Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-05-06 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Appeal.doc ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE By acclamation, the committee appointed Director of Planning and Community Development Epple as acting Chairman. Chairman Epple called the meeting to order at 9:16 a.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Andrew Epple, Chairman and Director of Planning and Community Development Debbie Arkell, Director of Public Service Neil Poulsen, Chief Building Officer Chuck Winn, Fire Chief Others Present Chris Saunders, Impact Fee Coordinator and Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development Tim Cooper, Assistant City Attorney Kimberly Kenney-Lyden, Recording Secretary Mr. Ron Milledge Mrs. Pat Milledge ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT Acting Chairman Andrew Epple called for public comment on any matter of concern to the Impact Fee Review Committee not on the agenda. Mr. Ron Milledge first commented on the waste management issues and read an article in the newspaper stating their funds are misappropriated. The money coming in from waste management fees are all earmarked. Mr. Milledge asserted himself by noting the collection of money for waste management being used for any other purpose is viewed as ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’. Mr. Milledge also noted that he fully supports Debbie Arkell’s position on this subject. Mr. Epple suggested to Mr. Milledge that this issue is unrelated to his appeal and should be addressed at the next City Commission meeting. ITEM 3. APPEAL OF IMPACT FEE DETERMINATION FOR RON MILLEDGE, 604 GOLD AVENUE ITEM 3A. Presentation of appeal by Impact Fee Coordinator (5 Minutes) Chris Saunders presented the subject of this appeal by first stating that when the City of Bozeman created its impact fee program, the City knew there would be disagreements and therefore created an outlet to file an appeal. This is the public’s opportunity to file an appeal of a decision on impact fees related to their property. The decisions of this committee may be appealed to the City Commission, which would consider the issues and render a final decision. Mr. Saunders noted the property in question for this appeal is 604 Gold Avenue. Mr. Saunders stated that the property owner, Mr. Ron Milledge, is filing this appeal asserting that the current impact fees should not apply to his property. Mr. Saunders stated Mr. Milledge received the staff’s position on the appeal prior to this meeting. ITEM 3B. Presentation by Appellant (10 Minutes) Mr. Epple advised Mr. Milledge that he has ten minutes to present his case to the members of the Committee. Mr. Milledge commented that his problem is not with any members of the committee, but it is with the Code itself. He noted it is somewhat confusing in that it says one thing one place and a complete different term someplace else. Mr. Milledge recognized it’s difficulty to write a code that lacks ambiguity and contradiction. He also recommended that the Code could use quite a bit of work. Mr. Milledge noted that it is especially hard for someone to understand this code if you’re not familiar with water and sewer in the first place. He commented that he has worked with the City of Bozeman’s water and sewer departments several times in the past and is deeply familiar with what is involved. Mr. Milledge made reference to the current water impact fees and the Code related to this fee is based on the size of the water meter. He stated the confusion with the code is that this is just one section of the code and yet when you move into the appeal process, the does not mention anything about water meters, it only makes mention of a ‘water tap’. Mr. Milledge questioned the difficulty with the ‘water tap’. Mr. Milledge gave an analogy where he’d need to install a main water and sewer line for his property. This would yield a large ditch in the middle of the street where there would be collection of water at the bottom of that ditch. This hole would have to be reconciled, the ditch can not be just covered up with asphalt and realized later that he would have to install a water tap. Mr. Milledge noted the issue with installing a water tap would have to be dealt with prior to completion of ditch coverage, otherwise there is an eleven-foot set back for this. Mr. Milledge also stated that if the water and sewer pipes are not at least six feet below ground, the water will freeze. The water at his property is currently connected to the City’s water and sewer lines. He noted there is an existing two-inch piece of pipe that is attached to the water in the current valve and he can just run that to the proposed building. Mr. Milledge stated his position is for concern for himself and his wife. They have been paying SID’s for the past twenty years and noted the fees have been in the thirty thousand dollar range. He also agreed that these fees went towards city streets and was aware that he was getting a return on his vested SID’s to the City of Bozeman. Mr. Milledge stated in 1980, these fees were the only way to pay for City improvements. However, he commented that in 1996, the City created what is called ‘Impact Fees’. These new fees are completely different and leave the maintenance of water and sewer responsibilities on the property to the owner and funds for maintaining this come out of their pockets. Mr. Milledge then noted his distress in stating that after he invests his money, his time and energy, the City of Bozeman now has to come in and inspect his work. Mr. Milledge questioned the members of the Committee on the knowledge of the depth of work involved with self maintenance or upgrades. He clearly noted that funding for any work done in upgrades or maintenance is from his pocket and he does not ask the City of Bozeman for any reimbursement. Mr. Milledge asserted he pays for it all and yet still pays for his proportionate share of water, sewer, fire, and street fees. He also commented on giving this infrastructure to the city would yield no gain. Mr. Milledge addressed his concern to the members of the committee in providing infrastructure, his subdivision. He noted that if the Beaumont Center Subdivision needed a new water tap, the City of Bozeman is going to have to dig up the city streets, dig down to the main water and sewer lines, insert a tap and then insert a valve. Mr. Milledge commented the City would then have to run thirty-inch piping from the street. He relayed his concern for his own property by noting the question of needing a new water tap on his property would take funds away from him and on top of that, he would have to pay the City the extra impact fees for this. Mr. Milledge expressed his inability to afford these extra charges. He also noted to the committee that he is satisfied with the ¾ inch water tap already in place. Mr. Milledge relayed his concern to Mr. Cooper. Mr. Milledge noted the four pages of State Statutes in what the City of Bozeman is allowed to charge for impact fees. He recorded the statute suggests the City can only charge the actual cost of construction and parts, not the $5,000 dollar impact fee he’s trying to appeal. Mr. Milledge noted Section 3.24.070.F of the Bozeman Municipal Code makes him exempt from Impact Fees by stating the statue: “Alteration or expansion of an existing building that does not require an additional or larger water tap”. Mr. Milledge noted the standard tap is a ¾ inch water tap. His building is in no need for alteration or expansion, therefore he should be exempt from these impact fees according to this statute. He commented the water meter is necessary for entrance to a building just as well as the sewer is necessary for this water to exit. Mr. Milledge strongly stated his concern in being exempt from water impact fees should automatically include being exempt from sewer impact fees since they are a combined function. Mr. Ron Milledge asked Mr. Chris Saunders to confirm he has a water meter currently in place at the site. Mr. Saunders stated he will address the issue upon his turn for rebuttal. Mr. Milledge noted his compliance in having water service and commented that John Alston noted he has a Rockwell water meter in place with water and sewer running to his building at 604 Gold Avenue. He affirmed it is observable and therefore does not have to pay the impact fees. Mr. Milledge adamantly stated there is more than just footing on this property and commented on the letter he had written to Mr. Saunders which listed the many on-site improvements to this property; concrete footings, water and sewer connections to the existing building, and fire system improvements. This letter detailed a concise intent to build. Mr. Milledge objected to Mr. Saunders statement in regards to there were only footings at his Gold Avenue site. Mr. Milledge requested the members of the Impact Fee Appeal committee to take into consideration the easement or ‘turnaround’ he has dedicated to the City of Bozeman which is a five-thousand dollar piece of property. He noted there was no financial gain in this dedication and felt strongly that he had done his part to compensate for paying impact fees on the Gold Avenue property. Mr. Milledge closed his argument. Mr. Winn requested a brief recess to take a call regarding fire candidate testing then underway. Upon his return, Mr. Epple called the meeting back to order. ITEM 3C Presentation of Staff position by Impact Fee Coordinator (10 Minutes) Mr. Chris Saunders noted the property at 604 Gold Avenue began construction in the 1980’s and had a hiatus is distinct and interesting than most of the properties we see day to day. He noted the definition of the term “development” includes whatever creates an additional demand for public service. Mr. Saunders noticed this site does have some added property value from previous work completed. He confirmed that he did go to the property with Ron Milledge the previous Friday and can confirm there is a water meter on this property. Mr.Saunders commented on the differences between SID’s and impact fees. He acknowledged that this project is complicated historical issues. Mr. Saunders observed the water service currently located on the property will be given consideration by the staff. He noted that n staff’s opinion, there has not been a historical demand for sewer service. Mr. Saunders commented this facility at one point was a concrete batch plant and though the cement hopper is not there, the bins are still present. There is no evidence of a water bill, but there is a water meter so there is sufficient evidence that the water was capable of being used. Mr. Andy Epple queried Mr. Saunders whether he thought Mr. Milledge should receive an exemption from the water impact fees. Mr. Chris Saunders responded he felt Mr. Milledge did deserve an exemption from the water impact fees. He noted whether one uses a hundred gallons a day, or twenty gallons a day, the size of ¾ inch water meter will stay the same. Mr. Saunders addressed his concern to the committee that there will be some new demand for the water system, but an incremental new use of this system. He believed the description of the impact fees ordinance do apply to Mr. Milledge’s property on 604 Gold Avenue. Mr.Winn questioned Mr. Chris Saunders on the concrete slabs installation in 1986 at this property and whether there were ‘footings’ in place as well. Mr. Saunders noted these slabs were 8 by 6 foot concrete floors adjacent to the building. Foundation walls are still in place for the main building. Mr. Winn queried Mr. Saunders as to what building is on the 604 Gold Avenue site currently. Mr. Saunders replied the east side of the gravel bin is the only spot where there is an existing building. The proposed new building will be larger. Ms. Debbie Arkell questioned Mr. Saunders as to where the water meter is located on this property to which he responded it was in the shed and this shed was used to keep the existing water lines from freezing. Mr. Saunders noted there is no current sewer usage, only rough-in in the foundation. Mr. Neil Poulsen queried Mr. Saunders whether the site and proposed building had water and sewer taps to clarify which service Mr. Milledge currently has. Mr. Saunders responded by stating there are water and sewer lines to this property. He added, however there is no demand on the water service or sewer system until someone has established a use of a site which has never occurred here. Mr. Poulsen then asked Mr. Ron Milledge if his sewer tap runs onto his property and into his building, to which Mr. Milledge confirmed that the sewer line does in fact run into his future building and the City of Bozeman has already inspected it. Mr. Milledge noted there may be some gaps in the building department’s records, but the sewer line does run through his property and does not stop at his property line. Mr. Chris Saunders noted that impact fees are structured for development of large scale system projects. He added the determining factor for the city to use impact fees would be the size and scale of the project, similar to the replacement of the sewer line on Rouse Ave. Mr. Saunders noted the sewer line main replacement on Rouse was due to a larger demand for sewer use. Ms. Debbie Arkell questioned Mr. Saunders to clarify that a new or larger water tap would be cause for increased use of water. Mr. Saunders confirmed. Mr. Milledge commented on the impact fee code and noted the city can use the funds it collects on any improvements within the City of Bozeman, however the fees collected from the Beaumont Subdivision should be going directly to improvements that would benefit this subdivision. Mr. Milledge referenced the large scale subdivision at Cattail Lake. He noted the demand for larger uses of water and sewer would require the need for an impact fee because of its size and the effect the traffic in Cattail Lake would have on our city. Mr. Milledge quoted from the Duncan Study which indicated if the city has not grown, there is no need for a larger usage of city services. He then noted his property is not the magnitude of Cattail Lake Subdivision. Mr. Epple asked Mr. Milledge what his property taxes reflected for the Gold Avenue site. Mr. Milledge noted that when he put a silo on this property, it was taxed, however when it was an empty lot, there was a minimal amount of taxes he had to pay. He then commented the improvements he has made on this property have now greatly increased his taxes. Ms. Debbie Arkell queried Mr. Milledge as to the date the concrete batch plant ceased operations. Mr. Milledge responded by stating he did not want to misrepresent himself to the committee and clarified this plant was never in operation at any time. Mr. Epple confirmed his statement was consistent with the lack of water bills to this address. Mr. Epple questioned Mr. Chris Saunders if the Beaumont Subdivision Mr. Milledge referenced earlier had been factored into the Duncan Study. Mr. Saunders stated the Duncan Study did take into account the Beaumont Subdivision which was platted and partly built out. He also noted the water fees in this study were based on the records of number and sizes of water meters and current demand. Mr. Epple then queried Mr. Saunders to clarify if Mr. Ron Milledge’s water meter was factored into this study. Mr. Saunders responded there was no clear answer, only to determine there is not evidence or record of a water bill. Director of Public Services Debbie Arkell commented when the impact fee was established, there ended up being a slew of building permits. She then quoted code, “Persons who file for a building permit should not be liable for impact fees if project is done prior to target date”. Director Arkell noted that if they did not begin construction, then their building permits were void if construction did not commence, however if the construction had commenced, they would be given a waiver. Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders noted Mr. Milledge made efforts to comply to some degree by submitting plans, but never drew a building permit. Ms. Arkell queried Mr. Neil Poulsen as to the time period allowed before a building permit was considered void. Mr. Poulsen answered one hundred-eighty days, then the client is allowed to file for an extension. Chairman Andrew Epple questioned the members as to whether or not Mr. Milledge needs to file for a new building permit due to the time line allowed before the permit was considered void. Mr. Epple noted that Mr. Milledge was unable to complete this project in the time frame allowed. Mr. Saunders added that this is one of factors that give unique qualities to this project. Chairman and Director of Planning Andrew Epple asked the members of the committee to determine if the impact fees are applicable in this case, to which Mr. Saunders commented he will have to re-evaluate the use of the property for determination of impact fees if they are found to apply. Mr. Saunders also noted the impact fee structure is composed of four separate fees and in Mr. Milledge’s case, they should be broken down separately. Mr. Epple noted that under the circumstance where building permits were granted in the 1980’s and the approval has lapsed, a new building permit is required. The need for building permits triggers the need to pay impact fees. Mr. Milledge noted that within the code, the definition of ‘New Development’ is a group of buildings, not a single building. He continued to say any improvements to the existing building would only be an improvement and not a development. Mr. Milledge also noted the terms ‘improvement’ and ‘development’ are synonymous in the Webster’s dictionary, however the code book clearly differentiates between the two. Ms. Debbie Arkell responded there is a specific definition within the ordinance and it is clearly stated. Mr. Milledge interjected by stating he does recognize this fact, however he noted the code needs to viewed in it’s entirety and not pulled apart sentence by sentence to appease any one party. Chief Building Officer Neil Poulsen asked Mr. Milledge if the water meter on his site is locked and if the water could run. Mr. Ron Milledge noted there is a nozzle and tap at this site. He also commented there is another fitting and valve that can supply water to a four-unit warehouse stating everything is in place. Mr. Saunders commented he believes water impact fees do apply, however the existing water meter on the site may reduce or offset the fees. Mr. Milledge then asked the members of the committee to also consider his exemption from sewer impact fees since water and sewer are closely related and he has not used the water service on this site. Mr. Epple noted that each fee will be addressed separately. Fire Chief Winn requested a brief recess to take a call regarding fire candidate testing. Upon his return, Chairman and Director of Planning Mr. Epple called the meeting back to order. ITEM 3D Decision by Committee Chairman Epple called for a motion to consider the sewer impact fee. Director of Public Services Debbie Arkell noted the code is clear that requires impact fees to be paid if there was a need for connection to city services, however they (Mr. Milledge) have a current connection and therefore the impact fees do not apply. Ms. Arkell motioned to have Mr. Milledge exempt from waste water impact fees since there is an existing sewer connection for the foundation on this site and future building. She noted code 3.24.080.F.1a to reference for this motion. Motion seconded by Fire Chief Chuck Winn. Chairman Andrew Epple commented that he did not support this finding and feels that when this building is completed, it will create new sewer and water demands. Mr. Epple referenced the Duncan Study and noted the sewer usage was not accounted for in these prior studies. He commented he believes Mr. Milledge is confused between installation costs and actual impact fees. Chairman Epple stated he will not be supporting the motion. Question was called on the motion to approve the exemption/ waiver for sewer impact fee. Three ayes, one nay, motion passed. Fire Chief Chuck Winn told the committee he would make a motion on the waiver for the fire impact fee. Mr. Winn noted since there is only a foundation at the site, there is no fire impact offset to future development. When Mr. Milledge constructs a new building it will create a new problem for the fire department. He stated although concrete will not burn, if a new building is constructed, it will require EMS services. Fire Chief Winn moved to deny a waiver for fire impact fees. Motion seconded by Officer Neil Poulsen. Tim Cooper clarified to committee members that this motion, if approved, will deny the appellant’s request to be exempt from fire impact fees. Question was called on the motion to deny a waiver/exemption for fire impact fees. Motion to deny a waiver/exemption for fire impact fees passed unanimously. Ms. Debbie Arkell made a motion to grant the waiver/exemption for water impact fees since the applicant already has a water line and water meter in place. Fire Chief Chuck Winn seconded the motion. Chairman and Director Mr. Epple cannot support the motion to approve and noted that even though there is a water meter, it was not apparently calculated into the original specifications nor ever utilized. Question was called on the motion to approve a waiver/exemption for water impact fees. Three ayes and one nay. Motion to approve a waiver/exemption for water impact fees passed. Director of Public Services Debbie Arkell noted the dedication of the easement in the Beaumont Subdivision was done well before 1996 and the turnaround is needed at this time. Ms. Arkell noted these types of credits have to be on a capital improvement program and must be of a nature to be considered to be community-wide improvements. Director Arkell commented even if this easement was done today, Mr. Milledge would not be eligible for this credit due to the fact the improvements are for local, not community-wide improvements. She noted that even though this property has not had much use in the past, building on the existing slab would create a new demand on the streets of Bozeman with increased traffic. Debbie Arkell motioned to deny the waiver for street impact fees. Chairman Andrew Epple seconded the motion. Question was called on the motion to deny a waiver/exemption for street impact fees. Motion to deny a waiver/exemption for street impact fees passed unanimously. Chairman Andrew Epple thanked Ron and Pat Milledge for their participation. Director of Public Services Debbie Arkell noted to Mr. and Mrs. Milledge they have ten working days to file an appeal of the Committee’s decision to the City Commission. An appeal to the City Commission can be requested within 10 days of the written decision at the committee. Mr. Milledge questioned Ms. Arkell as to whether the City Commission can overturn the Impact Fee Appeal Committee’s decision. Ms. Arkell confirmed the Commission can overturn it, however it would be in their best interest to not appeal the granted waivers of water and sewer impact fees. She then thanked Ron Milledge for his research to which Mr. Milledge noted his appreciation to all members of the committee. Mrs. Milledge thanked the entire committee as well. ITEM 4 ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn the meeting. All say aye. Development Impact Fee Review Committee appeal meeting adjourned at 10:51 a.m. _________________________________ Andrew C. Epple, Director City of Bozeman Planning and Community Development