address this issue. The subdivision review process separately includes regulatory requirements for land dedication for streets and public utility easements. City possession of necessary right of way for projects for which funds in-lieu or waivers are requested is a required precondition of approval.
12. Improvement of roads. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for the improvement of roads. The funds in-lieu of infrastructure program will allow for an additional financial mechanism to fund public street improvements. The intersection LOS waiver amendment will only apply to those intersections that are funded and scheduled for construction, therefore supporting improvements to streets.
13. Provision of adequate open spaces for travel, light, air and recreation. Neutral. The proposed amendments will not alter the existing subdivision regulations which require the provision of adequate open spaces.
14. Adequate transportation, water and drainage. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for adequate transportation, water and drainage. The amendments will not invalidate existing code requirements from providing adequate transportation, water and drainage facilities when determined necessary by the review authority.
15. Regulation of sanitary facilities, subject to section 76-3-511, MCA. Neutral. The proposed amendments will not provide local regulations more stringent than state regulations. The revised language will allow for subdividers to request the review authority allow payment of funds in-lieu of constructing sewer facilities under certain circumstances. This adds an alternative option for the sanitation requirements under the Bozeman Municipal Code but is not more stringent than Montana Code Annotated.
16. Avoidance or minimization of congestion. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for avoidance or minimization of congestion. The public will experience less frequent disruptions in service when capital projects are coordinated with planned transportation system improvements by the payment of funds in-lieu of capital facilities or the granting of an intersection LOS waiver. The amendments will not affect the ability of the review authority to require
62
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 15 of 16 on-site or off-site public improvements when essential to protect public health, safety and general welfare and to mitigate development-initiated congestion.
17. Avoidance of subdivision which would involve unnecessary environmental
degradation and the avoidance of danger or injury to health, safety, or welfare by
reason of nature hazard or the lack of water, drainage, access, transportation, or
other public services or would necessitate an excessive expenditure of public
funds for the supply of such services. Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for avoidance of subdivision which would involve unnecessary environmental degradation and the avoidance of danger or injury to health, safety, or welfare by reason of nature hazard or the lack of water, drainage, access, transportation, or other public services or would necessitate an excessive expenditure of public funds for the supply of such services.
APPENDIX A - AFFECTED ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY PROVISIONS
Zoning Designation and Land Uses: Mitigation of subdivision and other site development impacts on capital facilities must be generally applicable to all forms of development review. The proposed amendments address all forms of development across all zoning districts and improve equity in mitigation.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The amendments apply to subdivision and other site development within the municipal limits of Bozeman. The growth policy designates future land uses in the planning area boundary which may exceed the current city limits. As new property is annexed, these amendments will apply to all future subdivision and development within the city. See Zoning Criterion A for analysis of conformance with the Bozeman Community Plan.
APPENDIX B - POLICY BACKGROUND The City continues to improve capital planning and funding. At the current pace of development and population growth, evolved mechanisms are needed to construct infrastructure and support public interest and private development. Expanded means of meeting regulatory requirements must ensure resource efficiency and public health, safety and general welfare. The two associated text amendments address two of the alternative infrastructure options recommended during the recent Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion. If adopted, the efficacy of the amendments will be evaluated in the future following a reasonable period of implementation and development. The adoption of these
63
16377, Staff Report for the Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities and Intersection Level
of Service Waiver Text Amendments Page 16 of 16 amendments will support policy directives as the City continues to evolve existing and develop new methods to address the infrastructure challenges facing Bozeman. Video and meeting minutes from the July 25, 2016 City Commission meeting and Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion may be located at https://media.avcaptureall.com/session.html?sessionid=534882f7-b783-4911-875b-25e0a2147ff9.
APPENDIX C - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Noticing for amendments to the municipal code is provided by publication of a legal ad in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle. Publication for these amendments was done on September 18 and October 2, 2016. No public comments have been received as of the writing of this report.
FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by these amendments. Future fiscal effects are expected to be neutral.
ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Ordinance 1915
Ordinance 1959
July 25, 2016 Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion Materials
64
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 1 of 7
ORDINANCE NO. 1915
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA AMENDING SECTION 38.39.070, BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE5, TO
AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF FUNDS IN-LIEU OF CAPITAL FACILITIES TO
SATISFY REQUIREMENTS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE UNDER DEFINED
CIRCUMSTANCES.
WHEREAS, The City of Bozeman (the “City”) is authorized by the City Charter and
Montana law to regulate the subdivision of land to promote public health, safety and welfare and
otherwise execute the purposes of Sections 76-3-102 and 76-3-501, MCA; and
WHEREAS, The City is authorized by the City Charter and Montana law to adopt
zoning regulations and provide for the enforcement and administration of zoning regulations and
otherwise reasonably provide for the intentions of Section 76-2-304, MCA; and
WHEREAS, The City has had land development regulations since at least 1934 and has
amended them from time to time to respond to changes in state law, legal decisions, and
changing community needs ; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Legislative Findings:
65
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 2 of 7
1. The city relies upon the standards and definitions within chapter 38 to enable the
development of the city in a manner which avoids conflicts, enables public notice of and
comment on development which may affect residents and land owners, and provide
predictability in government actions.
2. Installation of streets, water and sewer mains, and storm water facilities are an essential
element of a functional city and the city’s land development regulations; and
3. The city also maintains streets, water and sewer mains, and storm water facilities; and
4. The city is obligated to be fiscally responsible stewards of the public’s assets and funds;
and
5. The installation of facilities by private development may be fiscally inefficient unless
coordinated with work by the city;
6. The provision for funds in-lieu of capital facilities enables an option in the evaluation of
the developer’s preference in mitigating impacts of development; and
7. It is beneficial to establish a mechanism by which private development can meet its
regulatory requirements in coordination with the city’s scheduling of maintenance or
expansion of public facilities; and
8. As the steward of the public infrastructure and the public safety it is appropriate that the
decision to accept funds in-lieu of capital facilities be at the sole discretion of the city.
Section 2
The Bozeman Municipal Code is amended by revising Section 38.39.070 to read as
follows:
Section 38.39.070. – Payment for extension of capital facilities.
A. Subdivision and site development may generate new demands on the city’s existing capital
facilities. The city may require a subdivider or other site developer to mitigate the impacts of
subdivision or site development by the extension of existing capital facilities or the
construction of new capital facilities. The review authority, established in 38.34.010, may
determine the construction of capital facilities should be coordinated with construction of
such projects by the city. In doing so, the review authority may determine that the payment or
66
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 3 of 7
the guarantee of payment for the construction of capital facilities are appropriate mechanisms
to coordinate with planned capital facility projects and to ensure public health, safety and
welfare. Payment of funds in-lieu of capital facilities is a method of meeting obligations for
installation of infrastructure. The review authority may, in its sole discretion, determine the
appropriate mitigation for any subdivision or site development impacts.
B. The city may require a subdivider or other site developer to pay or guarantee payment for
part or all of the costs of extending capital facilities related to public health and safety,
including but not limited to public roads or streets, sewer mains, water supply mains and
stormwater facilities for a subdivision or other site development. The costs must reasonably
reflect the expected impacts directly attributable to the subdivision or other site development.
The city may not require a subdivider or other site developer to pay or guarantee payment for
part or all of the costs of constructing or extending capital facilities related to education.
C. The review authority may accept direct payment of funds in-lieu of public street, water,
sewer, and stormwater capital facilities required by this code. Should the review authority
approve a request to pay funds in-lieu, a developer is not required to obtain a variance from
the requirement such facilities be constructed prior to development. A request to meet the
terms of chapters 38 and 40 by payment of funds in-lieu must be submitted by an applicant
prior to a determination of adequacy or any recommendation by an advisory body during
review of a development application. A request received after determination of adequacy or
advisory body recommendation is a material change to the application.
1. The review authority, established in 38.34.010, must evaluate proposals of funds in-lieu of
capital facilities and make a decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny such
requests. In evaluating a request to pay funds in-lieu, the review authority must consider
the following criteria:
a. Whether there is a danger to public health and safety of accepting funds in-lieu rather
than constructing the capital facilities;
b. Whether the work described in the proposal is part of a project scheduled for
construction on the most recently adopted capital improvement plan no later than
three (3) years from the date of submittal;
c. Whether a public work is pending which would substantially damage the work
otherwise required to be constructed;
67
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 4 of 7
d. Whether the installation of the otherwise required capital facilities would be disruptive
to planned public improvements;
e. Whether the city has made a determination of the reasonableness of the cost estimate of
the work; and
f. Whether the payment would enable a more efficient installation of required capital
facilities.
2. The request to pay fund in-lieu of capital facilities and the findings of the review authority
must be considered in any final action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a
development application.
3. All funds paid in-lieu must be held by the city in a fund dedicated to the work for which
the monies are paid.
4. As a condition of accepting funds in-lieu, the city may require the property owner to
execute a waiver of right to protest creation of a special improvement district, or other
legal instrument, assuring participation, on a fair share, proportionate basis, in future
capital facility improvements in the vicinity of the development proposal.
5. The city manager may adopt procedures by administrative order to implement this section.
6. The funds paid must include all component costs of the work deferred including but not
limited to design, permitting, traffic management, construction, and record drawings. The
funds paid must include a contingency amount to offset the uncertainty of cost estimating
and potential escalation of costs.
7. Issuance of a refund is a material modification of a development per 38.01.070. Refunds
of funds paid in-lieu are not available if:
a. A final plat which relied upon cash-in-lieu of facilities has been recorded;
b. If building permits for a non-subdivision development have been issued; or
c. If the City has published an invitation to bid on work which relies upon the paid
funds for project funding.
Section 3
Repealer.
68
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 5 of 7
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances
of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 4
Savings Provision.
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were
incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other
provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 5
Severability.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman
Municipal Code as a whole.
Section 6
Codification.
This ordinance shall be codified as indicated in Section 2.
Section 7
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
69
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 6 of 7
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the _____ day of ________________,
2016.
____________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
ROBIN CROUGH
City Clerk
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2016. The effective date of this ordinance is __________, __, 2016.
70
Ordinance No. 1915, Funds In-Lieu of Capital Facilities
Page 7 of 7
_________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
ROBIN CROUGH
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
71
Page 1 of 5
ORDINANCE NO. 1959
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA AMENDING 38.34.010 AND 38.24.060, BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE TO
PROVIDE STANDARDS FOR A WAIVER FROM THE LEVEL OF SERVICE
REQUIRED FOR INTERSECTIONS
WHEREAS, the Bozeman City Commission has established a level of service “C” as the
required level of service for intersections; and
WHEREAS, the Bozeman City Commission desires to provide the Director of Public
Works authority to grant waivers from the level of service if certain criteria are met.; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
That 38.24.060, BMC be amended as follows:
Sec. 38.24.060. - Street improvement standards.
A. All street improvements shall be designed by and constructed under the supervision of a
professional civil engineer, registered in the state, and shall meet or exceed the right-of-way
and construction standards adopted by the city (including but not limited to an adopted
transportation plan or specifications manual) and required for the type of street to be
constructed.
B. Plans and specifications for all public or private streets (including but not limited to curb,
gutter, storm drainage, street lighting and sidewalks), shall be provided to and approved by
the review authority. The developer shall provide professional engineering services for
construction inspection, post-construction certifications and preparation of Mylar record
72
Page 2 of 5
drawings. The plans and specifications shall be approved and a preconstruction conference
shall be conducted before any construction is initiated on the street improvements.
1. Surfacing. A pavement design report, based upon specific site soil data and design-year
traffic loading conditions, prepared by a professional engineer, or other qualified
professional approved by the review authority, shall be submitted to the review
authority for approval prior to plan and specification submittal if using the self-
certification process or with the plans and specifications if using the standard process.
Pavement design shall be in accordance with the city design standards and
specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard
specifications.
2. Alleys. In subdivisions where alleys are proposed, a 20-foot-wide right-of-way shall be
provided. The driving surface of the alley shall be 16 feet wide and shall be improved
with gravel.
a. Subdividers may elect to pave subdivision alleys provided that adequate
stormwater facilities are available.
b. Alleys shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the city design
standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works
standard specifications, and subject to approval by the city engineer.
c. Alleys used for backing under 38.25.020.D shall be designed to provide the
required aisle width.
2. Traffic progression. Traffic progression will be of paramount importance.
Consequently, all potential intersections with signals will be placed on quarter-mile
points unless otherwise approved by the review authority.
3. Level of service standards. All arterial and collector streets and intersections with
arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless
specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be
determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway
Capacity Manual. A development shall be approved only if the LOS requirements are
met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the
development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation
measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable
LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole.
a. Exception: If an intersection within the area required to be studied by section
38.41.060.A.12 does not meet LOS "C" and the intersection has been fully
constructed to its maximum lane and turning movement capacity, then an LOS of
less than "C" is acceptable.
b. Exception: The review authority may grant a waiver from a accept an LOS of less
than "C" at a specific intersection if the review authority determines:
1) granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be
contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest;
73
Page 3 of 5
2) improvements to the intersection to raise the overall level of service to a “C” or
better are currently scheduled for construction within three (3) years as shown
on the most recently adopted Transportation Capital Improvement Plan;
3) all right of way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been
obtained by the City or by the Montana Department of Transportation; and
4) the Commission has approved a financing plan for the intersection
improvements.
A waiver granted under this subsection is valid for a period of one (1) year from the
date of the waiver and applies only to the real property for which the waiver is
granted.
c. If the review authority does not grant a waiver from the level of service standard
under 38.24.060.B.4, a Developer may request a variance from the requirements of
this section. If a variance is granted from the requirements of this section, the
variance applies only to the specific development proposal for which it was granted
and shall not be considered evidence for any other development proposal.
(1) A variance to allow a lesser LOS was approved not more than two years prior
to the date an application for development being reviewed is determined to be
adequate for review;
(2) The request was made in writing with the application; and
(3) The circumstances are in the professional judgment of the review authority
substantially the same as when the variance was granted.
Section 2
That 38.34.010.E, BMC, be amended as follows:
E. Subject to 38.24.060, Tthe director of public works service shall review and upon
recommendation from the applicable advisory bodies as needed approve, approve with
conditions or deny the following development elements and processes:
1. A waiver of the requirement to extend water, sewer, and streets to the perimeter of
property being developed per section 38.23.070;
2. Water rights as authorized in 38.23.180;
3. Exceptions to the level of service standards established in 38.24.060.B.4;
4. Payment of funds in-lieu of capital facilities established in 38.39.070.C.
Section 3
Repealer.
74
Page 4 of 5
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances
of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 4
Savings Provision.
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were
incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other
provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 5
Severability.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman
Municipal Code as a whole.
Section 6
Codification.
This ordinance shall be codified as indicated in Section 1 – 2.
Section 7
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
75
Page 5 of 5
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on
first reading at a regular session held on the _____ day of ________________, 2016.
__________________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
ROBIN CROUGH
City Clerk
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of
Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2016. The effective date of this ordinance is __________, __, 201_.
__________________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
ROBIN CROUGH
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
76
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Craig Woolard, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action
MEETING DATE: July 25, 2016
KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Over the past several years, important improvements to planning and funding Bozeman’s
transportation system have occurred that include:
• A complete assessment of pavement condition.
• The local street reconstruction policy (and the reconstruction of two streets – Story and
Wallace).
• Additional funding for pavement maintenance.
• The creation of an arterial and collector district to provide funds, through a city-wide
assessment, to augment impact fees to complete construction of arterial and collector
roadways and intersections.
• Improved processes for proposing and approving entire corridor designs.
• An update of the transportation master plan (in progress).
The 5-year capital improvement plan (CIP) allocates impact fees and transportation assessments to projects that improve Bozeman’s transportation system. The improvements in transportation funding have allowed a CIP to be developed that addresses priority needs in the transportation
network rather than projects driven by specific development projects. Projects in the current
capital plan primarily address roadways and intersections at or beyond capacity with a failing
level of service.
17177
Despite improved funding and scheduled capital improvement, Bozeman’s transportation system
continues to be stressed by the pace of development. While the arterial and collector district
assessment, when combined with impact fees, improves transportation system funding, it only addresses a portion of the transportation network needs. Recent traffic counts and modelling
efforts conducted as part of the transportation master plan (TMP) update indicate a system with
multiple current and projected failures that remain as unfunded improvements.
Figure 1 shows the current level of service for 63 intersections that were evaluated within the TMP planning area. These data represent the most current system wide information available on
the performance of Bozeman’s network. 20 Intersections currently operate at or below the City’s
current level of service (LOS) “C” standard, 7 of which are to be upgraded per the City’s 5-year
CIP. Figure 2 shows the projected future (2040) conditions based on percentage growth rates
from travel demand modeling, assuming the current capital projects are completed. In 2040, 40 intersections in the planning area fail the LOS standard. These projections assume completion of
the projects in the current 5 year CIP. At the current pace of infrastructure improvements, and
assuming arterial and collector district funding and impact fee funding continue as planned and
keep pace with inflation, approximately half of the of the required intersection upgrades will
occur from 2021 to 2040.
Figure 1. Current Intersection Level of Service
17278
Figure 2. Projected Intersection Level of Service in the Year 2040
The current intersection LOS status of Bozeman’s transportation system, the requirements in the current development code and the pace of growth have created a situation where clear policy guidance from the Commission is required.
Bozeman’s Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 38.24.060.B.4 requires that all
intersections within one-half mile of a proposed development meet a LOS of “C” over a 15 year planning period. Should traffic studies indicate that that LOS cannot be met, the LOS deficiencies must be resolved before the development project can be completed.
When the data shown in Figures 1 and 2, the UDC language and the currently annexed land
available for development are considered together, clear implications for future development projects become apparent. The cumulative impact of delaying or deferring transportation
improvements while allowing development to occur has resulted in a situation where few new
development projects can occur without impacting an intersection that is failing or projected to
fail. Some, but not all, of the failing intersections are in the current 5-year CIP and will be
completed over the next several years. However, these projects are not keeping pace with new development. Many intersections that are impacted by development are not on the current 5
year CIP, and considering the number of projected intersections failures and the projected
funding for these improvements, many failing intersections may not be scheduled for
improvements for many years.
Public Works staff have been operating under the broad guidance to resolve infrastructure issues
for proposed developments. And as a result, creative solutions have facilitated private
development. Examples include allowing development (i.e., building permits) to proceed
17379
concurrently with roadway and intersection improvements. Provisions for these deviations from
the Unified Development Code (UDC) have been presented to the Commission as part of the
development review packages. The administrative authority provided to the Public Works
Director in section 38.34.010.E.3 of the UDC has also been used to facilitate development. The primary use of that discretion has been to consider any failing intersection identified and funded
on the 5-year CIP as meeting the LOS standard within the planning horizon thus eliminating the
need for that deficiency to be addressed by the proposed development.
To date, resolving development related transportation impacts using these approaches has been ad hoc. However, over the last several months, nearly every proposed development impacts
multiple failing intersections. The needed improvements are off-site improvements for nearly
every development. In most cases, at least one intersection is impacted where there is no
foreseeable plan to address the LOS deficiency. Based on the current pace of development and
the status of the transportation network, staff anticipates this trend to continue. Continued use of an ad hoc approach under these circumstances is inappropriate.
Following the UDC as written requires developers to remedy these deficiencies before
development could be approved. Most developers assert that (1) these additional costs cannot
be economically born by their projects alone and (2) they are only partially responsible for the deficiencies in the arterial and collector system and should not be required to remedy the entire
deficiency before development can occur. In the majority of cases, the impact of any single
proposed development is a small part of the overall traffic demand of an intersection. But the
cumulative impact of multiple projects has resulted in failing intersections and associated road
sections.
Both staff and the development community need to understand the will of the Commission as to
developments that impact failing intersections. Staff recommends that the Commission formally
adopt a policy that recognizes intersections and associated roadways on the 3 year CIP (funded
through a combination of impact fees and arterial and collector assessments) as meeting the LOS standard. Proposed development could proceed immediately without contributing to these off-
site improvements. Staff recommends allowing the Public Works Director to grant a LOS
waiver under these conditions and limit the use of variances to for truly exceptional
circumstances as they were intended. Draft ordinance language codifying this approach is
attached for your review. Upon receiving Commission direction and comment, staff will proceed with an ordinance change.
Beyond this policy recommendation, staff suggests the following as potential options for the
Commission to consider in providing direction.
• Adhere to the UDC as written and require failing intersections to be corrected before
development can occur (i.e., before development approval). This option will require the
developer to either wait for improvements to be made as part of the capital program, or
remedy the failure before development can proceed. For some developments, we
anticipate that the required improvements will be off site and in some cases required right
of way may not be dedicated.
17480
• Relax the LOS standard for intersections and allow development to proceed without
addressing current LOS deficiencies. For intersections that are complete, relaxation of
the LOS standard acknowledges that no further improvements are planned for completed
intersections. Relaxing LOS standards on incomplete intersections defers improvements
to the future with no formal plan to remedy the deficiencies may make completion of the
facility more difficult in the future and effect future impact fee assessments.
• Develop a cash-in-lieu of infrastructure program that allows the developer to make a
proportional contribution to the required improvements before significant building can
occur. Such a program could accelerate capital improvements in some situations. But
establishing a simple and easily administered program will be challenging because
varying patterns and status of development make every situation unique. And a cash-in-
lieu program that funds only partial intersection improvements will still require funding
from impact fees and/or the arterial and collector assessments that is inadequate to meet
the projected needs.
• Create Special Improvement Districts (SID) to address deficiencies before development
can proceed. In addition to being administratively burdensome, SID’s can be protested
and it is not clear what the extent of an SID would be for an arterial and/or collector
intersection. Due to the administrative challenges, historically only one intersection
upgrade has been completed in the City using an SID.
• Increase the level of funding in existing programs.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: As discussed above.
FISCAL EFFECTS: No changes to existing transportation funding mechanisms or levels are
being proposed as part of the staff policy recommendation. Commission direction on how to proceed with unfunded improvements could have significant staffing and financial implications.
ALTERNATIVES:
Adopt Staff recommendations.
Other alternatives as suggested by the Commission.
Attachments: Draft Ordinance Language for Section 38.24.060 – Street Improvement
Standards
I. Suggested adjustments to 38.34.010:
E. Subject to 38.24.060, Tthe director of public service shall review and upon recommendation from the applicable advisory bodies as needed approve, approve with conditions or deny the following
development elements and processes:
1. A waiver of the requirement to extend water, sewer, and streets to the perimeter of property
being developed per section 38.23.070;
2. Water rights as authorized in 38.23.180;
17581
3. Exceptions to the level of service standards established in 38.24.060.B.4.
II. Suggested adjustments to 38.24.060:
Sec. 38.24.060. - Street improvement standards.
A. All street improvements shall be designed by and constructed under the supervision of a
professional civil engineer, registered in the state, and shall meet or exceed the right-of-way and construction standards adopted by the city (including but not limited to an adopted transportation
plan or specifications manual) and required for the type of street to be constructed.
B. Plans and specifications for all public or private streets (including but not limited to curb, gutter, storm
drainage, street lighting and sidewalks), shall be provided to and approved by the review authority. The developer shall provide professional engineering services for construction inspection, post-
construction certifications and preparation of Mylar record drawings. The plans and specifications shall be approved and a preconstruction conference shall be conducted before any construction is
initiated on the street improvements.
1. Surfacing. A pavement design report, based upon specific site soil data and design-year traffic
loading conditions, prepared by a professional engineer, or other qualified professional approved by the review authority, shall be submitted to the review authority for approval prior to
plan and specification submittal if using the self-certification process or with the plans and specifications if using the standard process. Pavement design shall be in accordance with the
city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications.
2. Alleys. In subdivisions where alleys are proposed, a 20-foot-wide right-of-way shall be provided. The driving surface of the alley shall be 16 feet wide and shall be improved with gravel.
a. Subdividers may elect to pave subdivision alleys provided that adequate stormwater facilities are available.
b. Alleys shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard
specifications, and subject to approval by the city engineer.
c. Alleys used for backing under 38.25.020.D shall be designed to provide the required aisle width.
3. Traffic progression. Traffic progression will be of paramount importance. Consequently, all
potential intersections with signals will be placed on quarter-mile points unless otherwise approved by the review authority.
4. Level of service standards. All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and
collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be
approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole.
a. Exception: If an intersection within the area required to be studied by section 38.41.060.A.12 does not meet LOS "C" and the intersection has been fully constructed to
its maximum lane and turning movement capacity, then an LOS of less than "C" is
acceptable.
b. Exception: Pursuant to 38.24.060, he Director of Public Works review authority may grant a waiver from the accept an LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if the Director
determines:
17682
1) granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest;
2) improvements to the intersection to reduce the overall level of service to a “C” or better are currently scheduled for construction within three (3) years as shown on the most
recently adopted Transportation Capital Improvement Plan;
3) all right of way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been obtained
by the City or by the Montana Department of Transportation;
4) the Commission has approved financing plan for the intersection improvements; and
5) the Director of Administrative Services has indicated all financing for the intersection improvements has been obtained.
A waiver granted under this subsection is valid for a period of one (1) year from the date of the waiver and applies only to the property for which the waiver is granted.
c. If the Director of Public Works does not grant a waiver from the level of service standard under 38.24.060.B.4, a Developer may request a variance from the requirements of this
section. If a variance is granted from the requirements of this section, the variance applies only to the specific development proposal fro which it was granted and shall not be
considered evidence for any other development proposal.
(1) A variance to allow a lesser LOS was approved not more than two years prior to the date an application for development being reviewed is determined to be adequate for
review;
(2) The request was made in writing with the application; and
(3) The circumstances are in the professional judgment of the review authority substantially the same as when the variance was granted.
17783