HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Hearing on Impact Fee Appeal No. 1102.pdf
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Tim McHarg, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Conduct hearing on Impact Fee Appeal 1102, regarding procedural flaws in
Impact Fee Credit Request 1101, and consider whether to waive Criterion 5 regarding timing of
application for credits, and consider whether to direct the holding of a public hearing to amend
the water and transportation impact fee capital improvement programs.
MEETING DATE: August 8, 2011
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item
RECOMMENDATION: After consideration of the facts of the appeal decide whether or not to
uphold the appeal.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Option 1) * Having heard and considered the evidence and public testimony, I move to uphold the determination of
the impact fee coordinator.
Option 2) * Having heard and considered the evidence and public testimony, I move to waive criterion 5, Timely
Request, for Impact Fee Credit Request 1101 and direct staff to advertise a public hearing to consider amending the
street and water impact fee capital improvement programs to include the items included in Impact Fee Credit Request
1101, and direct the applicant to provide actual cost of work evidence in support of the requested amounts.
BACKGROUND: An appeal of an administrative determination regarding impact fees has
been received. The appeal is from an administrative decision relating to the timeliness of and
qualification for an impact fee credit request submitted on March 7, 2011 by Norton Properties
and the J&D Family Partnership. The Impact Fee Coordinator has determined that the credit is
disqualified from consideration by several criteria established in Chapter 3.24, Impact Fees,
Bozeman Municipal Code. The appeal and associated material was first considered by the
Development Impact Fee Review Committee established in Sections 3.24.040.C and 3.24.110.I,
BMC. The appeal was considered by the Committee on April 25, 2011, 10:00 am, in the
Madison Room of City Hall. The committee upheld the original decision of the Impact Fee
Coordinator finding that there was no error in the administration of the ordinance. As provided
by ordinance, the applicant now appeals to the City Commission for consideration of the matter.
The hearing on the appeal was continued and rescheduled to August 8th due to an unexpectedly
heavy meeting on May 23rd when the appeal was first scheduled to be heard.
The appellant has requested impact fee credit for:
Page 1 of 8
36
Page 2 of 8
1) the installation of 1,520 feet of a 12 inch diameter water main which is larger than the
minimum 8 inch diameter water main;
2) the installation of an additional lane (center turn) of 1,320 feet length in W. Babcock
Street west of Cottonwood Avenue; and
3)variable widening of Cottonwood Avenue for approximately 1,303 feet.
Materials Provided with this Memo
This listing is for both staff and appellant materials.
Appeal to the Commission (Item 1)
Development Impact Fee Review Committee decision findings and minutes (Item 2)
Development Impact Fee Review Committee packet materials (Item 3)
• Decision Letter – basis for the appeal (Item A)
• Chapter 3.24, BMC (Item B)
• Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, MCA (Item C)
• Capital Improvement pages water (Item D)
• Capital Improvement pages streets (Item E)
• Figure 9-2 Existing Major Street Network and Future Right-of-Way Corridor Needs
(Item F)
• Future 2025 Water System map (Item G)
• Application for impact fee credits (Item H)
• Appeal and supporting documentation (Item I)
Additional cost information received on July 14, 2011 (Item 4)
Requirements for Impact Fee Credits
Background:
The City’s impact fee program is established in Title 3, Chapter 24 of the Bozeman Municipal
Code. This local ordinance implements impact fees under the authorizing statute of Title 7,
Chapter 6, Part 16 of the Montana Code Annotated. Impact fees may only be charged for and
used for capacity expanding capital improvements of infrastructure. Maintenance activities or
other non-capacity expanding expenditures are not allowed.
Section 7-6-1601 defines a capital improvement as:
(1) (a) "Capital improvements" means improvements, land, and equipment with a useful life of
10 years or more that increase or improve the service capacity of a public facility.
(b) The term does not include consumable supplies.
The City’s major street system is established through the long range transportation planning
process. The map of the major street network is shown on Figure 9-2, Existing Major Street
Network and Future Right-Of-Way Corridor Needs. West Babcock west of Cottonwood Avenue
is not shown as a collector street, although it has been constructed to that standard at the City’s
direction and will serve that purpose. Cottonwood Avenue is shown as a principal arterial.
The City’s future water main network is established through the long range water facility
planning process. The map of the future water system in 2025 shows locations for water main
expansions or extensions. The Babcock 12 inch diameter water main extension is shown as item
P-568.
A mechanism for impact fee credits is required under state law and is implemented under Section
3.24.100, BMC. To qualify for an impact fee credit, a capacity expanding infrastructure
37
Page 3 of 8
construction project must meet five criteria. If the criteria are not met then the project is not
qualified and may not be impact fee funded. Some of the criteria are adopted to ensure correct
use of impact fees, and some are to help ensure that the impact fee program can operate smoothly
and effectively. All of the criteria must be satisfied. Analysis of each of the criteria for each of
the credit elements is provided below.
Criteria 1) Capacity Expanding (beyond project related). Impact fees solely exist to create more
infrastructure capacity to serve new development. This criteria ensures that a project is not
maintenance or other ineligible activity. The measure of capacity expansion varies by
infrastructure type. This is not a locally generated or flexible criteria.
Request 1. The minimum pipe size for water mains is 8 inch diameter and the
development installing the pipe does not have extraordinary demand that requires more
than the minimum diameter. The 12 inch main called for in the facility plan is larger than
the minimum. Therefore, there is excess capacity beyond incidental capacity.
Request 2. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and
sidewalks on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost
structure and impact fees or credits are not given for these minimum components.
Addition of center turn lanes and lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if
they are not project related improvements.
Request 3. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and
sidewalks on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost
structure and impact fees or credits are not given for these minimum components.
Addition of center turn lanes and lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if
they are not project related improvements. Project related improvements as defined in
ordinance are not eligible for impact fee credits.
Criteria 2) Not Project Related. This criteria separates those capacity expanding improvements
which are necessary for the minimum service to the installing development from those which
expand capacity in the overall infrastructure systems. Compliance with minimum standards are
included as “project related” improvements. Examples of project related improvements includes
local streets and minimum diameter water mains. This is not a locally generated or flexible
criteria.
Further, an impact fee is defined in Section 7-6-1601, MCA as:
“(5) (a) "Impact fee" means any charge imposed upon development by a governmental
entity as part of the development approval process to fund the additional service capacity
required by the development from which it is collected. An impact fee may include a fee
for the administration of the impact fee not to exceed 5% of the total impact fee collected.
(b) The term does not include:
(i) a charge or fee to pay for administration, plan review, or inspection costs
associated with a permit required for development;
(ii) a connection charge;
(iii) any other fee authorized by law, including but not limited to user fees, special
improvement district assessments, fees authorized under Title 7 for county, municipal,
and consolidated government sewer and water districts and systems, and costs of ongoing
maintenance; or
38
Page 4 of 8
(iv) onsite or offsite improvements necessary for new development to meet the safety,
level of service, and other minimum development standards that have been adopted by
the governmental entity.”
Consistent with the state authorizing language the City excludes things which are included in
subsection 5 b iv from consideration as a credit. These are defined as project related
improvements in Section 3.24.040, BMC, see attached Item B. A project related improvement is
not limited to the surveyed boundaries of a subdivision. Work adjacent to, leading to, or
otherwise outside the surveyed boundaries may also meet the definition of project related
improvement. As noted above, the statutory definition of an impact fee specifically allows for the
offsite improvements to be excluded from consideration as an impact fee under certain
conditions. Improvements necessary for a development to meet minimum level of service
standards are also excluded from considerations.
The City’s transportation system for which impact fees are collected and expended is defined in
Section 3.24.040.N as: “ ‘Transportation system’ means capacity-adding improvements to
collectors or arterial roads of three lanes or more, which are included on the 2001 Greater
Bozeman Transportation Plan Update or the City’s impact fee capital improvement program, and
which will benefit new development as required by law and this chapter. The transportation
system includes only those bicycle and pedestrian facilities built in conjunction with and
included in a capacity-adding transportation facility improvement otherwise eligible for impact
fee funding pursuant to the terms of this chapter. The “transportation system” does not include
project-related improvements.”
Request 1. As noted under Criteria 1 above, the installing development does not have
demand for more than the minimum water main size. Therefore, the oversizing of the
water main beyond the eight inch minimum size is not project related.
Request 2. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and
sidewalks on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost
structure and impact fees or credits are not charged or given for these minimum
components. Addition of center turn lanes and lanes beyond the first two may potentially
qualify if they are not project related improvements. A full analysis of project related
components has not been conducted at this point. Should the appeal be granted then it
will occur and any project related elements will be excluded from the credit.
Request 3. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and
sidewalks on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost
structure and impact fees or credits are not given for these minimum components.
Addition of center turn lanes and lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if
they are not project related improvements. Project related improvements as defined in
ordinance are not eligible for impact fee credits. Should the City Commission choose to
waive Criterion 5, then detailed evaluation of project related and capacity expanding
costs will occur and any project related elements will be excluded from the credit.
Criteria 3) CIP Listed. The City prepares a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to schedule the
construction of infrastructure. The CIP provides a means to describe future work and its
sequencing that can be available both to staff and the public. The CIP coordinates multiple
funding sources, including impact fees, to support construction of major projects. The CIP
contains a subset of the possible capacity expanding projects described in the facility plans. As a
rolling five year document, the CIP provides a near term understanding of expected expansion
work. The City Commission may amend the CIP at their discretion to add or remove projects or
change the sequence in which they may occur.
39
Page 5 of 8
The capital improvements program (CIP) is an essential component of an impact fee program. It
provides for transparency of fund allocation and use, reasonable balancing of incomes and
expenditures for the program to ensure financial accountability, and it provides a means for the
public (including developers) to propose and comment on projects for impact fee funding. Since
not all the money in an impact fee program is received at once it is necessary to have a means to
rationally use the funds. The City updates its CIP annually through a public process with
multiple opportunities for public participation. The City has amended its CIP on more than one
occasion to support a specific project in response to changing development needs and the request
by a developer.
By state law there must be a part of the City’s budget which allocates funds to capacity
expanding projects. The City uses the CIP for this purpose. As the City Commission is the only
entity authorized to commit funds, the CIP is adopted by the City Commission and may only be
amended by them. The statute requirement is:
“7-6-1602 (2) (k) have a component of the budget of the governmental entity that:
(i) schedules construction of public facility capital improvements to serve projected
growth;
(ii) projects costs of the capital improvements;
(iii) allocates collected impact fees for construction of the capital improvements; and
(iv) covers at least a 5-year period and is reviewed and updated at least every 2 years.”
The CIP is a document with a purpose and character distinct from other City documents, not
merely a summation. It is reviewed and adopted by the Commission as a specific action. Most of
the projects listed originate within long range facility planning studies. Listing within the CIP is
a deliberate action. The CIP brings together and harmonizes multiple funding sources and is not
limited solely to use of impact fees.
Request 1. The extension of the water line is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item D. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
Request 2. The installation of W. Babcock Street west of Cottonwood Avenue is not
listed on the impact fee capital improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is
attached as Item E. Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 3. The widening of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
Criteria 4) CIP Funded. The impact fee CIP lists funding for capacity expanding projects over
the next five years. Sometimes the City includes projects on the CIP which do not have full funds
allocated to them. This may be due to a project spanning multiple years with initial phases at the
latter end of the CIP, as an advisory of what projects are being considered as the next
possibilities for funding, or to hold an option open for the Commission to adjust the CIP
scheduling as needs in the community change. Projects which have no allocated funds need to be
moved into the funded schedule before they are available for impact fee credits.
Request 1. The extension of the water line is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item D. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
40
Page 6 of 8
Request 2. The installation of W. Babcock Street west of Cottonwood Avenue is not
listed on the impact fee capital improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is
attached as Item E. Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 3. The widening of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
Criteria 5) Timely Request (before construction or dedication). The City Commission has
stewardship for the paid impact fee funds and the City’s infrastructure. To enable the
Commission to act deliberately in establishing the impact fee work program, the provisions of
Chapter 3.24, BMC include a requirement that an applicant must first get approval for impact fee
credits prior to undertaking work for which impact fee credits are desired. This enables the City
Commission to manage the financial commitments of the City and the overall health of the
impact fee program without unexpected surprises and funding commitments which interfere with
high priority projects. The impact fee program is required by ordinance to keep a positive
projected fund balance at the end of the five year time horizon of the CIP. The timing
requirement and related definition are presented below.
Section 3.24.100.B. “In order to obtain a credit against development impact fees
otherwise due, an applicant must submit a written offer to dedicate to the City specific
parcels of qualifying land or easements, or to acquire or construct specific improvements
to the major street system or the City fire protection, water, or wastewater systems in
accordance with all applicable State or City design and construction standards, and must
specifically request a credit against such development impact fees. Such written request
must be made on a form provided by the City, must contain a statement under oath of the
facts that qualify the applicant to receive a credit, must be accompanied by documents
evidencing those facts, and must be filed not later than the initiation of construction of
improvements or the acceptance by the City of land dedications, or the applicant's claim
for the credit shall be waived. The granting of credit shall be approved by the City
Commission.” (emphasis added)
3.24.040.L "Initiation of construction" means the date of the preconstruction meeting
with the City Engineer or his/her designee, or the date of the first visible change in the
physical condition of the improved site caused by the first person furnishing services or
materials to effect construction of the improvement, whichever occurs first.
In the past, the City Attorney has noted that Criteria 5 is a protection for the City in its
administration of the impact fee program. As noted above, it assists in maintaining an orderly
and healthy impact fee program. However, as the criterion is for the benefit of the City, the City
Commission, and only the City Commission, may choose to waive this criteria.
Request 1. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of
the preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
Request 2. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of
the preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
Request 3. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of
the preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this
criteria is not met.
41
Page 7 of 8
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:
1) Will the City Commission waive Criterion 5 regarding the timing of application for
impact fee credit?
2) Will the City Commission consider amending the impact fee CIP to address the
deficiency for Criteria 3 and 4?
3) Cost of the requested impact fee credit. A specific number has been provided with the
original credit request for the water line of $20,065. On July 14th a more specific cost was
provided for the transportation credit request of $689,250.01. Some additional data is needed
in support of that figure. To expend fees or award credits actual costs for the work are
needed. If the Commission decides to waive Criteria 5 and sets a hearing to possibly amend
the CIP the applicant will need to provide complete actual cost figures for the work. Final
documentation of paid amounts for both water and transportation will be needed before
issuance of any funds or credits.
In order to grant the appeal and award credit the City Commission must decide favorably on both
of these unresolved issues. Staff recommends that, for clarity of both the discussion and motions,
the City Commission consider each element of the request individually. As described in their
minutes, this recommended procedure reflects the same methodology used by the Development
Impact Fee Review Committee when they took action.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Granting the appeal will commit impact fee funds to pay for the requested
impact fee credit. Exact amount will depend on which if any of the requested credits the
Commission decides to allow and final calculation of allowable costs. The requested credits
apply to both transportation and water impact fees. The requested amount for the water is
presently $20,065. The updated requested amount for transportation is $689,250.01. The amount
for transportation may include some items which are not eligible. Final cost figures have not yet
been determined. The magnitude of the request for transportation may influence other projects
currently listed on the transportation impact fee CIP.
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Will the City Commission waive Criterion 5 regarding the timing of application for
impact fee credit?
• Waiving Criterion 5 does not commit the City to awarding the requested credits.
Waiver of Criterion 5 removes a procedural barrier to consideration and allows
the Commission to consider the individual merits of the elements of the proposal.
• If Criterion 5 is not waived then the initial determination, which is the subject of
the appeal, is upheld and the credit application and appeal have completed
processing and no impact fee credit will be awarded.
2) Will the City Commission consider amending the impact fee CIP to address the
deficiency for Criteria 3 and 4?
• If the Commission directs Staff to prepare an item to be considered for inclusion
on the CIP this does not commit the Commission to award the requested credits. It
would trigger the public notice and documentation processes allowing Staff
analysis of, and public comment on, whether each item meets Criteria 1 and 2. A
public hearing would be scheduled during which each possible amendment to the
CIP will be considered by the Commission and an opportunity for the public to
participate in the decision is provided. This is the time when the bulk of the
42
Page 8 of 8
Part of
material in the packet is considered to determine whether there is a basis to
consider an element of the credit request as capacity expanding beyond the
minimum standards needed for the development. The Commission would then act
to formally amend, or not amend, the CIP to include one or more of the requested
credit elements. This would address Criterion 3.
o the amendment to the CIP to include an additional item would also
include the funding for that item. This would address Criterion 4.
Depending on the balance in the impact fee fund for a specific type of
infrastructure the inclusion of additional item(s) may require removal of
another project from the CIP.
• If the Commission does not direct Staff to begin the process to consider am
the CIP then the credit process is terminated as the credit request fails two of the
required criteria.
ending
Attachments:
Appeal to the Commission (Item 1)
Development Impact Fee Review Committee decision findings and minutes (Item 2)
Development Impact Fee Review Committee packet materials (Item 3)
• Decision Letter – basis for the appeal (Item A)
• Chapter 3.24, BMC (Item B)
• Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, MCA (Item C)
• Capital Improvement pages water (Item D)
• Capital Improvement pages streets (Item E)
• Figure 9-2 Existing Major Street Network and Future Right-of-Way Corridor Needs
(Item F)
• Future 2025 Water System map (Item G)
• Application for impact fee credits (Item H)
• Appeal and supporting documentation (Item I)
Additional cost information received on July 14, 2011 (Item 4)
Report compiled on: July 20, 2011
43
44
45
46
1
Development Impact Fee Review Committee Meeting– April 25, 2011
MINUTES
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REVIEW COMMITTEE
APRIL 25, 2011
ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Arkell called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m., in the Madison Meeting Room, City
Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana.
Members Present Staff Present
Debbie Arkell Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director/Impact
Jason Shrauger Fee Coordinator
Bob Risk Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Tim Cooper, City Attorney
Members Absent
Tim McHarg
Visitors Present
Tom Henesh
ITEM 2: APPEAL OF IMPACT FEE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION REGARDING
APPLICATION FOR IMPACT FEE CREDIT FOR J&D FAMILY LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP/NORTON PROPERTIES, INC.
Impact Fee Coordinator Chris Saunders noted the City had adopted Impact Fees consistent with
State statute including the five criteria used in evaluation of impact fee credit requests; two
statutory requirements and three adopted by City Ordinance. He stated the three local criteria
were the primary subject of the appeal; he added the purpose of the committee was to evaluate
whether or not the Impact Fee Coordinator had made an error in evaluating the request against
the criteria. He stated the City Commission would be the ultimate approval authority. He stated
he would be available to answer any questions.
Tom Henesh stated he appreciated the Committee’s time to review the request. He stated the
improvements to Babcock Street and Cottonwood Road had added a huge burden to two
developments even though they attempted to share in those improvements. He stated an
oversized water main instead of the minimum size needed to serve the developments had been
required and installed as well as the installation of an additional lane on Babcock Street and two
lanes of Cottonwood Road. Mr. Henesh stated the applicant felt that the City should partner with
the development with regard to the timeline of the improvements as well as to offset the costs of
those improvements because the City made it clear to Mr. Billion that it wanted his dealerships
to remain in the city and that they would assist in streamlining the process for that to happen. He
stated they were requesting credit for street improvements and the water main in Babcock Street,
and noted that their traffic studies showed that the traffic generated by the developments did not
warrant the additional lanes for Babcock or Cottonwood.
47
2
Development Impact Fee Review Committee Meeting– April 25, 2011
Chairperson Arkell asked Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders what had been required with
approval of the project. Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders responded that the segment of
Babcock Street had not existed and was required as new construction with curb, gutter, and
sidewalk on the south side and curb and gutter on the north side, as well as the widening of
Cottonwood Road. Mr. Saunders noted the first two lanes of any road are the 2 standard lanes of
a Local street which would not require the collection of impact fees so are not eligible for Impact
Fee credits. The installation of the third lane in Babcock Street made the standard of the street
operate as a Collector even though the street was not identified as a collector street in the
Transportation Plan. He noted the map would be changed to show this section as a collector
street when the Transportation Plan is next updated.
Mr. Saunders stated Cottonwood Road clearly met the Arterial Street standard and the roadway
had been previously constructed on the west side of the right of way. The City had included a
condition of approval for the proposal to include the construction of the east half of Cottonwood
Road. Chairperson Arkell asked from where to where on Cottonwood the improvements had
been required. Impact Fee Coordinator Chris Saunders responded it was essentially between
Babcock Street and Fallon Street. Mr. Henesh added it ended up being roughly 150 feet north
and south of each intersection. Chairperson Arkell stated there were a number of developments
on the east side of Cottonwood and asked if any of them had been required to install
improvements on Cottonwood Road. Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders responded he did not
think they had been required to make any improvements to Cottonwood. Chairperson Arkell
asked when the current proposal was submitted in relation to the other sites along the east side of
Cottonwood. Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders responded some had been proposed before and
some after the current proposal.
Mr. Risk asked how the other developments avoided improving Cottonwood and Babcock.
Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders responded that in some cases the development was very small
(single structure on a single lot) as well as the opportunity when two major subdivisions develop
at once to gather information on current traffic counts to update the street designation. Attorney
Cooper added that some developments were deferred in their required improvements but would
still be required to install said improvements based on the conditions of approval (such as Petra
Academy). Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders stated the criteria deficiencies were fundamentally
the subject of the appeal and in many cases the developer has already paid impact fees that
would be used for Cottonwood at a later date; the flaw was in the timing of the work with regard
to listing Cottonwood on the CIP. He added there was no argument that there was need for
additional roadway.
Mr. Risk asked if the developer had been notified of the opportunity to include the improvements
on the CIP. Mr. Henesh responded there had been no notice given on inclusion of the
improvements on the CIP, but a payback district had been mentioned. Chairperson Arkell asked
if the payback had been pursued. Mr. Henesh responded he had not pursued the payback beyond
preparing maps and discussing them with City Staff Engineer Bob Murray and added he felt the
ball had been dropped by both the developer and the City with regard to the possibility of impact
fee credits.
48
3
Development Impact Fee Review Committee Meeting– April 25, 2011
Mr. Shrauger clarified that the charge of the Committee was to either find that there had been an
error made by Staff or if Staff had made the correct determination. Impact Fee Coordinator
Saunders responded Mr. Shrauger was correct. Chairperson Arkell stated the standard condition
had been modified after the last impact fee appeal to include that the credit needed to be
requested prior to construction of the improvements. Mr. Shrauger suggested taking each item
one at a time to forward recommendation to the City Commission. Mr. Risk added that it
seemed Staff was technically correct, but there were extenuating circumstances for the site; the
ordinance requirements had been technically followed. Mr. Henesh stated the applicant was
requesting the inclusion of the project on the CIP and to ask forgiveness with regard to the
timeliness of the request. Chairperson Arkell asked when the preconstruction meeting had been
held. Mr. Henesh responded it had been held in March of 2010. Chairperson Arkell asked if
there were waivers of right to protest special improvement districts for the other developments in
the area. Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders responded it was standard practice to require those
waivers upon annexation of the property. Chairperson Arkell stated she was attempting to figure
out why the east side of Cottonwood did not have to participate in those improvements. Mr.
Henesh responded they were smaller scale developments.
Mr. Risk asked if Planning Staff agreed with the information the applicant had provided. Impact
Fee Coordinator Saunders responded Staff agreed with regard to the larger size water main, but
further data will be necessary with regard to the other items. Mr. Henesh apologized for the lack
of further data and stated the rest of the required information was still out for bid; he added he
thought the City could establish the data in comparison to other projects within the City. Impact
Fee Coordinator Saunders stated the actual costs would need to be provided instead of an
estimate. Chairperson Arkell responded the City had always paid on the actual expense.
MOTION: Mr. Shrauger moved, Mr. Risk seconded, to confirm the administrative
determination by Staff regarding the impact fee credit request related to the Babcock Street water
main was correct, the project was partially capacity expanding, was not CIP listed or funded, and
was not a timely request and therefore did not meet three of the five review criteria as set forth in
the ordinance. The motion carried 3-0.
MOTION: Mr. Shrauger moved, Mr. Risk seconded, to confirm the administrative
determination by Staff regarding the impact fee credit request related to the Babcock Street
widening was correct, the project was partially capacity expanding, was not CIP listed or funded,
and was not a timely request and therefore did not meet three of the five review criteria as set
forth in the ordinance. The motion carried 3-0.
MOTION: Mr. Shrauger moved, Mr. Risk seconded, to confirm the administrative
determination by Staff regarding the impact fee credit request related to the Cottonwood Avenue
widening was correct, the project was partially capacity expanding, was not CIP listed or funded,
and was not a timely request and therefore did not meet three of the five review criteria as set
forth in the ordinance. The motion carried 3-0.
Impact Fee Coordinator Saunders stated the applicant would be notified of the date and time of
the next steps needed to set up the public hearing before the City Commission.
49
4
Development Impact Fee Review Committee Meeting– April 25, 2011
ITEM 3: PUBLIC COMMENT
Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is
the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the
Bozeman Impact Fee Review Committee. Please limit your comments to three minutes.
There was no public comment forthcoming.
ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Committee at this time, Chairperson Arkell
adjourned the meeting at 10:50 a.m.
_____________________________________ _____________________________________
Debbie Arkell, Chairperson Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning
Impact Fee Advisory Committee Director/Impact Fee Coordinator
City of Bozeman Dept of Planning & Community Development
City of Bozeman
50
community planning zoning subdivision
review
annexation historic preservation neighborhood planning urban design GIS
CITY OF BOZEMAN
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building
20 East Olive Street
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230
phone 406-582-2260
fax 406-582-2263
planning@bozeman.net
www.bozeman.net
MEMORANDUM
TO: DEBBIE ARKELL, JASON SCHRAUGER, BOB RISK
CC: TIM MCHARG, TIM COOPER
FROM: CHRIS SAUNDERS
RE: NORTON/J&D IMPACT FEE APPEAL IFA-1102
DATE: APRIL 25, 2011
An appeal of an administrative determination regarding impact fees has been received. The appeal and
associated material is being transmitted to the Impact Fee Review Committee established in Sections
3.24.040.C and 3.24.110.I, BMC. The appeal application and supporting material is attached. The appeal
will be considered by the Committee on April 25, 2011, 10:00 am, in the Madison Room of City Hall.
The appeal is from an administrative decision relating to the timeliness of and qualification for an
impact fee credit request submitted on March 7, 2011 by Norton Properties and the J&D Family
Partnership. The Impact Fee Coordinator has determined that the credit is disqualified from
consideration by several criteria established in Chapter 3.24, Impact Fees, Bozeman Municipal Code. A
copy of the denial letter is attached as Item A. A copy of Chapter 3.24 is attached as Item B. An analysis
of the required criteria is provided later in this memo and is summarized in the letter which is the subject
of the appeal. A description of the appeal process in contained in Subsection 3.24.110.I.
The appellant has requested impact fee credit for:
1) the installation of 1,520 feet of a 12 inch diameter water main which is larger than the
minimum 8 inch diameter water main;
2) the installation of an additional lane (center turn) of 1,320 feet length in W. Babcock Street
west of Cottonwood Avenue; and
3)variable widening of Cottonwood Avenue for approximately 1,303 feet.
The Impact Fee Review Committee will make a determination as to whether staff erred in applying the
ordinance. If the Appellant is not satisfied with the decision of the Committee they may make a further
appeal to the City Commission.
Impact fees are authorized by and governed by Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, MCA. See attached
Item C for the text of the statute. The purpose of impact fees is to provide necessary infrastructure in
support of safe development. The statute limits the use of impact fees to the expansion of capacity in
capital improvements.
Materials Provided with this Memo
This listing is for both staff and appellant materials.
51
Page 2 of 6
• Decision Letter – basis for the appeal (Item A)
• Chapter 3.24, BMC (Item B)
• Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, MCA (Item C)
• Capital Improvement pages water (Item D)
• Capital Improvement pages streets (Item E)
• Figure 9-2 Existing Major Street Network and Future Right-of-Way Corridor Needs (Item F)
• Future 2025 Water System map (Item G)
• Application for impact fee credits (Item H)
• Appeal and supporting documentation (Item I)
Requirements for Impact Fee Credits
Background:
The City’s impact fee program is established in Title 3, Chapter 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code.
This local ordinance implements impact fees under the authorizing statute of Title 7, Chapter 6, Part 16
of the Montana Code Annotated. Impact fees may only be charged for and used for capacity expanding
capital improvements of infrastructure. Maintenance activities or other non-capacity expanding
expenditures are not allowed.
Section 7-6-1601 defines a capital improvement as:
(1) (a) "Capital improvements" means improvements, land, and equipment with a useful life of 10 years
or more that increase or improve the service capacity of a public facility.
(b) The term does not include consumable supplies.
The City’s major street system is established through the long range transportation planning process.
The map of the major street network is shown on Figure 9-2, Existing Major Street Network and Future
Right-Of-Way Corridor Needs. West Babcock west of Cottonwood Avenue is not shown as a collector
street, although it has been constructed to that standard at the City’s direction and will serve that
purpose. Cottonwood Avenue is shown as a principal arterial.
The City’s future water main network is established through the long range water facility planning
process. The map of the future water system in 2025 shows locations for water main expansions or
extensions. The Babcock 12 inch diameter water main extension is shown as item P-568.
A mechanism for impact fee credits is required under state law and is implemented under Section
3.24.100, BMC. To qualify for an impact fee credit, a capacity expanding infrastructure construction
project must meet five criteria. If the criteria are not met then the project is not qualified and may not be
impact fee funded. Some of the criteria are adopted to ensure correct use of impact fees, and some are to
help ensure that the impact fee program can operate smoothly and effectively. All of the criteria must be
satisfied. Analysis of each of the criteria for each of the credit elements is provided below.
Criteria 1) Capacity Expanding (beyond project related). Impact fees solely exist to create more
infrastructure capacity to serve new development. This criteria ensures that a project is not maintenance
or other ineligible activity. The measure of capacity expansion varies by infrastructure type. This is not a
locally generated or flexible criteria.
Request 1. The minimum pipe size for water mains is 8 inch diameter and the development
installing the pipe does not have extraordinary demand that requires more than the minimum
diameter. The 12 inch main called for in the facility plan is larger than the minimum. Therefore,
there is excess capacity beyond incidental capacity.
52
Page 3 of 6
Request 2. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and sidewalks
on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost structure and impact
fees or credits are not given for these minimum components. Addition of center turn lanes and
lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if they are not project related improvements.
Request 3. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and sidewalks
on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost structure and impact
fees or credits are not given for these minimum components. Addition of center turn lanes and
lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if they are not project related improvements.
Project related improvements as defined in ordinance are not eligible for impact fee credits.
Criteria 2) Not Project Related. This criteria separates those capacity expanding improvements which
are necessary for the minimum service to the installing development from those which expand capacity
in the overall infrastructure systems. Compliance with minimum standards are included as “project
related” improvements. Examples of project related improvements includes local streets and minimum
diameter water mains. This is not a locally generated or flexible criteria.
Further, an impact fee is defined in Section 7-6-1601, MCA as:
“(5) (a) "Impact fee" means any charge imposed upon development by a governmental entity as
part of the development approval process to fund the additional service capacity required by the
development from which it is collected. An impact fee may include a fee for the administration
of the impact fee not to exceed 5% of the total impact fee collected.
(b) The term does not include:
(i) a charge or fee to pay for administration, plan review, or inspection costs associated with a
permit required for development;
(ii) a connection charge;
(iii) any other fee authorized by law, including but not limited to user fees, special
improvement district assessments, fees authorized under Title 7 for county, municipal, and
consolidated government sewer and water districts and systems, and costs of ongoing
maintenance; or
(iv) onsite or offsite improvements necessary for new development to meet the safety, level of
service, and other minimum development standards that have been adopted by the governmental
entity.”
Consistent with the state authorizing language the City excludes things which are included in subsection
5 b iv from consideration as a credit. These are defined as project related improvements in Section
3.24.040, BMC, see attached Item B. A project related improvement is not limited to the surveyed
boundaries of a subdivision. Work adjacent to, leading to, or otherwise outside the surveyed boundaries
may also meet the definition of project related improvement. As noted above, the statutory definition of
an impact fee specifically allows for the offsite improvements to be excluded from consideration as an
impact fee under certain conditions. Improvements necessary for a development to meet minimum level
of service standards are also excluded from considerations.
The City’s transportation system for which impact fees are collected and expended is defined in Section
3.24.040.N as: “ ‘Transportation system’ means capacity-adding improvements to collectors or arterial
roads of three lanes or more, which are included on the 2001 Greater Bozeman Transportation Plan
Update or the City’s impact fee capital improvement program, and which will benefit new development
as required by law and this chapter. The transportation system includes only those bicycle and pedestrian
facilities built in conjunction with and included in a capacity-adding transportation facility improvement
53
Page 4 of 6
otherwise eligible for impact fee funding pursuant to the terms of this chapter. The “transportation
system” does not include project-related improvements.”
Request 1. As noted under Criteria 1 above, the installing development does not have demand for
more than the minimum water main size. Therefore, the oversizing of the water main beyond the
eight inch minimum size is not project related.
Request 2. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and sidewalks
on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost structure and impact
fees or credits are not given for these minimum components. Addition of center turn lanes and
lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if they are not project related improvements. A
full analysis of project related components has not been conducted at this point. Should the
appeal be granted then it will occur and any project related elements will be excluded from the
credit.
Request 3. The minimum street section is two lanes with associated curb, gutters, and sidewalks
on either side. This minimum section is not included in the impact fee cost structure and impact
fees or credits are not given for these minimum components. Addition of center turn lanes and
lanes beyond the first two may potentially qualify if they are not project related improvements.
Project related improvements as defined in ordinance are not eligible for impact fee credits.
Should the appeal be granted then it will occur and any project related elements will be excluded
from the credit.
Criteria 3) CIP Listed. The City prepares a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to schedule the
construction of infrastructure. The CIP provides a means to describe future work and its sequencing that
can be available both to staff and the public. The CIP coordinates multiple funding sources, including
impact fees, to support construction of major projects. The CIP contains a subset of the possible capacity
expanding projects described in the facility plans. As a rolling five year document, the CIP provides a
near term understanding of expected expansion work. The City Commission may amend the CIP at their
discretion to add or remove projects or change the sequence in which they may occur.
The capital improvements program (CIP) is an essential component of an impact fee program. It
provides for transparency of fund allocation and use, reasonable balancing of incomes and expenditures
for the program to ensure financial accountability, and it provides a means for the public (including
developers) to propose and comment on projects for impact fee funding. Since not all the money in an
impact fee program is received at once it is necessary to have a means to rationally use the funds. The
City updates its CIP annually through a public process with multiple opportunities for public
participation. The City has amended its CIP on more than one occasion to support a specific project in
response to changing development needs and the request by a developer.
There must, by state law, be a part of the City’s budget which allocates funds to capacity expanding
projects. The City uses the CIP for this purpose. As the City Commission is the only entity authorized to
commit funds, the CIP is adopted by the City Commission and may only be amended by them. The
statute requirement is:
“7-6-1602 (2) (k) have a component of the budget of the governmental entity that:
(i) schedules construction of public facility capital improvements to serve projected growth;
(ii) projects costs of the capital improvements;
(iii) allocates collected impact fees for construction of the capital improvements; and
(iv) covers at least a 5-year period and is reviewed and updated at least every 2 years.”
54
Page 5 of 6
The CIP is a document with a purpose and character distinct from other City documents, not merely a
summation. It is reviewed and adopted by the Commission as a specific action. Most of the projects
listed originate within long range facility planning studies. Listing within the CIP is a deliberate action.
The CIP brings together and harmonizes multiple funding sources and is not limited solely to use of
impact fees.
Request 1. The extension of the water line is not listed on the impact fee capital improvement
program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item D. Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 2. The installation of W. Babcock Street west of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the
impact fee capital improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E.
Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 3. The widening of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E. Therefore, this criteria is
not met.
Criteria 4) CIP Funded. The impact fee CIP lists funding for capacity expanding projects over the next
five years. Sometimes the City includes projects on the CIP which do not have full funds allocated to
them. This may be due to a project spanning multiple years with initial phases at the latter end of the
CIP, as an advisory of what projects are being considered as the next possibilities for funding, or to hold
an option open for the Commission to adjust the CIP scheduling as needs in the community change.
Projects which have no allocated funds need to be moved into the funded schedule before they are
available for impact fee credits.
Request 1. The extension of the water line is not listed on the impact fee capital improvement
program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item D. Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 2. The installation of W. Babcock Street west of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the
impact fee capital improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E.
Therefore, this criteria is not met.
Request 3. The widening of Cottonwood Avenue is not listed on the impact fee capital
improvement program. A copy of the current CIP is attached as Item E. Therefore, this criteria is
not met.
Criteria 5) Timely Request (before construction or dedication). The City Commission has stewardship
for the paid impact fee funds and the City’s infrastructure. To enable the Commission to act deliberately
in establishing the impact fee work program, the provisions of Chapter 3.24 include a requirement that
prior to undertaking work for which impact fee credits are desired an applicant must first get approval
for impact fee credits. This enables the City Commission to manage the financial commitments of the
City and the overall health of the impact fee program without unexpected surprises and funding
commitments which interfere with high priority projects. The impact fee program is required to keep a
positive projected fund balance at the end of the five year time horizon of the CIP. The timing
requirement and related definition are presented below.
Section 3.24.100.B. “In order to obtain a credit against development impact fees otherwise
due, an applicant must submit a written offer to dedicate to the City specific parcels of qualifying
land or easements, or to acquire or construct specific improvements to the major street system or
the City fire protection, water, or wastewater systems in accordance with all applicable State or
City design and construction standards, and must specifically request a credit against such
development impact fees. Such written request must be made on a form provided by the City,
must contain a statement under oath of the facts that qualify the applicant to receive a credit,
55
Page 6 of 6
must be accompanied by documents evidencing those facts, and must be filed not later than the
initiation of construction of improvements or the acceptance by the City of land dedications, or
the applicant's claim for the credit shall be waived. The granting of credit shall be approved by
the City Commission.” (emphasis added)
3.24.040.L "Initiation of construction" means the date of the preconstruction meeting with the
City Engineer or his/her designee, or the date of the first visible change in the physical condition
of the improved site caused by the first person furnishing services or materials to effect
construction of the improvement, whichever occurs first.
In the past, the City Attorney has noted that Criteria 5 is a protection for the City in its administration of
the impact fee program. As noted above, it assists in maintaining an orderly and healthy impact fee
program. However, as the criterion is for the benefit of the City, the City Commission, and only the City
Commission, may choose to waive this criteria.
Request 1. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of the
preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this criteria is
not met.
Request 2. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of the
preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this criteria is
not met.
Request 3. The request for impact fee credit was received on March 7, 2011. The date of the
preconstruction conference for the work was held on March 9, 2010. Therefore, this criteria is
not met.
Informational item. The initial credit request provided some general information on the dollar value of
the credits sought. Before any credit could be granted detailed cost information will be needed to
provide background data supporting the credit request.
56
57
58
59
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 1
Chapter 3.24
IMPACT FEES
Sections:
3.24.010 Legislative Findings
3.24.020 Authority and Applicability
3.24.030 Intent
3.24.040 Definitions
3.24.050 Transportation Impact Fees
3.24.060 Fire Protection Impact Fees
3.24.070 Water Impact Fees
3.24.080 Wastewater Impact Fees
3.24.090 Refunds of Development Impact Fees Paid
3.24.100 Credits Against Development Impact Fees
3.24.110 Miscellaneous Provisions
3.24.010 Legislative Findings
The City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana finds that:
A. The protection of the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city
requires that the street, fire protection, water, and wastewater systems of the city be
expanded and improved to accommodate continuing growth within the city and within
those areas directly served by its Fire Department and within those areas connected to
its water and wastewater systems.
B. New residential and nonresidential development imposes increased and excessive
demands upon existing city facilities.
C. New development often overburdens existing public facilities, and the tax revenues
generated from new development often do not generate sufficient funds to provide
public facilities to serve the new development.
D. New development is expected to continue and will place ever-increasing demands on
the city to provide public facilities to serve new development.
E. The creation of an equitable development impact fee system would enable the City to
impose a proportionate share of the costs of required improvements to the city's
transportation, fire protection, water, and wastewater systems on those developments
that create the need for them.
F. All types of development that are not explicitly exempted from the provisions of this
chapter will generate demand for city's transportation, fire protection, water, and
wastewater services or facilities that will require improvements to city facilities and
equipment.
G. The city's transportation impact fee study, dated October 31, 2007, prepared by
Tindale-Oliver & Associates and as updated, and the fire/EMS impact fee study dated
July 2008 and as updated, prepared by HDR Engineering, and water and wastewater
impact fee studies dated July 2007, prepared by HDR Engineering, set forth
reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of
61
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 2
development on the city's street, fire protection, water and wastewater systems and for
determining the cost of acquiring land and the cost of acquiring or constructing
facilities and equipment necessary to meet the demands for such services created by
new development.
H. The City establishes as city standards the assumptions and service standards
referenced in the impact fee studies and other duly adopted documents as part of its
current plans for the transportation system and for the city's fire protection, water, and
wastewater systems.
I. The documentation required by 7-6-1602, MCA is collectively contained in the City’s
facility plans, impact fee studies, development regulations, financial records, capital
improvements program, design and specification manual, and other city documents
J. The development impact fees described in this chapter are reasonably related to the
service demands and needs of new development and are based on the above-cited
impact fee studies and documentation and do not exceed the costs of acquiring
additional land and the costs of acquiring or constructing additional facilities or
equipment required to serve the new developments that will pay the fees.
K. All transportation improvements upon which the transportation impact fees are based
and upon which transportation impact fee revenues will be spent, based on the
limitations set forth in this chapter will benefit all new development in the city; and it
is, therefore, appropriate to treat the entire city as a single service area for purposes of
calculating, collecting, and spending the transportation impact fees, while recognizing
differences in the demand for service based upon the identified factors set forth in the
transportation impact fee study.
L. All of the fire protection improvements listed in the fire impact fee study will benefit
all new development that receives fire protection service directly from the City Fire
Department; and it is, therefore, appropriate to treat the entire city and all properties
served directly by the City Fire Department as a single service area for purposes of
calculating, collecting, and spending the fire protection impact fees.
M. All of the water system improvements listed in the water impact fee study will benefit
all new development that connects to the city water system; and it is, therefore,
appropriate to treat the entire city and all properties connected to the city water system
as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting, and spending the water
impact fees.
N. All of the wastewater system improvements listed in the wastewater impact fee study
will benefit all new development that connects to the city wastewater system; and it is,
therefore, appropriate to treat the entire city and all properties connected to the city
wastewater system as a single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting, and
spending the wastewater impact fees.
O. There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development
impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the
development impact fees that such development will be required to pay.
P. The City’s facility planning, capital improvement program, development review, and
bidding processes create a public process by which, on a specific and detailed basis,
the capacity expanding components of construction can be identified and funded
62
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 3
distinctly from those components which are not capacity expanding by providing for
evaluation by the City and the Impact Fee Advisory Committee of future needs related
to growth, identification of applicable funding sources, and monitoring of construction
and payments.
Q. This chapter creates a system by which development impact fees paid by new
developments will be used to expand or improve the city transportation, fire
protection, water, and wastewater systems in ways that benefit the development that
paid each fee within a reasonable period of time after the fee is paid.
R. This chapter creates a system under which development impact fees shall not be used
to cure existing deficiencies in public facilities or to pay maintenance or operations
costs associated with providing public facilities.
3.24.020 Authority and Applicability
A. This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's self-government powers, the authority
granted to the City by the Montana State Constitution, Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-
1604, and Sections 7-1- 4123, 7-1-4124, 7-3-4313, 7-7-4404, 7-7-4424, 7-13-4304,
and 69-7-101 of the Montana Code Annotated.
B. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the
city.
C. The provisions of this chapter related to the fire protection impact fees shall also apply
to all properties located outside the city that are served directly by the City Fire
Department.
D. The provisions of this chapter related to water impact fees shall also apply to all
properties located outside the city that are connected to the city water system.
E. The provisions of this chapter related to wastewater impact fees shall also apply to all
properties located outside the city that are connected to the city wastewater system.
3.24.030 Intent
A. This chapter is adopted to help implement the comprehensive plan of the city, the
city's 2001 transportation plan update prepared by Robert Peccia & Associates, and as
updated, the September 2006 draft of the water facility plan prepared for the City by
Allied Engineering and Robert Peccia and Associates, and as updated, and the May
2006 draft of the wastewater facility plan prepared for the City by HDR Engineering
and Morrison-Maierlie, Inc., and as updated, the August 2006 draft of the Fire
Protection Master Plan prepared for the City by Emergency Services Consulting, Inc,
and as updated.
B. The intent of this chapter is to ensure that new development bears a proportionate
share of the cost of improvements to the city transportation, fire protection, water, and
wastewater systems; to ensure that such proportionate share does not exceed the cost
of the transportation, fire protection, water, and wastewater facilities and equipment
required to serve such new developments; and to ensure that funds collected from new
developments are actually used to construct improvements to the city transportation,
fire protection, water, and wastewater systems that reasonably relate to the benefits
accruing to such new developments.
63
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 4
C. It is the further intent of this chapter that new development pay for its proportionate
share of public facilities through the imposition of development impact fees that will
be used to finance, defray, or reimburse all or a portion of the costs incurred by the
City to construct improvements to the city transportation, fire protection, water, and
wastewater systems that serve or benefit such new development.
D. It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any money from any new development in
excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for transportation, fire
protection, water, or wastewater improvements generated by that new development.
E. It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from any development
impact fee and deposited in an impact fee fund ever be co-mingled with monies from a
different impact fee fund or ever be used for a type of facility or equipment different
from that for which the fee was paid.
3.24.040 Definitions
A. “Central Business District” (CBD) means land uses established within the B-3,
“Central Business District,” zoning district.
B. "Development" means any construction or expansion of a building, structure, or use,
any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use of land, which
creates additional demand for public services.
C. "Development impact fees" means the transportation impact fee, fire protection impact
fee, water impact fee, and wastewater impact fee established by this chapter.
D. "Development Impact Fees Review Committee" means the committee composed of the
Impact Fee Coordinator, the Building Official, the Director of Public Service, the Fire
Chief, and the Director of Planning and Community Development, or their designees
appointed to serve in the member's place at a meeting.
E. "Encumber" means to legally obligate by contract, or otherwise commit to use by
appropriation or other official act of the City.
F. "Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program" means the capital improvements program
for the transportation system, the city fire protection system, and the city water and
wastewater systems, which shall assign monies from each impact fee fund to specific
projects and related expenses for improvements to the type of facilities or services for
which the fees in that fund were paid, and shall not include improvements needed to
correct existing deficiencies or operations or maintenance costs.
G. “Impact Fee Coordinator” means the Director of the City’s Department of Planning
and Community Development or the Director’s designee.
H. "Impact fee funds" means the transportation impact fee fund, fire protection impact fee
fund, water impact fee fund, and wastewater impact fee fund established by this
chapter.
I. "Impact fee studies" means the transportation impact fee study, dated October 31,
2007, prepared by Tindale-Oliver & Associates and as updated, and the fire impact fee
study, dated October 1995 and as updated, prepared by James Duncan and Associates,
and the water and wastewater impact fee studies dated May 2007, prepared by HDR
Engineering.
64
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 5
J. "Improvement" means planning, land acquisition, engineering design, construction
inspection, on-site construction, off-site construction, equipment purchases, and
financing costs associated with new or expanded facilities, buildings, and equipment
that expand the capacity of a facility or service system and that have an average useful
life of at least ten years. “Improvement” does not include maintenance, operations, or
improvements that do not expand capacity.
K. "Independent fee calculation study" means a study prepared by an applicant for a
building permit or water or wastewater connection permit calculating the cost of
expansions or improvements to the city's transportation, fire protection, water, or
wastewater systems required to serve the applicant's proposed development; that is
performed on an average cost (not marginal cost) methodology; uses the service units
and unit construction costs stated in the impact fee studies; and is performed in
compliance with any criteria for such studies established by this chapter or by the City.
L. "Initiation of construction" means the date of the preconstruction meeting with the
City Engineer or his/her designee, or the date of the first visible change in the physical
condition of the improved site caused by the first person furnishing services or
materials to effect construction of the improvement, whichever occurs first.
M. "Project-related improvements" means site-related improvements including, without
limitation, all access streets adjacent to the proposed development or leading only to
the proposed development and not included on the transportation system; all streets
and driveways within the development; all acceleration, deceleration, right, or left turn
lanes leading to any streets and driveways within the development; all traffic control
devices for streets and driveways within the development; all water lines or facilities
adjacent to, leading to, or located within the development and serving only the
development; all wastewater lines or facilities adjacent to, leading to, or located within
and serving only the development; and all off-site improvements necessary for the
safety and code compliance of a development. Credit for incidental improvements
shall not be allowed. The presumption shall be made that the minimum improvement
needed to serve a project shall be deemed to be a project improvement even if
additional capacity is thereby created that may be potentially used by other
developments presently or in the future.
N. “Transportation system” means capacity-adding improvements to collectors or arterial
roads of three lanes or more, which are included on the 2001 Greater Bozeman
Transportation Plan Update or the City’s impact fee capital improvement program, and
which will benefit new development as required by law and this chapter. The
transportation system includes only those bicycle and pedestrian facilities built in
conjunction with and included in a capacity-adding transportation facility
improvement otherwise eligible for impact fee funding pursuant to the terms of this
chapter. The “transportation system” does not include project-related improvements.
O. “Trip Exchange District” means a defined geographic area that meets the following
criteria, pursuant to the transportation fee study and an independent fee calculation
study as provided in section 3.24.050(B)(3), BMC:
1. The use of shared and consolidated parking;
2. A high degree of pedestrian and bicycle access to and throughout the
proposed development;
65
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 6
3. The availability of public transit;
4. Extensive trip capture within the proposed development where trips to the
proposed development result in visits to multiple businesses in the area via a
mode other than automobile;
The following additional physical development characteristics are associated with
trip exchange district land uses:
1. The majority of buildings associated with the proposed development are
multi-story buildings, often more than two stories;
2. Diverse business proprietorships within the development;
3. Primary use at the ground floor is commercial;
4. The majority of individual businesses within the development are less than
20,000 square feet;
5. Structures within the development are in near to each other and the public
street (with small or no setbacks);
6. Having a high percentage building coverage on the lot and typically in excess
of 0.5; and
7. The physical characteristics are shared among the entire business area, not
just one or a few of the businesses.
8. The area should be at least 50% developed as measured by lot area utilized.
9. The area is the subject of a city enforceable common plan of development,
such as an urban renewal plan.
3.24.050 Transportation Impact Fees
A. Imposition of Transportation Impact Fees
1. On or after March 23, 1996, any person who seeks to obtain any of the
following forms of development approval is required to pay a transportation
impact fee in the amount specified in Table 3.24.050:
a. A building permit;
b. Any other permit that will result in the construction of
improvements that will generate additional traffic; or
c. Any extension of any such permit that was issued before the
effective date of this chapter;; or
d. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by
the City Commission in accordance with the BMC Title 17, Chapter
2 for Workforce Housing Lots.
2. Notwithstanding the above subsection, no impact fee shall be imposed earlier
than the issuance of a building permit for developments requiring a building
permit.
66
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 7
3. No permits of the types described in Subsection A(1) of this section shall be
issued until the transportation impact fee described in this chapter has been
paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by
Subsection F of this section.
B. Computation of Amount of Transportation Impact Fee
1. An applicant required by this chapter to pay a transportation impact fee may
choose to have the amount of such fee determined pursuant to either
Subsection (B)(2) or (B)(3) of this section. The amount of the fee calculated
pursuant to either Subsection (B)(2) or (B)(3) shall be subject to the
following adjustment:
a. For the first expansion of an existing nonresidential building, the
amount calculated shall not include the amount calculated for the
expansion of up to thirty percent as compared with its size on
February 22, 1996, or two thousand square feet, whichever is less.
b. The transportation impact fees adopted are those shown in Table
3.24.050, BMC and as updated as provided for in this Chapter.
1. Beginning on February 16, 2008 the amount of the fee
collected shall be sixty percent (60%) of the amount calculated.
2. Unless an applicant requests that the City determine the amount of such fee
pursuant to Subsection (B)(3) of this section, the City shall determine the
amount of the required transportation impact fee by reference to Table
3.24.050. The fee amounts set forth in such table include credits for expected
future receipts of state and federal highway funds and expected future
receipts of gas tax revenues, and all other non-impact fee sources of funding
anticipated to be made by or as a result of new development to be applied to
the transportation improvements required to serve new development.
a. If the applicant's development is of a type not listed in Table
3.24.050, then the City shall use the fee applicable to the most
nearly comparable type or land use in the table. In making a
decision about which use is most nearly comparable, the City shall
be guided by the most recent edition of "Trip Generation: An
Information Report" prepared by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers; or if such publication is no longer available, then by a
similar publication. If the City determines that there is no
comparable type of land use listed in the table, then a new fee shall
be determined by:
1. Finding the most nearly comparable trip generation rate
from the above publication; and
2. Applying the formula set forth in Subsection (B)(3)(d) of
this section.
b. If the applicant's development includes a mix of those uses listed in
Table 3.24.050, then the fee shall be determined by adding up the
67
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 8
fees that would be payable for each use if it were a freestanding use
pursuant to Table 3.24.050.
c. If the applicant is applying for an extension of a permit issued
previously, then the fee shall be the net increase between the fee
applicable at the time of the current permit application and any
transportation impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter
for the same structure. In the event that the fee applicable at the
time of the current permit application is lower than the
transportation impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter
for the same structure, there shall be no refund of transportation
impact fees previously paid.
d. If the applicant is applying for a permit to allow a change of use or
the expansion, redevelopment, or modification of an existing
development, the fee shall be based on the net positive increase in
the fee for the new use as compared to the previous use. However,
no new fee shall be imposed unless an additional unit of service
demand is created, in accordance with Table 3.24.50. If necessary
to determine such net increase, the City shall be guided by the most
recent edition of "Trip Generation: An Information Report"
prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; or if such
publication is no longer available, then by a similar publication. In
the event that the proposed change of use, expansion,
redevelopment, or modification results in a net decrease in the fee
for the new use or development as compared to the previous use or
development, there shall be no refund of transportation impact fees
previously paid.
3. An applicant may request that the City determine the amount of the required
transportation impact fee by reference to an independent fee calculation study
for the applicant's development prepared by qualified professional traffic
engineers and/or economists at the applicant's cost and submitted to the City
Engineer. Any such study must show the traffic engineering and economic
methodologies and assumptions used, including, but not limited to, those
forms of documentation listed in Subsections (B)(3)(a) and (B)(3)(b) of this
section and must be acceptable to the City pursuant to Subsection (B)(3)(c)
of this section.
a. Traffic engineering studies must include documentation of trip
generation rates, trip lengths, any percentage of trips from the site
that represent net additions to current trips from the site, the
percentage of trips that are new trips as opposed to pass-by or
divert-link trips, and any other trip data for the proposed land use.
b. Economic studies must include documentation of any special
factors that the applicant believes will reduce the traffic volumes
otherwise attributable to the proposed land use.
c. The City shall consider all such documentation and any independent
fee calculation study submitted by the applicant, but shall not be
68
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 9
required to accept any such study or documentation that the City
deems to be inaccurate or unreliable and may request that the
applicant submit additional or different documentation for
consideration. Any independent fee calculation study submitted by
an applicant may be accepted, rejected, or accepted with
modifications by the City as the basis for calculating transportation
impact fees.
d. Upon acceptance, or acceptance with modifications, of an
independent fee calculation study and documentation, the City shall
use the following formulas to determine the transportation impact
fee:
Net Impact Fee = Total Impact Cost – Gas Tax Credit – Ad Valorem Credit
Where:
Total Impact Cost = ((Trip Rate × Assessable Trip Length × % New Trips) /
2) × (1 -Interstate Adj. Factor) × (Cost per Lane Mile / Avg. Capacity Added
per Lane Mile)
Total Gas Tax Credit = Present Value (Annual Gas Tax Credit), given 4.6%
interest rate & 25-year facility life
Annual Gas Tax Credit = (((Trip Rate × Total Trip Length × % New Trips) /
2) × Effective Days per Year × $/Gallon to Capital) / Fuel Efficiency
And where:
Trip Rate = the average daily trip generation rate, in vehicle-trips/day
Assessable Trip Length = the actual average trip length for the category,
in vehicle miles
Total Trip Length = the assessable trip length plus an adjustment factor of
half a mile is added to the trip length to account for the fact that gas taxes
are collected for travel on all roads including local roads
% New Trips = adjustment factor to account for trips that are already on
the roadway
Divide by 2 = The total daily miles of travel generated by a particular
category (i.e., rate X length X % new trips) is divided by two to prevent
the double-counting of travel generated among land use codes since every
trip has an origin and a destination.
Interstate Adjustment Factor = adjustment factor to account for the travel
demand occurring on interstate highways (15.0%)
Cost per Lane Mile = unit cost to construct one lane mile of roadway, in
$/lane mile($3,678,522 per study and will be subject to inflationary
adjustments)
Average Capacity Added per Lane Mile = represents the average daily
traffic on one travel lane at capacity for one lane mile of roadway, in
vehicles/lane-mile/day (8,658 per study)
Cost per Vehicle Mile of Capacity = unit cost to construct to provide a
vehicle mile of capacity ($472.92 per study)
69
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 10
Present Value = calculation of the present value of a uniform series of
cash flows, gas tax payments in this case, given an interest rate, “i,” and a
number of periods, “n;” for 4.6% interest and a 25-year facility life, the
uniform series present worth factor is 14.6768
Effective Days per Year = 365 days
$/Gallon to Capital = the amount of gas tax revenue per gallon of fuel that
is used for capital improvements, in $/gallon ($0.102)
Fuel Efficiency = average fuel efficiency of vehicles, in vehicle-
miles/gallon (17.70)
C. Payment of Transportation Impact Fee
1. An applicant for any of the permits or extensions listed in Subsection (A)(1)
of this section shall pay the transportation impact fee required by this chapter
to the City prior to the issuance of any such permit.
2. All funds paid by an applicant pursuant to this chapter shall be identified as
transportation impact fees and shall be promptly deposited in the
transportation impact fee fund described in Subsection D of this section.
D. Transportation Impact Fee Funds
1. A single transportation impact fee fund is created and such fund shall be
maintained in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall contain only those transportation impact fees collected
pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time
on such amounts.
E. Use of Transportation Impact Fee Funds. The monies in the transportation impact fee
fund shall be used only as follows:
1 To acquire land for and/or acquire or construct capacity-adding capital
improvements to the transportation system reasonably related to the benefits
accruing to new development subject to the terms of this chapter, in
accordance with the requirements of Montana law; or
2 To pay debt service on such capital improvements to the transportation
system; or
3 For purposes of refunds or credits, as described in Sections 3.24.090 or
3.24.100(G)); and
4. May not be used for
a. operations or maintenance purposes;
b to correct existing deficiencies; or
c. for bicycle or pedestrian facilities not built in conjunction with and
included in a capacity-adding transportation system facility, otherwise
eligible for impact fee funding.
F. Exemptions from Transportation Impact Fee
70
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 11
1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the
transportation impact fee:
a. Alterations, remodeling, rehabilitations, expansions of existing
buildings, or other improvements to an existing structure where no
additional vehicle trips will be produced over and above those
produced by the existing use;
b. Construction of accessory buildings or structures that will not
produce additional vehicle trips over and above those produced by
the primary building or land use;
c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or
structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use
where no additional vehicle trips will be produced over and above
those produced by the original building or structure;
d. The installation or replacement of a mobile home on a lot or a
mobile home site when a transportation impact fee for such lot or
site has previously been paid pursuant to this chapter or where a
mobile home legally existed on such site on or prior to the effective
date of this chapter;e. Any other type of development for which the
applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and
development will produce no more vehicle trips from such site over
and above the trips from such site prior to the proposed
development, or for which the applicant can show that a
transportation impact fee for such site has previously been paid in
an amount that equals or exceeds the transportation impact fee that
would be required by this chapter for such development.
2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the
applicant applies for the first permit or a type listed in Subsection (A)(1) of
this section for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not
made at or before that time shall have been waived.
3. The City Manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim
for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in Subsection (F)(1) of this
section.
TABLE 3.24.050
The following transportation impact fees apply to developments not located in the Central Business
District or a designated Trip Exchange District.
ITE LUC Land Use Unit Fee*
RESIDENTIAL:
210 Single Family (Detached)
Less than 1,500 sf and very low
income(2)
du $2,171
Less than 1,500 sf and low income (3) du $3,147
Less than 1,500 sf du $3,968
71
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 12
ITE LUC Land Use Unit Fee*
1,500 to 2,499 sf du $5,396
2,500 sf or larger du $6,082
220 Apartments du $3,339
230 Residential Condominium/ Townhouse du $2,946
240 Mobile Home Park du $1,593
LODGING:
310 Hotel room $3,063
320 Motel room $1,678
RECREATION:
430 Golf Course hole $12,295
411 City Park acre $546
444 Movie Theaters 1,000 sf $6,463
INSTITUTIONS:
610 Hospital 1,000 sf $6,023
620 Nursing Home bed $381
520 Elementary School student $315
530 High School student $477
540 University (7,500 or fewer students) (4) student $609
550 University (more than 7,500 students) (4) student $529
560 Church/ Synagogue 1,000 sf $2,428
565 Day Care 1,000 sf $7,433
OFFICE:
710 50,000 sf or less 1,000 sf $3,977
710 50,001-100,000 sf 1,000 sf $3,623
710 100,001-200,000 sf 1,000 sf $3,084
710 greater than 200,000 1,000 sf $2,460
720 Medical Office 1,000 sf $9,584
RETAIL:
820 under 50,000 sf 1,000 sf $9,378
820 50,000-99,000 sf 1,000 sf $9,587
820 100,000-199,000 sf 1,000 sf $9,331
820 200,000-299,000 sf 1,000 sf $8,567
820 greater than 300,000 sf 1,000 sf $8,144
812 Building Material/ Lumber 1,000 sf $21,209
813 Discount Super-Store 1,000 sf $26,996
817 Nursery/Garden Center 1,000 sf $18,903
851 Convenience Store 1,000 sf $44,607
931 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sf $22,036
934 Fast Food Rest w/ Drive-Thru 1,000 sf $61,225
841 New/Used Auto Sales 1,000 sf $12,033
890 Furniture Store 1,000 sf $1,684
912 Bank/ Savings Drive-in 1,000 sf $31,706
INDUSTRY:
110 General Light Industrial 1,000 sf $2,290
140 Manufacturing 1,000 sf $1,250
72
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 13
ITE LUC Land Use Unit Fee*
150 Warehouse 1,000 sf $1,627
151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf $810
(1) Source: Transportation Impact Fee Study, Appendix F, Table F-1
(2) Defined as 50% of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median
Income (AMI)
(3) Defined as 80% of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median
Income (AMI)
(4) Impact fee to be assessed on structures with classroom facilities. All auxiliary structures such
as administrative buildings and research centers are to be charged at the office land use rate.
The following transportation impact fees apply to developments located in the Central Business
District or within a designated Trip Exchange District.
ITE LUC Land Use Unit Fee*
RESIDENTIAL:
210 Single Family (Detached)
Less than 1,500 sf and very low
income(2)
du $2,171
Less than 1,500 sf and low income(3) du $3,147
Less than 1,500 sf du $3,968
1,500 to 2,499 sf du $5,396
2,500 sf or larger du $6,082
220 Apartments du $3,339
230 Residential Condominium/ Townhouse du $2,946
240 Mobile Home Park du $1,593
LODGING:
310 Hotel room $2,835
320 Motel room $1,333
RECREATION:
430 Golf Course hole $4,333
411 City Park acre $182
444 Movie Theaters 1,000 sf $2,333
INSTITUTIONS:
610 Hospital 1,000 sf $6,023
620 Nursing Home bed $381
520 Elementary School student $315
530 High School student $477
540 University (7,500 or fewer students) (4) student $609
550 University (more than 7,500 students) (4) student $529
560 Church/Synagogue 1,000 sf $2,428
565 Day Care 1,000 sf $7,433
OFFICE:
710 50,000 sf or less 1,000 sf $3,187
710 50,001-100,000 sf 1,000 sf $2,911
710 100,001-200,000 sf 1,000 sf $2,475
73
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 14
ITE LUC Land Use Unit Fee*
710 greater than 200,000 sf 1,000 sf $1,974
720 Medical Office 1,000 sf $9,584
RETAIL:
820 under 50,000 sf 1,000 sf $5,284
820 50,000-99,000 sf 1,000 sf $5,452
820 100,000-199,000 sf 1,000 sf $5,182
820 200,000-299,000 sf 1,000 sf $5,115
820 greater than 300,000 sf 1,000 sf $4,999
812 Building Material/Lumber 1,000 sf $21,209
813 Discount Super-Store 1,000 sf $26,996
817 Nursery/Garden Center 1,000 sf $18,903
851 Convenience Store 1,000 sf $44,607
931 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sf $6,009
934 Fast Food Rest w/ Drive-Thru 1,000 sf $22,164
841 New/ Used Auto Sales 1,000 sf $12,033
890 Furniture Store 1,000 sf $1,684
912 Bank/ Savings Drive-in 1,000 sf $24,133
INDUSTRY:
110 General Light Industrial 1,000 sf $2,290
140 Manufacturing 1,000 sf $1,250
150 Warehouse 1,000 sf $1,627
151 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sf $810
(1) Source: Transportation Impact Fee Study, Appendix F, Table F-2
(2) Defined as 50% of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median
Income (AMI)
(3) Defined as 80% of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median
Income (AMI)
(4) Impact fee to be assessed on structures with classroom facilities. All auxiliary structures such
as administrative buildings and research centers are to be charged at the office land use rate.
*Compiler's Note: The Transportation Impact Fees listed in this formula shall be
adjusted annually as per 3.24.110.K.
3.24.060 Fire Protection Impact Fees
A. Imposition of Fire Protection Impact Fees
1. On or after March 23, 1996, any person who seeks to obtain:
a. A building permit; or
b. Any other permit that will result in construction that will generate
demand for fire protection services; or
c. Any extension of any such permit that was issued before the
effective date of this chapter, is required to pay a fire protection
impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter; or
74
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 15
d. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by
the City Commission in accordance with the BMC Title 17, Chapter
2 for Workforce Housing Lots.
2. No permits of the types described in Subsection (A)(1) of this section shall
be issued until the fire protection impact fee described in this chapter has
been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted
by Subsection F of this section.
B. Computation of Amount of Fire Protection Impact Fee
1. An applicant required by this chapter to pay a fire protection impact fee may
choose to have the amount of such fee determined pursuant to either
Subsection (B)(2) or (B)(3) of this section. The amount of the fee calculated
pursuant to either Subsection (B)(2) or (B)(3) of this section shall be subject
to the following adjustment:
a. For the first expansion of an existing nonresidential building, the
amount calculated shall not include the amount calculated for the
expansion of up to thirty percent as compared with its size on
February 22, 1996, or two thousand square feet, whichever is less.
2. Unless an applicant requests that the City determine the amount of such fee
pursuant to Subsection (B)(3) of this section, the City shall determine the
amount of the required fire protection impact fee by reference to Table
3.24.060.
a. If the type of development that a permit is applied for is not listed in
Table 3.24.060, then the City shall use the fee applicable to the
most nearly comparable type or land use in the table.
b. If the type of development that a permit is applied for includes a
mix of those uses listed in Table 3.24.060, then the fee shall be
determined by adding up the fees that would be payable for each
use if it were a freestanding use pursuant to Table 3.24.060.
c. If the applicant is applying for an extension of a permit issued
previously, then the fee shall be the net increase between the fee
applicable at the time of the current permit application and any fire
protection impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter for
the same structure. In the event that the fee applicable at the time of
the current permit application is lower than the fire protection
impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter for the same
structure, there shall be no refund of fire protection impact fees
previously paid.
d. If the applicant is applying for a permit to allow a change of use or
for the expansion, redevelopment, or modification of an existing
development, the fee shall be based on the net increase in the fee for
the new use as compared to the previous use. In the event that the
proposed change of use, expansion, redevelopment, or modification
results in a net decrease in the fee for the new use or development
75
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 16
as compared to the previous use or development, there shall be no
refund of fire protection impact fees previously paid.
3. An applicant may request that the City determine the amount of the required
fire protection impact fee by reference to an independent fee calculation
study for the applicant's development prepared at the applicant's cost by
qualified professional fire protection experts and/or economists and
submitted to the City Fire Chief. Any such study shall be based on the same
service standards and unit costs for fire protection used in the fire impact fee
study prepared by HDR Engineering dated July 2008 and as updated, and
must document the economic methodologies and assumptions used. Any
independent fee calculation study submitted by an applicant may be accepted,
rejected, or accepted with modifications by the City as the basis for
calculating fire protection impact fees. If such study is accepted or accepted
with modifications as a more accurate measure of the demand for new fire
protection facilities and equipment created by the applicant's proposed
development than the applicable fee shown in Table 3.24.060, then the fire
protection impact fee due under this chapter may be calculated according to
such study.
C. Payment of Fire Protection Impact Fees
1. An applicant required by this chapter to pay a fire protection impact fee shall
pay such fee to the City prior to the issuance of any of the permits listed in
Subsection (A)(1) of this section.
2. All funds paid by an applicant pursuant to this chapter shall be identified as
fire protection impact fees and shall be promptly deposited in the fire
protection impact fee fund described in Subsection D of this section.
D. Fire Protection Impact Fee Funds
1. A single fire protection impact fee fund is created and such fund shall be
maintained in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall contain only those fire protection impact fees collected
pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time
on such amounts.
E. Use of Fire Protection Impact Fee Funds. The monies in the fire protection impact fee
fund shall be used only:
1 To acquire or construct fire protection improvements within the city; or
2 To pay debt service on any portion of any future general obligation bond
issue or revenue bond issue used to finance the acquisition or construction of
fire protection improvements within the city; or
3 As described in Sections 3.24.090 or 3.24.100(G).
F. Exemptions from Fire Protection Impact Fee
1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the
fire protection impact fee:
76
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 17
a. Reconstruction, expansion, or replacement of a previously existing
residential unit that does not create any additional residential units.
b. Construction of unoccupied accessory units related to a residential
unit.
c. Projects that the applicant can demonstrate will produce no greater
demand for fire protection from such land than existed prior to
issuance of such permit.
d. Projects for which a fire protection impact fee has previously been
paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the fire protection impact
fee that would be required by this chapter.
2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the
applicant applies for the first permit of a type listed in Subsection (A)(1) of
this section for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not
made at or before that time shall have been waived.
3. The City Manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim
for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in Subsection (F)(1) of this
section.
Table 3.24.060
Type of Development Impact Fee*
Detached residential per dwelling unit $780.20
Attached residential, per dwelling unit $655.92
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional per 1,000
gross sq. ft. of building space
$178.84
*Compiler's Note: The Fire Protection Impact Fees listed in this formula shall be
adjusted annually as per 3.24.110.K.
3.24.070 Water Impact Fees
A. Imposition of Water Impact Fees
1. On or after March 23, 1996, any person who seeks to obtain a permit for
connection to the city water system, or who is subject to subsection (B)(2)(b)
and applies for a city permit to expand or add to the structure served by a
previously approved water connection, or any extension of such a permit
issued before the effective date of this chapter, is required to pay a water
impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter; or
2. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the
City Commission in accordance with the BMC Title 17, Chapter 2 for
Workforce Housing Lots.
3. No permits for connection to the city water system shall be issued until the
water impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the
77
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 18
development for which the permit is sought is exempted by Subsection F of
this section.
B. Computation of Amount of Water Impact Fee
1. The City shall determine the amount of the required water impact fee by
reference to Table 3.24.070 unless the applicant chooses to submit an
individualized calculation pursuant to subsection (B)(2)(a) or the City
determines the application to be subject to subsection (B)(2)(b). If the
applicant is applying for a replacement for a water connection permit issued
previously, then the fee shall be the net positive difference between the fee
applicable at the time of the current permit application and any water impact
fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter for the same structure. In the
event that the fee applicable at the time of the replacement permit application
is lower than the water impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter for
the same structure, there shall be no refund of water impact fees previously
paid.
2. Individualized Calculations.
a. An applicant may request that the City determine the amount of the
required water impact fee by reference to an independent fee calculation
study for the applicant's development prepared at the applicant's cost by
a professional engineer and/or economist and submitted to the City
Public Service Director. Any such study shall be based on the same
service standards and unit costs used in the water impact fee study
prepared by HDR Engineering dated May 2007, and as updated, and
must document the economic methodologies and assumptions used.
Any independent fee calculation study submitted by an applicant may be
accepted, rejected, or accepted with modifications by the City as the
basis for calculating water impact fees. If such study is accepted, or
accepted with modifications, as a more accurate measure of the demand
for new water facilities created by the applicant's proposed development
than the applicable fee shown in Table 3.24.070, then the water impact
fee due under this chapter may be calculated according to such study.
b. The City may identify a user as having extraordinary demands for water
service which are not accurately represented by the average usage which
was relied upon by the methodology which generated Table 3.24.070. In
this circumstance the City shall prepare a customized calculation based
upon the Large Meter calculation methodology in Exhibit 6 of the Water
Impact Fee study. The impact fee paid for water meters larger than 3
inches as of the effective date of this ordinance may be adjusted based
on actual usage. If usage is greater than 110% of anticipated volume
during the 12 month period of time beginning 6 months after building
occupancy is granted by the City, an additional impact fee may be
charged, using the same techniques for calculating peak day and storage
EDUs and multiplying by the peak day impact fee cost per EDU and the
storage impact fee cost per EDU then in effect. The additional impact
fee is the positive net between a previously calculated impact fee and the
78
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 19
impact fee based upon the metered demand.
C. Payment of Water Impact Fee
1. An applicant required by this chapter to pay a water impact fee shall pay such
fee to the City prior to the issuance of a water connection permit.
2. All funds paid by an applicant pursuant to this chapter shall be identified as
water impact fees and shall be promptly deposited in the water impact fee
fund described in Subsection D of this section.
D. Water Impact Fee Funds
1. A single water impact fee fund is created and such fund shall be maintained
in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall contain only those water impact fees collected pursuant to
this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such
amounts.
E. Use of Water Impact Fee Funds. The monies in the water impact fee fund shall be
used only:
1. To acquire or construct improvements to the city water system; or
2. To pay debt service on any portion of any future general obligation bond
issue or revenue bond issue used to finance improvements to the city water
system; or
3. As described in Sections 3.24.090 or 3.24.100(G).
F. Exemptions from Water Impact Fees
1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the
water impact fee:
a. Alteration or expansion of an existing building that does not require
an additional or larger water meter;
b. Replacement of a building or structure of the same size that does
not require an additional or larger water meter;
c. The location of mobile home on a site for which a water impact fee
was previously paid, and that does not require an additional or
larger water meter.
2. The installation of fire lines for fire protection shall be exempted from
payment of the water impact fee.
3. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the
applicant applies for the first permit of a type listed in Subsection (A)(1) of
this section for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not
made at or before that time shall have been waived.
4. The City Manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claims
for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in Subsections (F)(1) and
(F)(2) of this section.
79
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 20
Table 3.24.070
WATER IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE*
SIZE OF WATER METER COST PER METER
3/4 inch $ 3,310
1 inch $ 8,275
1 ½ inch $ 16,550
2 inch $ 26,480
3 inch $ 52,960
Larger than 3 inch calculated
*Compiler's Note: The Cost Per Meter Fees listed in this formula shall be adjusted
annually as per 3.24.110.K.
3.24.080 Wastewater Impact Fees
A. Imposition of Wastewater Impact Fees
1. On or after March 23, 1996, any person who seeks to obtain a permit for
connection to the city wastewater system, or who is subject to subsection
(B)(2)(b) and applies for a city permit to expand or add to the structure
served by a previously approved water connection, or any extension of such
a permit issued before the effective date of this chapter is required to pay a
wastewater impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter; or
2. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the
City Commission in accordance with the BMC Title 17, Chapter 2 for
Workforce Housing Lots.
3. No permits for connection to the city water system shall be issued until the
water impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the
development for which the permit is sought is exempted by Subsection F of
this section.
B. Computation of Amount of Wastewater Impact Fee
1. The City shall determine the amount of the required wastewater impact fee
by reference to Table 3.24.080 070 unless the applicant chooses to submit an
individualized calculation pursuant to subsection (B)(2)(a) or the City
determines the application to be subject to subsection (B)(2)(b). If the
applicant is applying for a replacement for a wastewater connection permit
issued previously, then the fee shall be the net positive difference between
the fee applicable at the time of the current permit application and any
wastewater impact fee previously paid pursuant to this chapter for the same
structure. In the event that the fee applicable at the time of the replacement
permit application is lower than the wastewater impact fee previously paid
pursuant to this chapter for the same structure, there shall be no refund of
wastewater impact fees previously paid.
2. Individualized Calculations.
80
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 21
a. An applicant may request that the City determine the amount of the
required wastewater impact fee by reference to an independent fee
calculation study for the applicant's development prepared at the
applicant's cost by a professional engineer and/or economist and
submitted to the City Public Service Director. Any such study shall be
based on the same service standards and unit costs used in the
wastewater impact fee study prepared by HDR Engineering dated May
2007, and as updated, and must document the economic methodologies
and assumptions used. Any independent fee calculation study submitted
by an applicant may be accepted, rejected, or modified by the City as the
basis for calculating wastewater impact fees. If such study is accepted
or accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the
demand for new wastewater facilities created by the applicant's proposed
development than the applicable fee shown in Table 3.24.080, then the
wastewater impact fees due under this chapter shall be calculated
according to such study.
b. The City may identify a user as having extraordinary demands for
wastewater service which are not accurately represented by the average
usage which was relied upon by the methodology which generated Table
3.24.080. In this circumstance the City shall prepare a customized
calculation based upon the methodology in the Water Impact Fee study.
When applicable an adjustment for high strength discharge will be
applied. The impact fee paid for water meters larger than 3 inches as of
the effective date of this ordinance may be adjusted based on actual
usage. If usage is greater than 110% of anticipated volume during the
12 month period of time beginning 6 months after building occupancy is
granted by the City, an additional impact fee may be charged, using the
same techniques for calculating treatment and collection in EDUs and
multiplying by the impact fee cost per EDU. The additional impact fee is
the positive net between a previously calculated impact fee and the
impact fee based upon the metered demand.
C. Payment of Wastewater Impact Fee
1. An applicant required by this chapter to pay a wastewater impact fee shall
pay such fee to the City prior to the issuance of a wastewater connection
permit.
2. All funds paid by an applicant paid pursuant to this chapter shall be identified
as wastewater impact fees and shall be promptly deposited in the wastewater
impact fee fund described in Subsection D of this section.
D. Wastewater Impact Fee Funds
1. A single wastewater impact fee fund is created and such fund shall be
maintained in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall contain only those wastewater impact fees collected pursuant
to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such
amounts.
81
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 22
E. Use of Wastewater Impact Fee Funds. The monies in the wastewater impact fee fund
shall be used only:
1. To acquire or construct improvements to the city wastewater system; or
2. To pay debt service on any portion of any future general obligation bond
issue or revenue bond issue used to finance improvements to the city
wastewater system; or
3. As described in Section 3.24.090 or Section 3.24.100(G).
F. Exemptions from Wastewater Impact Fees
1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the
wastewater impact fee:
a. Alteration or expansion of an existing building that does not require
an additional or larger water meter;
b. Replacement of a building or structure of the same size that does
not require an additional or larger water meter;
c. The location of mobile home on a site for which a wastewater
impact fee was previously paid and that does not require an
additional or larger water meter;
2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the
applicant applies for the first permit of a type listed in Subsection (A)(1) of
this section for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not
made at or before that time shall have been waived.
3. The City Manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim
for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in Subsection (F)(1) of this
section.
Table 3.24.080
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
SIZE OF WATER METER COST PER METER*
3/4 inch $ 2,955
1 inch $ 7,388
1 ½ inch $ 14,775
2 inch $ 23,640
3 inch $ 47,280
Larger than 3 inch calculated
*Compiler's Note: The Cost Per Meter Fees listed in this formula shall be adjusted
annually as per 3.24.110.K.
3.24.090 Refunds of Development Impact Fees Paid
Refunds of development impact fees shall be made only in the following instances and in the
following manner:
82
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 23
A. Upon application to the Impact Fee Coordinator by the applicant, the City shall refund
the development impact fee paid if capacity is available and service is denied.
B.
1. Upon application to the Impact Fee Coordinator, the City shall refund the
development impact fee paid and not expended or encumbered within ten
years from the date the development impact fee was paid or spent in a
manner not in accordance with this chapter or section 17-6-1602 of the
Montana Code Annotated. Refunds shall be paid to the owner of the
property at the time the refund is due. In determining whether development
impact fees have been expended or encumbered, fees shall be considered
encumbered on a first-in, first-out (FIFO) basis.
2. When the right to a refund exists due to a failure to expend or encumber
development impact fees, the City shall publish written notice within thirty
days after the expiration of the ten year period from the date development
impact fee was paid. The published notice shall contain the heading "Notice
of Entitlement to Development Impact Fee Refund."
C. If an applicant has paid a development impact fee required by this chapter and has
obtained any of the types of permits or extensions listed in Sections 3.24.050 (A)(1),
3.24.060 (A)(1), 3.24.070 (A)(1), or 3.24.080(A)(1), and the permit or extension for
which the fee was paid later expires without the possibility of further extension, then
the applicant who paid such fee shall be entitled to a refund of the fee paid, without
interest. In order to be eligible to receive such refund, the applicant who paid such fee
shall be required to submit an application for such refund within thirty days after the
expiration of the permit or extension for which the fee was paid.
D. A refund application shall be made to the Impact Fee Coordinator within one year
from the date such refund becomes payable under Subsections A and B of this section,
or within one year from the date of publication of the notice of entitlement of a refund
under Subsection B of this section, whichever is later. Any refund not applied for
within said time period shall be deemed waived.
E. A refund application shall include information and documentation sufficient to permit
the Impact Fee Coordinator to determine whether the refund claimed is proper and, if
so, the amount of such refund.
F. A refund shall include a pro rata share of interest actually earned on the unused or
excess development impact fee paid.
G. All refunds shall be paid within sixty days after the Impact Fee Coordinator
determines that such refund is due. (Ord. 1418 § 7, 1996; Ord. 1414 § 1 (part), 1996)
H. Any refund payable pursuant to Subsections A and B of this section, shall be made to
the record owner of property as of the date the refund was due.
3.24.100 Credits Against Development Impact Fees
A. After the effective date of this chapter, mandatory or voluntary land or easement
dedications for transportation, fire protection, water, or wastewater improvements, and
mandatory or voluntary acquisition or construction of capital improvements to the
83
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 24
transportation system or the city fire protection, water, or wastewater systems by an
applicant in connection with a proposed development may result in a pro rata credit
against the development impact fee for the same type of service or facility otherwise
due for such development, except that no such credit shall be awarded for:
1. Projects or land dedications not listed on the impact fee capital improvements
program; or
2. Land dedications for, or acquisition or construction of, project-related
improvements as defined in Section 3.24.040(G) or Section 3.24.040; or
3. Any voluntary land or easement dedications not accepted by the City; or
4. Any voluntary acquisition or construction of improvements not approved in
writing by the City prior to commencement of the acquisition or construction.
B. In order to obtain a credit against development impact fees otherwise due, an applicant
must submit a written offer to dedicate to the City specific parcels of qualifying land
or easements, or to acquire or construct specific improvements to the transportation
system or the City fire protection, water, or wastewater systems in accordance with all
applicable State or City design and construction standards, and must specifically
request a credit against such development impact fees. Such written request must be
made on a form provided by the City, must contain a statement under oath of the facts
that qualify the applicant to receive a credit, must be accompanied by documents
evidencing those facts, and must be approved not later than the initiation of
construction of improvements or the acceptance by the City of land dedications, or the
applicant's claim for the credit shall be waived. The granting of credit shall be
approved by the City Commission. The City shall approve a credit only after showing
that the need for the dedication or construction is clearly documented pursuant to
section 7-6-1602 of the Montana Code Annotated, and that any land dedication
proposed for credit is determined to be appropriate for the proposed use.
1. Upon receipt of a complete application for impact fee credit the Impact Fee
Coordinator shall coordinate review of the application for compliance with the
requirements of this chapter and other relevant requirements. Upon completion of
the review the Impact Fee Coordinator shall either: forward the application to the
City Manager, or when required to the City Commission, for approval or; if the
application is insufficient or otherwise does not conform to the City’s
requirements shall communicate in writing to the applicant the reason the credit
request failed. If the application satisfies the requirements and is approved the
credit may be provided in any of the allowed forms as described in Subsection G.
a. Factors for Consideration
(1) When credit is sought for an improvement listed in the second through
fifth years of the CIP after the current fiscal year there shall be a
rebuttable presumption that any credit shall be awarded as a credit
balance and not as cash.
(2) The final decision to approve a credit request in excess of $1,000,000
from a single impact fee fund shall be made by the City Commission.
84
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 25
(3) In the event that the City Manager believes that a credit request may
result in a significant effect on policy decisions the credit request may be
referred to the City Commission for final action regardless of the dollar
amount.
(4) In the event that the City considers that award of a credit may negatively
impact its ability to construct improvements listed sooner in time on the
CIP they may decline to award a credit at that time without removing the
item from the CIP.
2. Appeals relating to staff decisions on credit requests may be appealed to the City
Commission per Subsection 3.24.110.I
C. The credit due to an applicant shall be calculated and documented as follows:
1. Credit for qualifying land or easement dedications shall, at the applicant's
option, be valued at:
a. One hundred percent of the most recent assessed value for such land
as shown in the records of the City Assessor; or
b. That fair market value established by a private appraiser acceptable
to the City in an appraisal paid for by the applicant.
2. In order to receive credit for qualifying acquisition or construction of
transportation, fire protection, water, or wastewater improvements, the
applicant shall submit complete engineering drawings, specifications, and
construction cost estimates to the City. The City shall determine the amount
of credit due based on the information submitted, or, if it determines that
such information is inaccurate or unreliable, then on alternative engineering
or construction costs acceptable to the City.
D. Approved credits shall become effective at the following times:
1. Approved credit for land or easement dedications shall become effective
when the land has been conveyed to the City in a form acceptable to the City,
and at no cost to the City, and has been accepted by the City Commission.
When such conditions have been met, the City shall note that fact in the
credit record maintained by the City Finance Department. Upon request of
the credit holder, the City shall send the credit holder a letter stating the
credit balance available to him (or her).
2. Approved credits for the acquisition or construction of transportation, fire
protection, water, or wastewater improvements shall generally become
effective when:
a. All required construction has been completed and has been accepted
by the City; and
b. A suitable maintenance and warranty bond has been received and
approved by the City; and
c. All design, construction, inspection, testing, bonding, and
acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all
applicable City and State procedures.
85
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 26
However, approved credits for the construction of improvements may
become effective at an earlier date if the applicant posts security in the form of a
performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or escrow agreement, and the
amount and terms of such security are accepted by the City. At a minimum, such
security must be in the amount of the approved credit or an amount determined to
be adequate to allow the City to construct the improvements for which the credit
was given, whichever is higher. When such conditions have been met, the City
shall note that fact in the credit record maintained by the City Finance
Department. Upon request of the credit holder, the City shall also send the credit
holder a letter stating the credit balance available to him (or her).
E. Approved credits may be used to reduce the amount of development impact fees due
from any proposed development for the same type of service or facility for which the
applicant dedicated land or acquired or constructed improvements until the amount of
the credit is exhausted. Each time a request to use credit from a mandatory or
voluntary dedication, acquisition, or construction is presented to the City, the City
shall reduce the amount of the development impact fee of the same type otherwise due
from the applicant and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if
any. In the case of a mandatory dedication, acquisition, or construction, any credit in
excess of the amount of the development impact fee otherwise due under this chapter
shall be deemed excess credit that is remaining and available for use by the applicant.
In the case of a voluntary dedication, acquisition, or construction, any credit in excess
of the amount of the development impact fee of the same type and applicable to the
project, as shown in Tables 3.24.050, 3.24.060, 3.24.070, or 3.24.080, shall be deemed
excess credit that is remaining and available for use by the applicant. Upon request of
the credit holder, the City shall also send the credit holder a letter stating the amount
of credit remaining to him (or her).
F. Approved credit shall only be used to reduce the amount of development impact fees
of the same type otherwise due under this chapter and shall not be paid to the applicant
in cash or in credit against any development impact fees for a different type of facility
or service or against any other monies due from the applicant to the City, except as
described in Subsection G of this section.
G. If the amount of approved credit for a mandatory dedication, acquisition, or
construction exceeds the amount of the development impact fees of the same type
otherwise due under this chapter, the applicant may request in writing that the City
provide for reimbursement of any excess credit to the applicant in cash. Such written
request must be approved not later than the initiation of construction of
improvements, or the acceptance by the City of land dedications, or the applicant's
claim shall be waived. Upon receipt of such a written request, the City may, at its
discretion:
1. Arrange for the reimbursement of such excess credit from the impact fee fund
for the same type of service or facility from development impact fees paid by
others;
2 . Arrange for the reimbursement of such excess credit through the issuance of
a promissory note payable in not more than ten years and bearing interest
equal to the interest rate paid by the City for its long-term debt; or
86
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 27
3. Reject the request for cash and provide credit. Such excess credit shall be
valued at one hundred percent of actual developer costs for the excess
improvements, or at the actual appraised value of such excess improvements,
at the City's option.
H. Credit may be transferred from one holder to another by any written instrument clearly
identifying the credit issued under Subsection C of this section that is to be transferred,
provided that such instrument is signed by both the transferror and transferee, and that
the document is delivered to the City for registration of the change in ownership.
I. In the event that land is annexed into the city from Gallatin County after the effective
date of this chapter, and that road or fire impact fees have been previously paid to the
County, an applicant proposing a development on the land may request in writing a
credit against the transportation impact fee equal to the amount of any road impact fee
paid to the County for the same land and may also request a credit against the fire
protection impact fee equal to the amount of any fire protection impact fee paid to the
County for the same land. Such written request must be filed not later than the time
when an applicant applies for the first permit of a type listed in Sections
3.24.050(A)(1) or 3.24.060(A)(1) that creates an obligation to pay the type of
development impact fee against which the credit is requested, or the applicant's claim
shall be waived.
3.24.110 Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Interest earned on monies in any impact fee fund shall be considered part of such fund
and shall be subject to the same restrictions on use applicable to the impact fees
deposited in such fund.
B. No monies from any impact fee fund shall be spent for periodic or routine maintenance
of any facility of any type or to cure deficiencies in public facilities existing on the
effective date of this chapter.
C. Nothing in this chapter shall restrict the City from requiring an applicant to construct
reasonable project improvements required to serve the applicant's project, whether or
not such improvements are of a type for which credit is available under Section
3.24.100.
D. The City shall maintain accurate records of the development impact fees paid,
including the name of the person paying such fees, the project for which the fees were
paid, the date of payment of each fee, the amounts received in payment for each fee,
and any other matters that the City deems appropriate or necessary to the accurate
accounting of such fees, and such records shall be available for review by the public
during city business hours.
E. At least once during each fiscal year of the City, the City Administrative Services
Director shall present to the City Commission a proposed impact fee capital
improvements program for the transportation system, fire protection system, water
system, and wastewater system, which identifies the capacity-adding capital
improvements that will benefit new development subject to the terms of this chapter,
exclusive of any improvements needed to correct existing deficiencies or for operation
or maintenance purposes. Such capital improvements program shall assign monies
from each impact fee fund to specific projects and related expenses for improvements
87
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 28
to the type of facilities or services for which the fees in that fund were paid. Any
monies, including any accrued interest, not assigned to specific projects within such
capital improvements program and not expended pursuant to Sections 3.24.090 or
3.24.100(G) shall be retained in the same impact fee fund until the next fiscal year.
The Impact Fee Capital Improvements Program shall be adopted by the City
Commission as a supplemental document to the city budget. The Impact Fee Capital
Improvements Program shall schedule the construction of capital improvements to
serve projected growth and project capital improvement costs, expenditures and
impact fee fund revenues for a five year period. The individual fee funds shall
maintain a positive fiscal balance. The program may be amended by a majority vote
of the City Commission. The City Manager shall adopt and revise, as needed, an
administrative impact fee manual to carry out the purposes of this chapter.
F. The City shall be entitled to retain not more than five percent of the development
impact fees collected as payment for the expenses of collecting the fee and
administering this chapter.
G. If a development impact fee has been calculated and paid based on a mistake or
misrepresentation, it shall be recalculated. Any amounts overpaid by an applicant
shall be refunded by the City to the applicant within thirty days after the City's
acceptance of the recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per
annum since the date of such overpayment. Any amounts underpaid by the applicant
shall be paid to the City within thirty days after the City's acceptance of the
recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per annum since the date
of such underpayment. In the event the underpayment is caused by an error attributed
solely to the City, the applicant shall pay the recalculated amount without interest. In
the case of an underpayment to the City, the City shall not issue any additional permits
or approvals for the project for which the development impact fee was previously paid
until such underpayment is corrected; and if amounts owed to the City are not paid
within such thirty day period, the City may also repeal any permits issued in reliance
on the previous payment of such development impact fee and refund such fee to the
then current owner of the land.
H. In order to promote affordable workforce housing of the City, the City Commission
may waive impact fees for Workforce Housing Lots approved by the City Commission
pursuant to the BMC Title 17, Chapter 2 by paying some or all of the impact fee from
other funds of the city that are not restricted to other uses. In order to promote the
economic development of the city and the provision of affordable housing in the city,
the City Commission may agree to pay some or all of the development impact fees
imposed on a proposed development by this chapter from other funds of the city that
are not restricted to other uses. Any such decision to pay development impact fees on
behalf of an applicant shall be at the discretion of the City Commission and shall be
made pursuant to goals and objectives previously adopted by the City Commission to
promote economic development and/or affordable housing.
I. Any determination made by any official of the city charged with the administration of
any part of this chapter may be appealed to the Development Impact Fees Review
Committee by filing:
1. A written notice of appeal on a form provided by the City;
88
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 29
2. A written explanation of why the appellant feels that a determination was in
error; and
3. An appeal fee of five hundred dollars with the Impact Fee Coordinator
within ten working days after the determination for which the appeal is being
filed.
The Development Impact Fees Review Committee shall meet to review the
appeal within thirty working days of the date the written appeal was presented to
the Impact Fee Coordinator. If the appellant is dissatisfied with the decision of
the Development Impact Fees Review Committee, the appellant may appeal the
decision to the City Commission by filing a written request with the City Clerk
within ten working days of the Committee's decision. At the regular meeting
following the filing of the appeal, the City Commission shall fix a time and place
for hearing the appeal; and the City Clerk shall mail notice of the hearing to the
appellant at the address given in the notice of appeal. The hearing shall be
conducted at the time and place stated in such notice given by the City
Commission. The determination of the City Commission shall be final. If the
City Commission concludes that all or part of a determination made by an official
of the city charged with the administration of any part of this chapter was in error,
then the appeal fee described above shall be returned to the appellant.
J. Updating of impact fee information.
1. The facility plans described in this chapter shall be reviewed by the City at least
once every five years and if a revision of a facility plan to address changed
conditions is deemed necessary, by the City, the plan shall be updated.
2. The development impact fees described in this chapter, fee studies, data and
analysis relied upon and required by section 7-6-1602, MCA, and the
administrative procedures and manual of this chapter shall be updated at least
once every three fiscal years.
3. The impact fee capital improvement program shall be reviewed and updated as
provided in section 3.24.110(E) above.
4. The purpose of the review and updating of impact fee related documentation is to
ensure that:
a The demand and cost assumptions underlying such fees are still valid;
b. The resulting fees do not exceed the actual cost of constructing
improvements that are of the type for which the fee was paid and that are
required to serve new development;
c. The monies collected or to be collected in each impact fee fund have been,
and are expected to be, spent for improvements of the type for which such
fees were paid; and
d. That such improvements will benefit those developments for which the fees
were paid.
K. The development impact fees shown in Tables 3.24.050, 3.24.060, 3.24.070, and
3.24.080 shall be adjusted annually to reflect the effects of inflation on those costs for
89
Most Recently Amended By Ord. 1746 Effective 9/6/2008
p. 30
improvements set forth in the impact fee studies. On January 1st of each year unless
and until the fees in Tables 3.24.050, 3.24.060, 3.24.070, and/or 3.24.080 are revised
or replaced, and then beginning in the subsequent calendar year, each fee amount set
forth in each such table shall be adjusted by multiplying such amount by one (1) plus
the value of the Construction Cost Index published in the first December edition of the
current year. – Source: Engineering News Record. The right-of-way component of the
transportation impact fee shall be adjusted by multiplying the value of the right-of-way
component of the fee by one (1) plus the percentage value of the increase in taxable
value from the preceding year. – Source: Montana Department of Revenue. Such
adjustments in such fees shall become effective immediately upon calculation by the
City and shall not require additional action by the City Commission to be effective.
M. The section titles used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not effect the
interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter.
N. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, or annul the
reasonableness, legality, or validity of any development impact fee must be filed and
service of process effected within ninety days following the date of imposition of the
fee or the final determination of the City Commission, whichever is the later.
90
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED 2009
TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 6. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND TAXATION
Part 16. Impact Fees to Fund Capital Improvements
Section 7-6-1601. Definitions. As used in this part, the following definitions apply:
(1) (a) "Capital improvements" means improvements, land, and equipment with a useful
life of 10 years or more that increase or improve the service capacity of a public facility.
(b) The term does not include consumable supplies.
(2) "Connection charge" means the actual cost of connecting a property to a public utility system
and is limited to the labor, materials, and overhead involved in making connections and installing
meters.
(3) "Development" means construction, renovation, or installation of a building or structure, a
change in use of a building or structure, or a change in the use of land when the construction,
installation, or other action creates additional demand for public facilities.
(4) "Governmental entity" means a county, city, town, or consolidated government.
(5) (a) "Impact fee" means any charge imposed upon development by a governmental
entity as part of the development approval process to fund the additional service capacity
required by the development from which it is collected. An impact fee may include a fee
for the administration of the impact fee not to exceed 5% of the total impact fee collected.
(b) The term does not include:
(i) a charge or fee to pay for administration, plan review, or inspection costs
associated with a permit required for development;
(ii) a connection charge;
(iii) any other fee authorized by law, including but not limited to user fees, special
improvement district assessments, fees authorized under Title 7 for county,
municipal, and consolidated government sewer and water districts and systems,
and costs of ongoing maintenance; or
(iv) onsite or offsite improvements necessary for new development to meet the
safety, level of service, and other minimum development standards that have been
adopted by the governmental entity.
(6) "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost of capital system improvements that
reasonably relates to the service demands and needs of the project. A proportionate share must
take into account the limitations provided in 7-6-1602.
(7) "Public facilities" means:
(a) a water supply production, treatment, storage, or distribution facility;
Page 1 of 6
91
(b) a wastewater collection, treatment, or disposal facility;
(c) a transportation facility, including roads, streets, bridges, rights-of-way, traffic
signals, and landscaping;
(d) a storm water collection, retention, detention, treatment, or disposal facility or a flood
control facility;
(e) a police, emergency medical rescue, or fire protection facility; and
(f) other facilities for which documentation is prepared as provided in 7-6-1602 that have
been approved as part of an impact fee ordinance or resolution by:
(i) a two-thirds majority of the governing body of an incorporated city, town, or
consolidated local government; or
(ii) a unanimous vote of the board of county commissioners of a county
government.
History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 299, L. 2005.
Section 7-6-1602. Calculation of impact fees -- documentation required -- ordinance or
resolution -- requirements for impact fees.
(1) For each public facility for which an impact fee is imposed, the governmental entity shall
prepare and approve a service area report.
(2) The service area report is a written analysis that must:
(a) describe existing conditions of the facility;
(b) establish level-of-service standards;
(c) forecast future additional needs for service for a defined period of time;
(d) identify capital improvements necessary to meet future needs for service;
(e) identify those capital improvements needed for continued operation and maintenance
of the facility;
(f) make a determination as to whether one service area or more than one service area is
necessary to establish a correlation between impact fees and benefits;
(g) make a determination as to whether one service area or more than one service area for
transportation facilities is needed to establish a correlation between impact fees and
benefits;
(h) establish the methodology and time period over which the governmental entity will
assign the proportionate share of capital costs for expansion of the facility to provide
service to new development within each service area;
Page 2 of 6
92
(i) establish the methodology that the governmental entity will use to exclude operations
and maintenance costs and correction of existing deficiencies from the impact fee;
(j) establish the amount of the impact fee that will be imposed for each unit of increased
service demand; and
(k) have a component of the budget of the governmental entity that:
(i) schedules construction of public facility capital improvements to serve
projected growth;
(ii) projects costs of the capital improvements;
(iii) allocates collected impact fees for construction of the capital improvements;
and
(iv) covers at least a 5-year period and is reviewed and updated at least every 2
years.
(3) The service area report is a written analysis that must contain documentation of sources and
methodology used for purposes of subsection (2) and must document how each impact fee meets
the requirements of subsection (7).
(4) The service area report that supports adoption and calculation of an impact fee must be
available to the public upon request.
(5) The amount of each impact fee imposed must be based upon the actual cost of public facility
expansion or improvements or reasonable estimates of the cost to be incurred by the
governmental entity as a result of new development. The calculation of each impact fee must be
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
(6) The ordinance or resolution adopting the impact fee must include a time schedule for
periodically updating the documentation required under subsection (2).
(7) An impact fee must meet the following requirements:
(a) The amount of the impact fee must be reasonably related to and reasonably
attributable to the development's share of the cost of infrastructure improvements made
necessary by the new development.
(b) The impact fees imposed may not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred
or to be incurred by the governmental entity in accommodating the development. The
following factors must be considered in determining a proportionate share of public
facilities capital improvements costs:
(i) the need for public facilities capital improvements required to serve new
development; and
Page 3 of 6
93
(ii) consideration of payments for system improvements reasonably anticipated to
be made by or as a result of the development in the form of user fees, debt service
payments, taxes, and other available sources of funding the system improvements.
(c) Costs for correction of existing deficiencies in a public facility may not be included in
the impact fee.
(d) New development may not be held to a higher level of service than existing users
unless there is a mechanism in place for the existing users to make improvements to the
existing system to match the higher level of service.
(e) Impact fees may not include expenses for operations and maintenance of the facility.
History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 299, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 358, L. 2009.
Section 7-6-1603. Collection and expenditure of impact fees -- refunds or credits -- mechanism
for appeal required.
(1) The collection and expenditure of impact fees must comply with this part. The collection and
expenditure of impact fees must be reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the
development paying the impact fees. The ordinance or resolution adopted by the governmental
entity must include the following requirements:
(a) Upon collection, impact fees must be deposited in a special proprietary fund, which
must be invested with all interest accruing to the fund.
(b) A governmental entity may impose impact fees on behalf of local districts.
(c) If the impact fees are not collected or spent in accordance with the impact fee
ordinance or resolution or in accordance with 7-6-1602, any impact fees that were
collected must be refunded to the person who owned the property at the time that the
refund was due.
(2) All impact fees imposed pursuant to the authority granted in this part must be paid no earlier
than the date of issuance of a building permit if a building permit is required for the development
or no earlier than the time of wastewater or water service connection or well or septic permitting.
(3) A governmental entity may recoup costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when
the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, by
requiring impact fees for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to
recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602 in a manner
that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. This part does not prevent a governmental
entity from continuing to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an
existing facility. The impact fees imposed to recoup the costs to provide the excess capacity must
be based on the governmental entity's actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the
Page 4 of 6
94
facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess
capacity.
(4) Governmental entities may accept the dedication of land or the construction of public
facilities in lieu of payment of impact fees if:
(a) the need for the dedication or construction is clearly documented pursuant to 7-6-
1602;
(b) the land proposed for dedication for the public facilities to be constructed is
determined to be appropriate for the proposed use by the governmental entity;
(c) formulas or procedures for determining the worth of proposed dedications or
constructions are established as part of the impact fee ordinance or resolution; and
(d) a means to establish credits against future impact fee revenue has been created as part
of the adopting ordinance or resolution if the dedication of land or construction of public
facilities is of worth in excess of the impact fee due from an individual development.
(5) Impact fees may not be imposed for remodeling, rehabilitation, or other improvements to an
existing structure or for rebuilding a damaged structure unless there is an increase in units that
increase service demand as described in 7-6-1602(2)(j). If impact fees are imposed for
remodeling, rehabilitation, or other improvements to an existing structure or use, only the net
increase between the old and new demand may be imposed.
(6) This part does not prevent a governmental entity from granting refunds or credits:
(a) that it considers appropriate and that are consistent with the provisions of 7-6-1602
and this chapter; or
(b) in accordance with a voluntary agreement, consistent with the provisions of 7-6-1602
and this chapter, between the governmental entity and the individual or entity being
assessed the impact fees.
(7) An impact fee represents a fee for service payable by all users creating additional demand on
the facility.
(8) An impact fee ordinance or resolution must include a mechanism whereby a person charged
an impact fee may appeal the charge if the person believes an error has been made.
History: En. Sec. 3, Ch. 299, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 358, L. 2009.
Section 7-6-1604. Impact fee advisory committee.
(1) A governmental entity that intends to propose an impact fee ordinance or resolution shall
establish an impact fee advisory committee.
Page 5 of 6
95
Page 6 of 6
(2) An impact fee advisory committee must include at least one representative of the
development community and one certified public accountant. The committee shall review and
monitor the process of calculating, assessing, and spending impact fees.
(3) The impact fee advisory committee shall serve in an advisory capacity to the governing body
of the governmental entity.
History: En. Sec. 4, Ch. 299, L. 2005.
96
City of Bozeman, Montana
Adopted
Capital Improvements
Program
Fiscal Years 2011-2015
City of Bozeman Vehicle Maintenance Shop—Streamline Bus Storage — Joint Facility, 2009
97
CITY OF BOZEMANCAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM WATER IMPACT FEE PROJECTSItem Ref # -----------Projected Costs by Fiscal Year----------- Not # Project Title Department/DivisionCategoryFY11FY12FY13FY14 FY15Total ScheduledW07 22MG MEMBRANE WATER TREATMENT PLANTWater Impact Fees Project 500,000 5,000,000 2,800,000 - 8,300,000 WIF01 SOURDOUGH CREEK DAM Water Impact Fees Project 200,000 200,000 19,750,000 WIF03 5.3MG CONCRETE WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Water Impact Fees Project- 5,300,000 WIF05 REDUNDANT TRANSMISSION MAIN FROM WTPWater Impact Fees Project- - 21,680,000 WIF07 GRAF STREET EXTENSIONWater Impact Fees Project- 150,000 wif08 WATER TREATMENT PLANT DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT Water Impact Fees Project318,567 324,935 643,502 ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________Total700,000$ 5,000,000$ 2,800,000$ 318,567$ 324,935$ 9,143,502$ 46,880,000$ 26498
City of Bozeman, Montana
Approved
Capital Improvements
Program
Fiscal Years 2012-2016
City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility—Administrative & Lab Building, 2011
99
CIP PROJECT FUNDPROJ.DEPARTMENPROJECT NAMEFY12FY13FY14FY16UnscheduledFY15Impact Fees WaterW07WATER IFWATER TREATMENT PLANT 22MG MEMBRANE PLANT$5,000,000$3,075,290WIF01WATER IFSOURDOUGH CREEK DAM$19,750,000WIF03WATER IF5.3MG CONCRETE WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR$5,300,000WIF05WATER IFREDUNDANT TRANMISSION MAIN FROM WTP$21,680,000WIF07WATER IFGRAF STREET EXTENSION$150,000WIF08WATER IFWATER TREATMENT PLAN DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT$416,201$424,525$433,015WIF09WATER IFIntegrated Water Resources Plan$250,000Summary for Impact Fees Water (7 items)Totals by year:$5,250,000 $3,075,290 $416,201 $424,525$433,015$46,880,000FY12FY13FY14FY15FY16Unscheduled189100
City of Bozeman, Montana
Adopted
Capital Improvements
Program
Fiscal Years 2011-2015
City of Bozeman Vehicle Maintenance Shop—Streamline Bus Storage — Joint Facility, 2009
101
CITY OF BOZEMANCAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM STREET IMPACT FEE PROJECTSItem ----------------------------Projected Costs by Fiscal Year-------------------------------Not # Project TitleDepartment/Division Category FY11FY12FY13FY14 FY15Total ScheduledSIF01RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONSTR IMPACT FEESProject 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000 SIF02BAXTER (19TH TO COTTONWOOD)STR IMPACT FEESProject 500,000 500,000 2,850,000 SIF04CHURCHSTR IMPACT FEESProject- 5,800,000 SIF05COLLEGE (8TH TO 19TH)STR IMPACT FEESProject- 2,000,000 SIF06COLLEGE (MAIN TO 19TH)STR IMPACT FEESProject 250,000 250,000 5,660,000 6,160,000 SIF08DURSTON (FOWLER TO COTTONWOOD)STR IMPACT FEESProject500,000 5,000,000 5,500,000 SIF09KAGY (WILLSON TO 19TH)STR IMPACT FEESProject- 6,650,000 SIF10OAK (CEDAR TO MAIN STREET)STR IMPACT FEESProject- UNKNOWNSIF11OAK (ROUSE TO CEDAR)STR IMPACT FEESProject - 8,900,000 SIF19INTERSECTION CONTROL: 27th & OAKSTR IMPACT FEESProject 500,000 500,000 SIF20INTERSECTION CONTROL: 7th & KAGYSTR IMPACT FEESProject - 540,000 SIF21GRAF STREET CONNECTIONSTR IMPACT FEESProject- 1,000,000 SIF22INTERSECTION CONTROL: COLLEGE & 8THSTR IMPACT FEESProject 500,000 500,000 Total350,000$ 850,000$ 6,260,000$ 600,000$ 5,600,000$ 13,660,000$ 27,740,000$ Note: Projects with external funding sources (ie. Federal Appropriations, grants, urban funds, or developer contributions) indicate "total project costs", with correspondingrevenue sources indicated on the revenue schedule. Projects financed completely with City dollars but out of separate City funds are shown with the respective funding amount ineach schedule of the CIP.239102
City of Bozeman, Montana
Approved
Capital Improvements
Program
Fiscal Years 2012-2016
City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility—Administrative & Lab Building, 2011
103
CIP PROJECT FUNDPROJ.DEPARTMENTPROJECT NAMEFY12FY13FY14FY16UnscheduledFY15Impact Fees StreetsSIF01STREET IFRIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000SIF02STREET IFBAXTER (19TH TO COTTONWOOD)$3,350,000SIF04STREET IFCHURCH$5,800,000SIF05STREET IFCOLLEGE (8TH TO 19TH)$2,000,000SIF06STREET IFCOLLEGE (MAIN TO 19TH)$250,000$5,660,000SIF08STREET IFDURSTON (FOWLER TO FERGUSON)$1,500,000SIF09STREET IFKAGY (WILLSON TO 19TH)$650,000$6,000,000SIF19STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: 27TH & OAK$500,000SIF20STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: 7TH & KAGY$540,000SIF21STREET IFGRAF STREET CONNECTION$1,000,000SIF22STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: COLLEGE & 8TH$750,000SIF23STREET IFHIGHLAND BLVD (MAIN STREET TO KAGY BLVD.)$7,600,000SIF24STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: HIGHLAND AND ELLIS STREET$500,000SIF25STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: HIGHLAND AND KAGY$750,000SIF26STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: CHURCH AND KAGY$750,000SIF27STREET IFINTERSECTION CONTROL: COTTONWOOD ROAD & DURSTON AVE$500,000SIF28STREET IFNORTH 27TH STREET (OAK TO TSCHACHE)$200,000Summary for Impact Fees Streets (17 items)Totals by year:$850,000 $6,260,000 $750,000 $6,100,000$100,000$24,740,000FY12FY13FY14FY15FY16Unscheduled165104
GREATER BOZEMAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION PLAN (2007 UPDATE)
prepared by
Helena, MT
Robert Peccia & Associates
April 2009
and
Portland, OR
ALTA Planning + Design
Cambridge, MA
Cambridge Systematics
APR
105
0 5,0002,500
Feet
Interpretation of MapThis map presents the Recommended Major Street Network. It shows how the street network should develop over time and is intended to be used as a planning tool. It will assist in theevaluation of long-term traffic needs when planning future developments. The route alignments shown are conceptual in nature.The actual alignments may vary based on development patterns, geographic features, and other issues unknown at this time. The community planners will strive to designthe roads to fit the character of the landscape and minimize impacts on natural features such as wetlands, mature trees, and riparian corridors.Most of these routes are not recommended for construction at this time. The development of these conceptual routes will take decades to become reality, and will only become roadsif traffic needs materialize as a result of development in the area. Many of the existing roads identified as arterial routes are currently functioning as collectors or local streets and will beupgraded as traffic needs increase.It is important to note that although this major street network is recommended as part of the Transportation Plan, it does not reflect the federally approved functional classification criteriawhich is based on current conditions rather than anticipated future conditions.
Existing Major Street Network andFuture Right-Of-Way Corridor NeedsFigure 9-2
Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan(2007 Update)Legend Local Roadway
Detail Area
Urban Boundary
City Boundary
InterstatePrincipal ArterialMinor ArterialCollectorFuture Principal Arterial*Future Minor Arterial*Future Collector*
Note:Future links identified where no roadcurrently exists will be constructed asthe surrounding are develops.
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155