Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-11 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes (2) MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 17, 2011 BOZEMAN, MONTANA The Impact Fee Advisory Committee of the City of Bozeman met in the Commission room, City Hall at 121 North Rouse on Thursday, November 17, 2011. Present were board members Rob Evans, Randy Carpenter, George Thompson, James Nickelson and David Graham. Also present were Commission Liaison Chris Mehl, City Engineer Rick Hixson, Finance Director Anna Rosenberry, Assistant Planning Director, Chris Saunders, and Deputy City Clerk Aimee Kissel taking minutes. Present in the audience were Director of Economic Development and Community Relations Brit Fontenot and Public Works Director Debbie Arkell. ITEM 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson James Nickelson called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. ITEM 2. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2011 Motion and Vote to approve the minutes of October 27, 2011 as submitted. It was moved by Anna Rosenberry, seconded by Rob Evans to approve the minutes of October 27, 2011 as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. ITEM 3. PUBLIC COMMENT James Nickelson opened public comment. No person commented. ITEM 4. CITY COMMISSION LIAISON Commissioner Chris Mehl thanked Committee members for volunteering. He also confirmed a Committee quorum would be present for the next meeting on December Stn ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Transportation Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program Annual Update (Rosenberry) Ms. Rosenberry explained that the new packet provided have been updated with the changes the Committee made during the last meeting. In addition, City Engineer Rick Hixson was able to provide an updated estimate on the College project. Ms. Rosenberry said she would hope to have 1 of 7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 the list approved and recommended to the Commission in whatever manner the Committee wishes. Cr. Mehl asked about the rankings on the schedule. Ms. Rosenberry explained the rankings are included in the detailed individual forms and said she would add them back to the main schedule prior to the Commission discussion on this item. The Committee began discussion on staff's recommendation. Responding to a question from David Graham, Ms. Rosenberry reviewed changes made since the last Committee meeting. These included: Dollar amounts Project 920,Manley Road intersection control improvements Project 432 unscheduled Project 928 improvements on North 27th—move from unscheduled and into the next year. This is a small piece of roadway that is not connected right now. City Planner Chris Saunders reported receiving a letter from the public regarding the North 27th project regarding an upcoming site plan on the corner. While city funding would handle costs from expansion, the developer would be contributing site improvement related work. Since there is a potential for development and partnering, this item was moved up in the CIP. Mr. Saunders also reported receiving public comment regarding project 932 from Director of Economic Development and Community Relations Brit Fontenot (see packet materials). Director of Economic Development and Community Relations Brit Fontenot said in addition to recommendations made in his November 7th memorandum to the Committee he would also like to add consideration of an intersection control device at North 7th and Griffin Drive as unscheduled. Mr. Saunders spoke regarding a letter in the first packet from TD & H Engineering asking for consideration of a possible signalization at the intersection of Griffin and Manley Drive. This was for a potential user that never materialized. Mr. Saunders and Mr. Fontenot spoke based on the discussion from the last meeting, how impact fee funding is partnered with other funding resources on this project. There is an existing signal at N. 7th and Griffin Drive but that intersection has two arterial, urban streets with large industrial property to the northwest. If there was significant development there, significant improvements would be needed at 7th and Griffin. The discussion then moved to leveraging other funding sources, minimizing impact fee expense while getting the most value while facilitating development. For this reason, Mr. Saunders and Mr. Fontenot would rather prioritize 7th and Griffin rather than Manley. Mr. Saunders explained they do not have a recommendation for what year to place this in as there is not anything pending 2 of 7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 though the TIF board is interested in encouraging development. The timing would be driven by an actual development, so this item could be placed under unscheduled with the idea that if something significant was started, this project would be queued up. Mr. Saunders said there is no cost estimate available at this time for 7t' and Griffin. General signalization costs run about $500,000 with some right of way acquisition costs. There is potential for partner funding which would lower the impact fee cost share. Discussion and explanation occurred regarding partner funding. City Engineer Rick Hixson spoke regarding the possibility of using urban funds on urban routes and the process of approving those through the Transportation Coordinating Committee and then the Commission and considering the impact of taking urban funds from other planned projects. James Nickelson confirmed that should the Committee choose to add the 7t' and Griffin project, they could estimate $500,000 for now. Mr. Fontenot reported working on a planning effort with Mandeville Farms and State lands to the south of that property. If that proceeds, the project in question would be an important piece. Mr. Nickelson confirmed with Ms. Rosenberry that an intersection control project could be added later into fiscal year 2017. Ms. Rosenberry explained that the more left on the table in the last year of the plan, the more flexibility to add a project in the middle of a plan year. It is important that the last year of the plan has a positive balance. If we want to leave flexibility for projects to come in as development opportunities arise, it is better to leave more of a balance in the plan. David Graham asked whether this item was being recommended for the CIP to encourage future development in this area. Mr. Saunders responded that it allows conversations to happen with the Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Board. Ms. Rosenberry explained that having a project on the list keeps more focus on the needs of the different elements of a project such as right-of-way, etc. Mr. Fontenot added that the intention was to identify the strategically developable properties and get them front and center to help staff keep them in mind and to also show the community that we are trying to think ahead and be proactive. Cr. Mehl urged the Committee to keep the list moderate and that the important piece from the Commission's perspective is to make it clear that if someone does come to the Commission with a proposal, the Commission will listen. 3 of 7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 Mr. Thompson asked whether staff would recommend pulling the Manley and Griffin project off and replace it with 7th and Griffin. Mr. Fontenot responded that he would prefer that the Manley and Griffin project remain on the list. The Committee continued discussion regarding what projects to keep on the list and in which year. Rick Hixson began a discussion regarding whether Church Street from Main to Kagy Blvd. should be removed from the list as the project will be extremely costly and difficult and is not anticipated for years to come. Ms. Rosenberry said the Committee needs to take one of the items within the first five years and move it to unscheduled to maintain a cash balance if the 7th and Griffin project is added as scheduled. Discussion continued regarding scheduled vs. unscheduled projects. David Graham asked whether intersection controls are always roundabouts or stoplights? Mr. Hixson said in general, the main options are signals, roundabouts or stop controls. Motion to adopt the street impact fee budget as recommended by staff. It was moved by Rick Hixson, seconded by George Thompson to adopt the street impact fee budget as recommended by staff. David Graham began discussion regarding what the Committee would be adopting; specifically whether other funding sources would be adopted. Mr. Saunders clarified the Committee would be making a recommendation on the draft in its entirety. He said as design work happens and as funding sources become solidified the dollar amounts change. Discussion continued regarding how money is allocated to projects and what projects the Impact Fee Committee would consider again. Cr. Mehl clarified that the City Commission will be considering this list on December 5th and the program can be changed by the Commission later as well. Ms. Rosenberry explained that if any changes need to be made to any of these projects regarding percent of allocated funding, etc. tonight would be the time to make those changes. Mr. Saunders explained that the City Commission actually approves individual projects during the yearly budget approval when more accurate numbers and information is available. 4of7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 Amendment and Vote to the main motion to add the North 7 t and Griffin Drive signal improvements as a separate item to the schedule, and that they be unscheduled at half a million dollars. It was moved by Anna Rosenberry, seconded by Rick Hixson to add the North 7 t and Griffin Drive signal improvements as a separate item to the schedule, and that they be unscheduled at half a million dollars. The amendment to the main motion passed unanimously. Motion and Vote to move the intersection control at Cottonwood Road and Durston Avenue to unscheduled. It was moved by Rick Hixson, seconded by Randy Carpenter to move the intersection control at Cottonwood Road and Durston Avenue to unscheduled. The amendment to the main motion passed unanimously. The Committee discussed whether Church Street should be dropped off the list. Chairperson Nickelson asked for further discussion or amendments to the main motion. Rob Evans began a discussion regarding how there has been very little discussion regarding the aspects of the CIP related to funding sources and percentages. He did not understand he was voting on that portion of the CIP at this juncture. Ms. Rosenberry explained how other funding elements contribute to projects in which impact fees are to be used and how it is decided how each will contribute. Mr. Hixson further explained the balancing act to determine funding sources and percentages that can be used on projects using urban funds as an example. Mr. Hixson explained that current capacity is a strict calculation based on the physical, capital structure measured across the roadway that exists. For example, the addition of bike lanes where there were none would be considered capacity expanding and would be impact fee eligible since the current capacity for bikes is 0. Mr. Hixson explained that staff uses the same logic for intersections. Using College and l lth as an example, Mr. Hixson explained in 1995 the level of service at that intersection was an A or B (how well an intersection is working based on delay rated from A (best) to E (worst)). Due to the impact of growth at that intersection, the level of service became degraded over time causing the need for the roundabout to replace the 4 way stop. Mr. Saunders further explained that whether two lanes are functioning at or over capacity, replacing asphalt as maintenance. 5 of 7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 Mr. Evans said the board has not really analyzed the percentages used to determine how much impact fees should be used on intersections or other projects and he did not understand recommendation of the document was all or nothing. Cr. Mehl emphasized that he understood the concerns raised and future discussions looking at the results of the impact fee study will explore these issues. In the meantime, none of the intersections are scheduled for 2013, so the Committee will have time to analyze this. Mr. Nickelson verified with Mr. Hixson that the final percentage split is based upon the actual project. Mr. Hixson explained how the calculation is reconciled. Mr. Graham continued questions regarding how the calculations are made and said he disagrees with staffs interpretation of the statute saying he reads it as net increase between the old and new demand and not that anything that's greater is capacity expanding. Mr. Saunders said we hired a consultant to help us through these issues. Mr. Hixson explained that Tyndale and Oliver who conducted the original impact fee study verified that 100% impact fee allocation is absolutely legal and is the maximum amount that you could allocate to that project but the Commission can change that percent. Ms. Rosenberry began a discussion looking at different funding sources that may need to be found in lieu of impact fees in order to complete a project. She also spoke about projects that are impact fee eligible, but because other funding such as urban funds is available for a particular project, impact fees are not used because we know we have other projects that do not have other funding options. Ms. Rosenberry said her preferred option is urban funds, then impact fees, special improvement districts, etc. Ms. Rosenberry responded to questions from Mr. Graham about the general fund saying the general fund makes the match for CTEP (grants) but not a lot of improvement costs. The Committee continued discussion regarding the need to examine funding sources and percentages further and concerns by some members that the Committee may be approving a document they do not fully understand at this juncture. Cr. Mehl said the Commission will be most likely scrutinizing the percentages in the summer after this Committee has performed the bulk of the work with the consultant and before the final budget has been approved. Mr. Evans said his understanding is that while in fact the Committee will be approving the document in its entirety, practically speaking they are approving the priority of the projects. 6 of 7 Impact Fee Advisory Committee Minutes, November 17, 2011 Cr. Mehl apologized if this was not clear and reiterated that members and public will have every opportunity this summer and also when the budget is approved in December to have an impact. Debbie Arkell mentioned that the Commission has not always chosen to use the full impact fees that staff recommended. They have created Special Improvement Districts in the past. Vote on the main motion as amended to adopt the street impact fee budget as recommended by staff. to add the North 7 t and Griffin Drive signal improvements as a separate item to the schedule, and that they be unscheduled at half a million dollars to move the intersection control at Cottonwood Road and Durston Avenue to unscheduled. The main motion passed as amended 6-1 with David Graham opposed. ITEM 6. OLD BUSINESS Impact Fee Project Update Website Chris Saunders showed Committee members how to access an exciting new site on the city of Bozeman webpage for the impact fee update project. This page includes news, upcoming events, resources and an interactive impact fee map. The map is a great piece of work from the GIS department and allows the user to add different layers as needed to show things like zoning boundaries, city limits, annexations, the major water distribution system is, where we need to make major future line improvements and other similar information. To reach this site from the city of Bozeman home page at www.bozeman.net: Click the `Bids Projects' icon on the left side of the page. On the next page click `Impact Fee Update'. Next Impact Fee Committee Meeting December 8tb. There will be a break over the holidays and then a meeting will be scheduled when the consultant is ready to meet with the Committee. ITEM 7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS None ITEM 8. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson James Nickelson adjourned the meeting at 7:08 p.m. James Nickelson, Chairperson, Impact Fee Advisory Committee, City of Bozeman ATTESTED AND PREPARED BY: Aimee Kissel, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED: 7 of 7