HomeMy WebLinkAboutBID Minutes 11-16
Downtown Business Improvement District
Board Meeting Minutes
November 16, 2016
Attending: Mike Basile, Eric Bowman, Erik Nelson, Eric Sutherland, Jolee Berry, Ileana
Indreland, Susan Neubauer, Chris Naumann
Absent: Jeff Krauss
Public Comments: None
Disclosures: None
Minutes
ACTION: Mike Basile moved to approve the minutes from October as presented.
Eric Bowman seconded the motion.
All voted in favor.
Finance Report
Chris presented the financials as of November 16, 2016. He noted that revenues were tracking
as expected with just over $67,300 received. On the expense side of the ledger, nothing
unexpected to report as all expenses were on budget. Chris reported between the checking
account and CDs, total cash equaled $108,772. The board had no further questions about the finance report.
Discussion and Decision Item
Flower Basket Size Upgrade
Chris informed the board that he and staff had met with Renee from Oak Gardens to recap the
flower basket season. One of the topics of discussion is how most of the 14” side street baskets struggle every year. They never grow and bloom like the 18” baskets. The conclusion was that
the small size is the problem. The only solution would be to upgrade the 14” baskets to the 18”
size.
Chris proposed that since we own 68 14” baskets we could upgrade them over a three year
period. The board all agreed that it would be preferable to upgrade them all at once…for the 2017 season. They asked Chris to come up with some options to sell or get credit for the 14”
baskets to offset the costs of purchasing the 18” baskets.
Chris said he would report back with a solution at a future meeting.
Floodplain Appeal Cost Share Chris presented the board with a cost share proposal (see below) for the Bozeman Creek FEMA
floodplain appeal. He said after further discussions with the City Public Works Department it
became clear the downtown boards would need to cover the appeal costs above the City’s
$25,000 allocation. Chris said the TIF Board approved $41,674 of funding at their meeting the
day before. As previously discussed, the board agreed that making a fiscal commitment to the FEMA appeal would be important to limit the negative impacts to future downtown development.
ACTION: Mike Basile moved to approve $20,000 for the Bozeman Creek FEMA
Floodplain appeal contingent on the proposed project budget of $86,674 was all the funding needed to formally submit the appeal. Ileana Indreland seconded the motion.
All voted in favor.
************************************
TO: BID Board
TIF Board
FR: Chris Naumann DA: 14 November 2016 RE: Downtown Bozeman FEMA Appeal Cost Share Proposal
FEMA Appeal Analysis Scope
Below are some excerpts from the City of Bozeman Engineering Department’s memo to the BID and TIF
boards as presented and discussed at the October meetings. The excerpts describe the analysis that would
be required to formally prepare and submit an appeal to FEMA.
2D Appeal of FIS The federal FIS adoption process provides a formal 90-day appeal opportunity whereby the technical information of
the FIS can be challenged if better data or methodology is brought forward that more accurately simulates flooding behavior. The City believes map accuracy can be improved by utilizing a more sophisticated two-dimensional
flood model approach. A preliminary 2D evaluation was prepare by Allied Engineering to determine the potential
mapping differences this approach has when compared to the conventional 1D approach employed by FEMA in the new FIS. Results of this evaluation indicate that the high hazard inundation area is reduced due to dispersion of
floodwater into City streets that is not accounted for in FEMA’s current 1D model. This 2D model approach may render fewer buildings into the floodplain than FEMA’s 1D approach. See Attachment D. Thus, fewer properties may carry the mandate to obtain flood insurance, or fall under the City’s local floodplain development regulations,
if the appeal is successful. The goal of the 2D appeal is to map flood risk in the downtown area as accurately as
possible utilizing best available technology such that the costs to comply with ongoing insurance mandates and floodplain regulations reflect the actual flood risk.
It is anticipated that the FEMA’s formal appeal process will kick off in February or March 2017. The deadline for appeals is 90 days later. There is sufficient time to prepare a comprehensive appeal data package, but work must
begin relatively soon.
Appeal Consultant Selection
Costs to prepare the requisite 2D data package and supporting documentation are substantial. It is estimated that the appeal, together with further evaluation Mill Ditch flood hazard mitigation potential, will cost from $80k -
$100k to complete. This expense is for the community to bear. An RFP for the mitigation and appeal project has
been developed and is advertised. See Attachment F. The City aims to have a contract for this project in front of the City Commission for approval on November 28, 2016 and for work to begin immediately thereafter. The
Commission will be asked to approve a budget amendment as this project was not anticipated to occur when the budget was prepared last year. Because the map appeal and the flood hazard mitigation evaluation directly benefit the downtown area, a cost-share with the DBP will be requested. Due to time constraints for the appeal, the cost-
share discussion will likely conclude after work begins on the project, presuming the City Commission authorizes
the budget amendment and contract. The Commission will be notified that the cost-share discussion will occur with the DBP.
Appeal Cost The cost of the FEMA appeal is $86,674 according to a itemized budget prepared by Allied Engineering.
Cost Share Proposal
The City of Bozeman has committed $25,000 to the project and is requesting the TIF and BID boards
contribute the balance of $61,674. This is roughly a 30% - 70% cost share.
My assessment of the TIF and BID boards financial capacities, I suggest the following funding
contributions:
TIF Board $41,674 BID Board $20,000
Of course the exact amounts of funding will be discussed, finalized and approved by each board at their
respective November meetings.
Timeline The funding decisions by the TIF and BID boards must occur at their meeting on Tuesday November 15th
and Wednesday November 16th.
Letter documenting each board’s financial contribution will need to submitted to the City Engineers on Thursday November 17th.
This timing would allow the City Commission packet for the appeal to be submitted to the City Clerk by
the deadline on Friday November 18th to be on the CC agenda for the meeting on November 28th.
Downtown Policy Discussion Chris reminded the board that the City Commission would be holding a policy discussion about the Downtown Plan and further private development. He said that staff would be providing an
overview of downtown planning history, current regulations, and established design guidelines.
Chris said that Chris Kukulski, City Manager, had asked him to contribute to the staff
presentation by providing a detailed overview of the 2009 Downtown Improvement Plan. Chris reiterated that the goal would be to emphasize why downtown is and should be regulated differently than other commercial districts—North 7th, North 19th and West Main.
Chris emphasized the importance of BID board members attending and even providing public
comment in support of the Downtown Plan and long-standing vision for Bozeman’s urban core.
Amplified Music Issues Chris presented the following summary of downtown amplified music issues and corresponding
code provisions as requested by Ileana Indreland.
BID Board Memo Amplified Music Issues and Code Provisions
Background There are two common instances of amplified music downtown: musicians performing and businesses
playing music on outdoor speakers.
The only regular street musician is Elijah who seasonally plays on Main Street between Tracy and Black Avenues.
The following businesses regularly play amplified outdoor music:
1. Rockin R Bar 2. Toro Mexican Restaurant
3. Bagels Etc/Bar IX
4. Sassy Sisters
5. Downtown Ridge Athletic Club
This is a partial list as there may be other businesses that have and use outdoor speakers.
UDC Analysis
The applicability of the noise ordinance (posted below) is dependent on the phrase “unreasonably
disrupts” a person’s “comfort, repose, health, peace, or safety”. I have requested the City Attorney’s Office to interpret how the UDC applies to music being played over
outdoor speakers downtown. I have not received a response yet.
• ARTICLE 6. - NOISE[5]
• Sec. 16.06.010. - Purpose.
The city commission hereby enacts the ordinance from which this article is derived to
protect, preserve, and promote the health, safety, welfare, peace, and quiet of the citizens of
the city through the reduction, control, and prevention of raucous noise, or any noise which
unreasonably disturbs, injures, or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, or safety of reasonable persons of ordinary sensitivity.
(Ord. No. 1539, § 1(8.30.010), 9-24-2001)
• Sec. 16.06.020. - Findings.
A. Loud and raucous noise degrades the environment of the city to a degree that:
1. It may be harmful to the health, welfare, and safety of its inhabitants and visitors;
2. It may interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property reasonably
expected in an urban environment;
3. It may cause or aggravate health problems.
B. Both the effective control and the elimination of loud or raucous noise are essential to
the health and welfare of the citizens and visitors of the city as well as to the conduct of the
normal pursuits of life, including recreation, work and communication.
C. The use of sound amplification equipment creates loud and raucous noise that may, in a particular manner and at a particular time and place, substantially and unreasonably invade the privacy, peace, and freedom of the citizens of and visitors to the city.
D. Certain short-term easing of noise restrictions is essential to allow the construction and
maintenance of structures, infrastructure, and other elements necessary for the physical
and commercial vitality of the city.
(Ord. No. 1539, § 1(8.30.020), 9-24-2001)
• Sec. 16.06.030. - Scope.
This article applies to the control of all sound originating within the jurisdictional limits of
the city.
(Ord. No. 1539, § 1(8.30.030), 9-24-2001)
• Sec. 16.06.050. - Loud noises prohibited.
A. It is unlawful to perform any of the following acts anywhere within the city's jurisdictional limits:
1. Sound amplifying equipment. Except as authorized in section 16.06.070.A.5
(permitted outdoor events), using operating or permitting the use of any radio
receiving set, musical instrument, "boombox," CD Player, radio, television, phonograph
or other machine or device for the production or reproduction of sound in such a manner as to disturb the quiet, comfort or repose of any normally sensitive and reasonable person.
5. Loudspeakers, amplifiers, public address systems. Except as authorized in section
16.06.070.A.5 (permitted outdoor events),, the use or operation of any loudspeaker,
amplifier, public address system or any similar instrument or equipment whose purpose
is to amplify or make sound louder in a fixed or movable position or mounted upon any sound truck for the purpose of giving instructions, directions, talks, addresses, lectures,
or transmitting music to any person or assemblages, in or on any public right-of-way
within city areas in such a manner as to disturb the quiet, comfort or repose of any
normally sensitive and reasonable person.
(Ord. No. 1539, § 1(8.30.050), 9-24-2001)
Tenant Mix Discussion
The board agreed to look at meeting in December specifically to have a discussion about tenant
mix. Chris said he would send out a couple meeting options to find what would work for the
greatest number of board members.
**Meeting was adjourned at 1:15pm**