The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-05-12 City Commission meeting materials - ALLTable of Contents Agenda 4 September 17, 2012 09-17-12 (RM) su 7 September 24, 2012 09-24-2012 (RM) su 15 October 1, 2012 10-01-12 draft minutes, ab 31 Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims Claims Memo 39 Authorize City Manager to sign a Notice of Award to Lutey Construction for the remodel and renovation of the Water Department Building at 5519 Saxson Way, in the Laurel Glen Subdivision City Commission Memo 40 Bid Form 42 Notice of Award 50 Authorize Mayor to sign Findings of Fact and Order for the preliminary plat of Lot 7A, Block 10, of Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision, Application P-12009 P12009 - Lot 7A, Blk 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 MiSub - CC Cover Memo 51 P12009 - Lot 7A, Blk 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 MiSub - Applicant's Submittal 52 P12009 - Lot 7A, Blk 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 MiSub - Findings of Fact and Order 53 Ratify City Manager's signature on a Professional Services Agreement with Clarion Associates for Planning Services related to Unified Development Code Amendments for the North Seventh Avenue Urban Renewal Board Memo to City Commission 61 SKMBT_C55012102615580 62 Approve Cancelling the City Commission meeting the week of November 12, 2012 cancel meeting memo 71 Approve Depository Bonds and Pledged Securities as of September 30, 2012 Commission Memorandum - Pledged Securities - Approval 0912 72 Depository Bonds & Securities 0912 73 Approve Resolution 4416, authorizing Change Order 10 for the Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility, Phase I Improvements Commission Memo 77 Resolution 78 Change Order No. 1 summary 80 1 Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1820, authorizing City Manager to submit an Application for Approval of a Certificate of Survey to Relocate the Common Boundary Line between City-owned property at the Bozeman Public Library and the Adjacent Harrington’s Parcel cc meeting 11-05-12 90 Attachment 1 - ORDINANCE NO 1820 92 Attachment 2 09-19-11 Minutes, City Commission 96 Attachment 3 109 Attachment 4 maint. agreement 111 Attachment 5 115 Attachment 6 116 Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1843, amending Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Impact Fees to remove specific references Cover memo 117 Ordinance 1843 118 Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1845, establishing initial zoning in conjunction with annexation of 3601 Good Medicine Way, Z- 12068 Cover memo 155 Ordinance 1845 156 Ordinance 1845 Map 161 Provisionally Adopt Ordinance No. 1846, Zone Map Amendment to Central Business District (B-3) for Application Z-12122, on 2.8 acres on South Wallace Prov. Adopt. Ord. 1846 - CC Memo 162 Prov. Adopt. Ord. 1846 - Ordinance 163 Prov. Adopt. Ord. 1846 - ZMA Map 166 First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment, Application Z- 12219 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - Commission Cover Memo 167 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - Applicant's Submittal 169 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - Staff Report w/o Attachments 190 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - Staff Report Attachments 201 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - ZC Minutes 205 Z12219 First Baptist Church ZMA - ZC Resolution 210 Request for Issuance of Disclaimer of Interest or QuitClaim Deed for property located at or adjacent to 323 S. Wallace Commission Memo re 323 S. Wallace 212 Attachment 1 214 Attachment 2 215 Attachment 3 216 Request from Jeffrey & Katherine Ball 217 Letter from Brian Gallik on behalf of Jeffrey & Katherine Ball 218 2 Resolution No. 4414, adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan memo cc meeting 11-5-12 resolution 4414 10-25-12 228 Resolution 4414 Adopting the CDP 10-24-12 232 Attachment 1 SBTT CDP 235 EXHIBITS B AND C legal desc and map 349 South Bozeman Technology District - Property Owners List 351 Notice of Public Hearing for Tech TIF 10 12 352 Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1844, Creating the South Bozeman Technology District memo cc meeting 11-5-12 ordinance 1844 - FINAL 10- 29-12 353 Ord 1844 Creation of South Bozeman Tech TIF - 10-23- 12 359 EXHIBITS A AND B legal desc and map 365 South Bozeman Technology District - Property Owners List 367 Notice of Public Hearing for Tech TIF 10 12 368 Appointment to the Building Division Board of Appeals 11-5-12 Board of Appeals Appt 369 O'Brien, Appeals (partial) app, 10-12 370 Appointment to the Design Review Board 11-5-12 Design Board appts 371 Howe (partial) Design app, 10-12 373 3 1 of 3 THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA AGENDA Monday, November 5, 2012 A. Call to Order – 6 p.m. – Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence C. Changes to the Agenda D. Public Service Announcements 1. 2012 Annual Beautification Awards Ceremony on November 7th at 7 p.m. in the Library, large conference room (Brekke) 2. City Hall Closed Tuesday, November 6th and Monday, November 12th (Ulmen) E. Authorize Absence of Commissioner Krauss Consider the motion: I move to approve the absence of Commissioner Krauss. F. Minutes – September 17th, September 24th and October 1, 2012 Consider the motion: I move to approve the minutes of September 17th, September 24th and October 1st, 2012 as submitted. G. Consent 1. Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims (LaMeres) 2. Authorize City Manager to sign Notice of Award to Lutey Construction for renovation of the Water Department Building at 5519 Saxson Way, in the Laurel Glen Subdivision (Goehrung) 3. Authorize Mayor to sign Findings of Fact and Order for the preliminary plat of Lot 7A, Block 10, of Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision, Application P-12009 (Skelton) 4. Ratify City Manager's signature on a Professional Services Agreement with Clarion Associates for planning services related to Unified Development Code Amendments for the North Seventh Avenue Urban Renewal Board (Thorpe) Bozeman City Commission Agenda, November 5, 2012 2 of 3 5. Approve Cancelling the City Commission meeting the week of November 12, 2012 (Ulmen) 6. Approve Depository Bonds and Pledged Securities as of September 30, 2012 (Clark) 7. Approve Resolution 4416, authorizing Change Order 10 for the Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility, Phase I Improvements (Murray) 8. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1820, authorizing City Manager to submit an Application for Approval of a Certificate of Survey to Relocate the Common Boundary Line between City-owned property at the Bozeman Public Library and the Adjacent Harrington’s Parcel (Fontenot) 9. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1843, amending Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Impact Fees to remove specific references (Saunders) 10. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1845, establishing initial zoning in conjunction with annexation of 3601 Good Medicine Way, Z-12068 (Saunders) 11. Provisionally Adopt Ordinance No. 1846, Zone Map Amendment to Central Business District (B-3) for Application Z-12122, on 2.8 acres on South Wallace (Riley) Consider the motion: I move to approve Consent items G. 1-11 as submitted. H. 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 City Commission. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each agenda item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. I. Action Items 1. First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment, Application Z-12219 (Skelton) Consider the motion: Having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report and in Zoning Commission Resolution Z-12219 for application Z-12219 and move to approve the zone map amendment of R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies listed in the staff report; and denial of the R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233, and direct staff to prepare an ordinance for the zone map amendment. 2. Request for Issuance of Disclaimer of Interest or Quitclaim Deed for property located at or adjacent to 323 S. Wallace (Cooper) Consider the motion: I move to direct staff to initiate the steps necessary to disclaim interest in the 25’ x 150’ strip of land on the westerly portion of the property described as 323 South Wallace Avenue. Bozeman City Commission Agenda, November 5, 2012 3 of 3 3. Resolution No. 4414, adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan (Fontenot) Consider the motion: I move to approve Resolution No. 4414, adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Plan. 4. Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1844, Creating the South Bozeman Technology District (Fontenot) Consider the motion: I move to provisionally adopt Ordinance No. 1844, creating the South Bozeman Technology District. 5. Appointment to the Building Division Board of Appeals (Brunckhorst) Consider the motion: I move to appoint Chuck O’Brien to the Building Division Board of Appeals. 6. Appointment to the Design Review Board (Brunckhorst) Consider the motion: I move to appoint Melvin Howe as a non-professional representative to the Design Review Board. J. FYI/Discussion 1. City offices will be closed Tuesday, November 6th and Monday, November 12th. K. Adjournment City Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, James Goehrung, at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). Commission meetings are televised live on cable channel 20 and streamed live at www.bozeman.net. City Commission meetings are re-aired on cable Channel 20 Wednesday at 4 p.m., Thursday at noon, Friday at 10 a.m. and Sunday at 2 p.m. Page 1 of 8 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA September 17, 2012 ********************** The Commission met in the City Commission Room, City Hall at 121 North Rouse on Monday, September 17, 2012. Present were Mayor Sean Becker, Deputy Mayor Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Chris Mehl, Commissioner Cyndy Andrus, Commissioner Carson Taylor, City Manager Chris Kukulski, Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn, City Finance Director Anna Rosenberry, City Attorney Greg Sullivan, and City Clerk Stacy Ulmen. *These minutes are not word for word and should be considered along with the audio recording. 0:00:00 A. Call to Order – 6 p.m. – Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North B. Executive Session-Litigation Strategy Mayor Becker closed to the public all or portions of this meeting pursuant to Sect. 2-3- 203(4)(a), MCA, finding that the meeting involves a discussion of litigation strategy and an open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the litigation position of the City. *A separate set of minutes have been prepared for Executive Session 0:00:01 C. Call the Regular Meeting Back to Order – 6:45 p.m. Mayor Becker called the Regular meeting to order. 0:00:08 D. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence 0:00:47 E. Changes to the Agenda Mayor Becker asked City Manager Chris Kukulski if there were any changes to the Agenda. Mr. Kukulski stated that an addendum was sent out for Consent Item. 4. 0:01:26 F. Consent 1. Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims (LaMeres) 2. Approve Resolution No. 4407, Legislative Body Relating to a Money Purchase Plan (Rosenberry) 3. Approve Terminating the Carnegie Parcels Request For Proposal process (Fontenot) 4. Provisionally Adopt Ordinance No. 1842, authorizing City Manager to enter into a 2-year space lease with MSU-Extended University for the lease of an office and classroom in the Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building at 20 East Olive (Goehrung) 7 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 2 of 8 0:01:31 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment on the Consent agenda. No person spoke. Mayor Becker closed public comment on the Consent agenda. 0:01:44 Motion and Vote to approve Consent Items F. 1-4 as submitted. It was moved by Cr. Andrus, seconded by Cr. Mehl to approve Consent Items F. 1-4 as submitted. Those voting Aye being Crs. Andrus, Mehl, Deputy Mayor Krauss. Cr. Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 0:02:03 G. Public Comment Mayor Becker opened general public comment. 0:02:25 Jerry Pape, Public Comment Mr. Pape of 15 North 25th spoke regarding Consent Item No. 3. 0:03:24 Public Comment closed Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:03:27 H. Action Items 0:03:28 1. Designation of Save America's Treasures Grant funding for rehabilitation projects at the Rialto Theatre and on North Willson Avenue for the Caird Streetlamp Restoration and authorize City Manager to sign associated Contracts (continued from September 10, 2012) (Kramer) 0:03:55 Courtney Kramer, Staff presentation. Ms. Kramer gave the staff presentation regarding the Designation of Save America's Treasures Grant funding for rehabilitation projects at the Rialto Theatre and on North Willson Avenue for the Caird Streetlamp Restoration and authorize City Manager to sign associated Contracts. 0:05:10 Commission Questions The Commission and Staff spoke regarding time frames for the contract. 0:05:51 Mark Huffstetler, Chair of the Bozeman Historic Board Mr. Huffsteler stated that he was on the professional committee that reviewed these applications over the last few weeks. 0:06:54 Commission Questions The Commission and staff spoke regarding notification and clarification of awards, criteria for applicants, the location of the historical district, variances, preferences and working with the national park services, the process for City reimbursement and conservation easements. 8 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 3 of 8 0:38:18 Ms. Kramer Ms. Kramer spoke regarding recommended motion and vote language. 0:41:54 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. Public comment was put on hold to hear from the applicant. 0:42:29 Applicant Presentation 0:42:38 May Kay Duffie, Rialto Applicant Ms. Kay gave the applicant presentation for the Rialto project. 0:48:10 Questions for applicant The Commission and applicant spoke regarding the different phases of the project and donations earned thus far. 0:52:02 Stephen Michael, Rialto Applicant Mr. Michael continued the applicant presentation. 0:53:13 Continued questions for Applicant The Commission and applicant spoke regarding the purchase of the property and the intentions of use along with the façade and marquee cost. 0:58:44 Dave Brekke, Loveless building Applicant Mr. Brekke spoke regarding the Loveless building application. 1:01:55 Public Comment continued Mayor Becker continued public comment. 1:01:57 Steve Goacher, Public comment Mr. Goacher from Butte spoke regarding prior business efforts with the owners or the Rialto. 1:04:34 Susan Denson-Guy, Public comment Ms. Denson-Guy gave a presentation regarding the Emerson project. 1:10:37 Continued Commission Questions The Commission discussed conservation easements and variances. Ms. Kramer spoke regarding the grant application process and history. 1:19:53 Public Comment closed Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:20:16 Commission Discussion The Commission spoke regarding the review process and benefits to the community, the Commission's responsibilities in regards to award of the funds, the need to look at a better procedure for this, contributions historically to the downtown areas, the allocation process, creation of timing limits and splitting the funding. 1:44:36 Motion to approve (as amended) the designation of Save America's Treasurers Grant funding for rehabilitation projects at the Rialto Theatre and on North Willson 9 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 4 of 8 Avenue for the Caird Streetlamp Restoration and authorize the City Manager to sign the associated contract. The designation of SAT finding and the resulting contracts shall be subject to the following performance standards: 1. A six month period, or until March 17, 2013 to complete final design and bid documents and to document fundraising of a minimum of 50% of the SAT grant amount; and, 2. A twelve month period, or until September 17, 2013 to be issued a building permit, to initiate construction and to document fundraising of 100% of the SAT grant amount. In the event that the Rialto Theatre or the Caird Streetlamp Restoration do not meet these performance standards, the SAT funding shall be allocated to the Emerson Cultural Center subject to the same performance standards. It was moved by Cr. Mehl ,seconded by Cr. Taylor to approve (as amended) the designation of Save America's Treasurers Grant funding for rehabilitation projects at the Rialto Theatre and on North Willson Avenue for the Caird Streetlamp Restoration and authorize the City Manager to sign the associated contract. The designation of SAT finding and the resulting contracts shall be subject to the following performance standards: 1. A six month period, or until March 17, 2013 to complete final design and bid documents and to document fundraising of a minimum of 50% of the SAT grant amount; and, 2. A twelve month period, or until September 17, 2013 to be issued a building permit, to initiate construction and to document fundraising of 100% of the SAT grant amount. In the event that the Rialto Theatre or the Caird Streetlamp Restoration do not meet these performance standards, the SAT funding shall be allocated to the Emerson Cultural Center subject to the same performance standards. 1:44:59 Commission Discussion on the Motion 1:52:45 Amendment to award $70,000 to the Emerson, $70,000 to the Rialto and $10,000 to the street light project. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Mehl to award $70,000 to the Emerson, $70,000 to the Rialto and $10,000 to the street light project. 1:53:39 Discussion on the Amendment 1:59:09 Vote on the Amendment to award $70,000 to the Emerson, $70,000 to the Rialto and $10,000 to the street light project. Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Crs. Mehl, Taylor and Andrus. The motion failed 2-3. 10 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 5 of 8 1:59:36 Amendment that staff indicate to the National Park Service that the City Commission strongly recommends that the money be split $70,000-$70,000-$10,000 and that we urge them to agree to that as a split of the money, and that if they don't agree the matter doesn't have to come back to the Commission and the alternative motion as originally written would be the way to proceed. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Andrus that staff indicate to the National Park Service that the City Commission strongly recommends that the money be split $70,000- $70,000-$10,000 and that we urge them to agree to that as a split of the money, and that if they don't agree the matter doesn't have to come back to the Commission and the alternative motion as originally written would be the way to proceed. 2:01:08 Commission Discussion on the Amendment 2:02:02 Vote on the Amendment that staff indicate to the National Park Service that the City Commission strongly recommends that the money be split $70,000-$70,000-$10,000 and that we urge them to agree to that as a split of the money, and that if they don't agree the matter doesn't have to come back to the Commission and the alternative motion as originally written would be the way to proceed. Those voting Aye being Crs. Taylor, Andrus, Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Deputy Mayor Krauss. The motion passed 4-1. 2:02:32 Vote on the Main Motion as amended to approve the designation of Save America's Treasurers Grant funding for rehabilitation projects at the Rialto Theatre and on North Willson Avenue for the Caird Streetlamp Restoration and authorize the City Manager to sign the associated contract. The designation of SAT finding and the resulting contracts shall be subject to the following performance standards: 1. A six month period, or until March 17, 2013 to complete final design and bid documents and to document fundraising of a minimum of 50% of the SAT grant amount; and, 2. A twelve month period, or until September 17, 2013 to be issued a building permit, to initiate construction and to document fundraising of 100% of the SAT grant amount. In the event that the Rialto Theatre or the Caird Streetlamp Restoration do not meet these performance standards, the SAT funding shall be allocated to the Emerson Cultural Center subject to the same performance standards. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Taylor, Andrus and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Deputy Mayor Krauss. The motion passed 4-1. 2:03:02 Break Mayor Becker declared a break. 11 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 6 of 8 2:15:18 2. Participation as Amicus Curiae in Alliance for the Wild Rockies et al v. United States Forest Service et al (litigation filed in the Montana Federal District Court (cause number 9:12-cv-00055-DLC: the Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project) (Sullivan) 2:15:20 Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Mr. Sullivan gave the staff presentation regarding Participation as Amicus Curiae in Alliance for the Wild Rockies et al v. United States Forest Service et al (litigation filed in the Montana Federal District Court (cause number 9:12-cv-00055-DLC: the Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project). 2:19:29 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. 2:19:44 Rick Meece, Public Comment Mr. Meece of 724 West Arnold spoke regarding prior fires and fire prevention and lawsuits in the past in regards to these types of issues. 2:26:34 Lisa Stepler, Public Comment Ms. Stepler stated that she is a District Ranger for the United States Forest Service spoke regarding joint ventures to protect water sheds. 2:28:57 Jennifer Miller, Public Comment Ms. Miller of 1017 West Koch Street stated that she is representing the Wilderness Society and spoke regarding logging and the need to have a diverse group to discuss these kinds of issues. 2:32:47 Public Comment closed Mayor Becker closed public comment. 2:32:58 Motion that having considered the staff memorandum and public comment, I move to direct the City Attorney to prepare and file a motion seeking leave of the Montana Federal District Court to file a brief in Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. United States Forest Service for the purposes discussed and if such leave is granted to prepare and file a brief. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Taylor that Having considered the staff memorandum and public comment, I move to direct the City Attorney to prepare and file a motion seeking leave of the Montana Federal District Court to file a brief in Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. United States Forest Service for the purposes discussed and if such leave is granted to prepare and file a brief. 2:33:31 Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed protecting the water supply and litigation. 2:42:18 Vote on the Motion that having considered the staff memorandum and public comment, I move to direct the City Attorney to prepare and file a motion seeking leave of the Montana Federal District Court to file a brief in Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. United States Forest Service for the purposes discussed and if such leave is granted to prepare and file a brief. 12 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 7 of 8 Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Taylor, Andrus, Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 2:42:34 3. Appointment to the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board (Brunckhorst) 2:42:43 Motion and Vote to appoint Kyle Terrio as a representative on the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board of an organization providing services to people with low to moderate income. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Andrus to appoint Kyle Terrio as a representative on the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board of an organization providing services to people with low to moderate income. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Cr. Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 2:43:27 4. Re-appointment to the Northeast Urban Renewal Board (Brunckhorst) 2:43:30 Motion and Vote to reappoint Tom Noble to the Northeast Urban Renewal Board. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Taylor to reappoint Tom Noble to the Northeast Urban Renewal Board. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Taylor, Andrus and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Deputy Mayor Krauss. The motion passed 4-1. 2:43:53 I. FYI/Discussion 2:43:57 1. Addition of Addendum to Purchase/Sales Agreement with Exergy Friends of the Story Mansion Mr. Kukulski stated that additional materials will be added to next week's packet in regards to an addendum to the purchase/sales agreement with Exergy Friends of the Story Mansion. 2:45:01 2. Confirmation of a joint meeting with ASMSU 2:48:14 3. Information regarding 2 year schools 2:50:54 4. Haven Community Support 2:51:36 5. Impact Fee Advisory Committee Meeting regarding Impact Fees 2:53:04 6. Letter received for the Sourdough trail head 2:54:20 7. Strategic Implementing Planning Committee 13 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission Meeting, September 17, 2012 Page 8 of 8 2:55:29 J. Adjournment Mayor Becker adjourned the meeting at 9:46 p.m. ____________________________________ Sean Becker, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Stacy Ulmen, CMC, City Clerk PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Stacy Ulmen, CMC, City Clerk Approved on ___________________________ 14 Page 1 of 16 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA September 24, 2012 ********************** The Commission met in the City Commission Room, City Hall at 121 North Rouse on Monday, September 24, 2012. Present were Mayor Sean Becker, Deputy Mayor Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Chris Mehl, Commissioner Cyndy Andrus, Commissioner Carson Taylor, City Manager Chris Kukulski, Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn, City Finance Director Anna Rosenberry, City Attorney Greg Sullivan, and City Clerk Stacy Ulmen. *These minutes are not word for word and should be considered along with the audio recording. 0:00:03 A. Call to Order – 6 p.m. – Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Mayor Becker called the meeting to order. 0:00:14 B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence 0:00:53 C. Changes to the Agenda Mayor Becker asked City Manager Chris Kukulski if there were any changes to the agenda. Mr. Kukulski spoke regarding the set up of the Consent agenda this evening. 0:01:30 D. Minutes – August 13, 2012 and August 20, 2012 0:01:35 Motion and Vote to approve the minutes from August 13th and 20th as submitted. It was moved by Cr. Andrus and Cr. Taylor to approve the minutes from August 13th and 20th as submitted. Those voting Aye being Crs. Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Cr. Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 0:01:57 E. Consent 1. Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims (LaMeres) 15 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 2 of 16 2. Approve a full Liquor License for the Olive Garden at 1533 North 19th Avenue (Neibauer) 3. Approve Resolution No. 4391, Intent to Create Special Improvement Lighting District No. 714 for Southbridge Subdivision Phase 1 (Rosenberry) 4. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1840, Adopting Zoning of Public Lands and Institutions on the 42.935 acre tract for Public School District #7's 8th Elementary School in conjunction with Annexation Z-12055 (Riley) 5. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1841, Authorizing City Manager to enter into a 3-year lease with Steven Dayhuff for the lease of Water Treatment Plant property near Mystic Heights Subdivision for the purpose of grazing (Woolard) 6. Approval of Settlement Agreement with Montana Fair Housing in Cause No. CV 09-90- BU-DLC, Montana Fair Housing vs. City of Bozeman (Cooper) 0:02:02 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:02:27 Motion and Vote to approve Consent Items E. 1-6 as submitted. It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Deputy Mayor Krauss to approve Consent Items E. 1-6 as submitted. Those voting Aye being Cr. Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 0:02:51 Consent Item: Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1830, Zone Code Amendment Z- 12163, relocating provisions establishing the Design Review Board and Wetlands Review Board from Chapter 38 to Chapter 2, Amend Chapter 20 to remove duplicative standards for campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, and amend Chapter 38 to add cross references, remove redundant text, and improve various development standards (Saunders) Cr. Andrus recused herself from voting on this item as she may have a conflict of interest. 0:03:19 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened Public Comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed Public Comment. 16 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 3 of 16 0:03:32 Motion and Vote to Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1830, Zone Code Amendment Z- 12163, relocating provisions establishing the Design Review Board and Wetlands Review Board from Chapter 38 to Chapter 2, Amend Chapter 20 to remove duplicative standards for campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, and amend Chapter 38 to add cross references, remove redundant text, and improve various development standards. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Mehl to Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1830, Zone Code Amendment Z-12163, relocating provisions establishing the Design Review Board and Wetlands Review Board from Chapter 38 to Chapter 2, Amend Chapter 20 to remove duplicative standards for campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, and amend Chapter 38 to add cross references, remove redundant text, and improve various development standards. Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 0:03:57 F. Public Comment Mayor Becker opened general public comment. No person spoke. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:04:21 G. Action Items 0:04:22 1. Bolton Demolition and New Residential Construction with an Accessory Dwelling Unit Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation at 1301 South Willson Avenue, Application Z-12173 (Quasi-Judicial) (continued from August 27, 2012) (Kramer) 0:05:11 Courtney Kramer, Associate Planner Ms. Kramer gave the staff presentation regarding the Bolton Demolition and New Residential Construction with an Accessory Dwelling Unit Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation at 1301 South Willson Avenue, Application Z-12173. 0:09:03 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and staff discussed separated accessory dwellings, separate entrances, lot dimensions, corner lots and deviations. 0:20:20 Applicant Presentation Applicant representative Lois Bolton gave the applicant presentation for the project. 17 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 4 of 16 0:28:15 Architect for Project The Architect spoke regarding entrances to the property. 0:29:54 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person spoke. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:30:09 Motion that the City Commission finds that the north side of the application (Hayes Street) as the Side Yard and that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, hereby adopt the findings, striking condition No. 2, presented in the staff report for application Z -12173 and move to approve the site plan with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, Seconded by Cr. Andrus that the City Commission finds that the north side of the application (Hayes Street) as the Side Yard and that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, hereby adopt the findings, striking condition No. 2, presented in the staff report for application Z - 12173 and move to approve the site plan with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 0:31:09 Discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed entrances and setbacks. 0:38:47 Vote on the Motion that the City Commission finds that the north side of the application (Hayes Street) as the Side Yard and that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, hereby adopt the findings, striking condition No. 2, presented in the staff report for application Z -12173 and move to approve the site plan with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Deputy Mayor Krauss. The motion passed 4-1. 0:39:01 2. McCune Demolition and Single-Household Residence and Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations, 212 North Church Avenue, Application Z-12205 (Quasi-Judicial) (Brekke) 0:39:37 Allyson Brekke, Associate Planner Ms. Brekke gave the staff presentation regarding the McCune Demolition and Single-Household Residence and Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations, 212 North Church Avenue, Application Z-12205. 18 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 5 of 16 0:45:18 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and staff discussed duplexes and lot width. 0:47:03 Applicant Presentation The applicant representative gave the presentation on the project. 0:50:39 Commission Questions for Applicant The Commission and Applicant discussed the consolidation of two lots. 0:51:51 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:52:09 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12205 and move to approve the McCune Demolition and Single-Household Residence/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Cr. Andrus, seconded by Cr. Taylor that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12205 and move to approve the McCune Demolition and Single-Household Residence/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 0:52:36 Discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed density and the zoning of the area. 0:55:02 Vote on the Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12205 and move to approve the McCune Demolition and Single- Household Residence/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Those voting Aye being Crs. Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Cr. Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 19 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 6 of 16 0:55:12 3. Running/Buckingham Garage Demolition and new Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations, 317 South 6th Avenue, Application Z-12207 (Quasi-Judicial) (Brekke) 0:55:50 Allyson Brekke, Planning Associate Ms. Brekke gave the staff presentation regarding the Running/Buckingham Garage Demolition and new Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations, 317 South 6th Avenue, Application Z-12207. 1:01:08 Commission questions for Staff The Commission and Staff discussed height and ownership. 1:04:37 Applicant presentation The Applicant representative gave the presentation for the project. 1:05:17 Questions for Applicant The Commission and the applicant spoke regarding the sidewalk and the conditions. 1:06:26 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:06:34 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12207 and move to approve the Running/Buckingham Garage/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Deputy Mayor Krauss that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12207 and move to approve the Running/Buckingham Garage/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 1:07:08 Discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed the amount of building in the space, the zoning of the area, corner lots and traffic. 1:16:34 Vote on the Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff 20 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 7 of 16 report for application Z-12207 and move to approve the Running/Buckingham Garage/Accessory Dwelling Unit Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Those voting Aye being Crs. Taylor, Mehl, Andrus and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Deputy Mayor Krauss. The motion passed 4-1. 1:16:49 4. Olive Garden On Premise Sales and Consumption of Alcohol Conditional Use Permit, 1553 North 19th Avenue, Application Z-12199 1553 N. 19th Avenue (Quasi- Judicial) (Krueger) 1:17:32 Tim McHarg, Planning Director Mr. McHarg gave the staff presentation regarding the Olive Garden On Premise Sales and Consumption of Alcohol Conditional Use Permit, 1553 North 19th Avenue, Application Z- 12199, 1553 N. 19th Avenue 1:19:23 Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff spoke regarding gaming and liquor licenses. 1:19:50 Applicant Presentation The Applicant representative gave the presentation regarding their project. 1:20:24 Questions for Applicant 1:20:31 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:20:44 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12199 and move to approve the conditional use permit with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Mehl that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12199 and move to approve the conditional use permit with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 21 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 8 of 16 1:21:11 Commission Discussion on the Motion 1:21:53 Vote on the Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12199 and move to approve the conditional use permit with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:22:05 5. Meadow Creek Minor Subdivision, Lot 7A, Blk 10 of Phase 1 Preliminary Plat Application P-12009 (Quasi-Judicial) (Skelton) 1:22:34 Dave Skelton, Sr. Planner Mr. Skelton gave the staff presentation regarding the Meadow Creek Minor Subdivision, Lot 7A, Blk 10 of Phase 1 Preliminary Plat Application P-12009. 1:28:09 Commission Questions The Commission and Staff spoke regarding the type of housing proposed, density and lot size. 1:31:42 Applicant Presentation The Applicant representative stated that he is on the Planning Board and just was informed that he cannot present the application at this time. 1:32:32 Commission questions 1:33:12 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:33:24 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application P-12009 and move to approve preliminary plat for Lot 7A, Block 10, Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision to subdivide 1.004 acres and create four residential lots, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Andrus that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application P-12009 and move to approve preliminary plat for Lot 7A, Block 10, Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor 22 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 9 of 16 Subdivision to subdivide 1.004 acres and create four residential lots, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. 1:34:00 Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed the conditions. 1:37:03 Vote on the Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application P-12009 and move to approve preliminary plat for Lot 7A, Block 10, Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision to subdivide 1.004 acres and create four residential lots, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:37:21 6. Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1836, ratification of City Manager signature on the Buy-Sell Agreement for the sale of vacant office space on the second floor of Bridger Parking Garage (Lee) 1:37:53 Scott Lee, Parking Manager Mr. Lee gave the staff presentation regarding the Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1836, ratification of City Manager signature on the Buy-Sell Agreement for the sale of vacant office space on the second floor of Bridger Parking Garage. 1:38:32 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff spoke regarding the condominium documents, access, signage and the federal funds received for the facility. 1:41:38 Applicant Presentation The Applicant representative gave the buyer's presentation. 1:42:22 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:42:27 Motion that having conducted a public hearing and considered public comment I hereby move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1836 ratifying the signature of the City Manager entering into a Commercial Buy-Sell Agreement for the sale of vacant office space on the second floor of the Bridger Park Downtown parking garage. 23 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 10 of 16 It was moved by Cr. Andrus, seconded by Cr. Taylor that having conducted a public hearing and considered public comment I hereby move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1836 ratifying the signature of the City Manager entering into a Commercial Buy-Sell Agreement for the sale of vacant office space on the second floor of the Bridger Park Downtown parking garage. 1:42:58 Commission Discussion The Commission discussed the federal funding and the process. 1:44:37 Vote on the Motion that having conducted a public hearing and considered public comment I hereby move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1836 ratifying the signature of the City Manager entering into a Commercial Buy-Sell Agreement for the sale of vacant office space on the second floor of the Bridger Park Downtown parking garage. Those voting Aye being Crs. Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Cr. Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:45:22 Break Mayor Becker called for a break. 1:45:27 Meeting called back to order Mayor Becker called the meeting back to order. 1:45:28 7. Resolution No. 4401, Special Improvement Lighting Maintenance District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:45:49 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:46:03 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4401, Special Improvement Lighting Maintenance District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Deputy Mayor Krauss to approve Resolution No. 4401, Special Improvement Lighting Maintenance District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. Those voting Aye being Cr. Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus and Mayor Becker. 24 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 11 of 16 Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:46:25 8. Resolution No. 4402, Bozeman Tourism Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:46:40 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:46:51 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4402, Bozeman Tourism Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Mehl to approve Resolution No. 4402, Bozeman Tourism Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:47:20 9. Resolution No. 4403, Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:47:32 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:47:44 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4403, Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Andrus to approve Resolution No. 4403, Business Improvement District Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 25 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 12 of 16 1:48:15 10. Resolution No. 4404, Delinquent Water and Sewer Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:48:21 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:48:32 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4404, Delinquent Water and Sewer Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. It was moved by Cr. Andrus, seconded by Cr. Taylor to approve Resolution No. 4404, Delinquent Water and Sewer Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. Those voting Aye being Crs. Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Cr. Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:48:52 11. Resolution No. 4405, Delinquent Garbage Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:49:07 Anna Rosenberry, Administrative Services Director Ms. Rosenberry gave the Staff presentation regarding Resolution No. 4405, Delinquent Garbage Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013. A revision has taken place in regards to the list. 1:49:32 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:49:46 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4405, Delinquent Garbage Charge Assessments for fiscal year 2013 with the exception of the property owned by the Lenons at 4277 West Babcock street No. 9.(the bill has been paid) It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Deputy Mayor Krauss to approve Resolution No. 4405, Delinquent Garbage Charge Assessments for fiscal year 2013 with the exception of the property owned by the Lenons at 4277 West Babcock street No. 9.(the bill has been paid). Those voting Aye being Cr. Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus and Mayor Becker. 26 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 13 of 16 Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:50:20 12. Resolution No. 4406, Delinquent Weed Mowing Charge Assessments for Fiscal Year 2013 (Rosenberry) 1:50:36 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:50:44 Motion and Vote to approve Resolution No. 4406, Delinquent Weed Mowing Charge Assessments for fiscal year 2013. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Krauss, seconded by Cr. Mehl to approve Resolution No. 4406, Delinquent Weed Mowing Charge Assessments for fiscal year 2013. Those voting Aye being Deputy Mayor Krauss, Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 1:51:08 13. Authorize City Manager to Sign an Addendum to the Story Mansion Buy/Sell Agreement Extending the date for Closing until March 29, 2013 1:51:32 Chris Kukulski, City Manager Mr. Kukulski gave the staff presentation regarding authorizing the City Manager to Sign an Addendum to the Story Mansion Buy/Sell Agreement Extending the date for Closing until March 29, 2013. An addendum has been prepared due to interest from the Bozeman Art Museum. 1:57:17 Tim Cooper, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Cooper spoke regarding the proposal from the Art Museum and that it needs to be reviewed. 1:58:23 Questions for Staff. 1:58:36 Corky Brittan, Exergy Mr. Brittan spoke regarding the improvements that have taken place to the property including the roof modifications. 2:00:41 Questions for Applicant 2:00:46 Public Comment 27 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 14 of 16 Mayor Becker opened public comment. 2:01:12 Christian Wilcox, Public Comment Mr. Wilcox spoke regarding the money put into the Mansion. We cannot live in the past, we need to live right now. 2:04:50 Jerry Coffey, Public Comment Mr. Coffey stated that he is a professor at MSU and spoke regarding the dedication and goodwill who have worked hard and long on the Story Mansion. 2:08:06 Public Comment closed Mayor Becker closed public comment. 2:08:13 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission discussed the income statements for the Story Mansion and management reports, repairs, depreciation and statement of activities and allocation of costs, the Beall and Lindley Center segregation of funds, what is allowed publicly with the sale of the property and the amount of funds received thus far for the sale of the property. 2:27:08 Commission Discussion The Commission spoke regarding profit and loss statements, the extension, consideration of other offers, time limits, protecting the asset and the residents of the City, the 6 month time frame concern and good faith efforts. 2:44:19 Motion that after considering the staff memorandum and public comment, I hereby move to authorize the City Manager to sign the Addendum labeled "Version 9-21-12" extending the date of closing for the sale of the Story Mansion to February 28, 2013. It was moved by Cr. Mehl , seconded by Cr. Andrus that after considering the staff memorandum and public comment, I hereby move to authorize the City Manager to sign the Addendum labeled "Version 9-21-12" extending the date of closing for the sale of the Story Mansion to February 28, 2013. 2:45:04 Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission discussed the considerations, raising money and the need for a non-refundable deposit. 2:48:32 Mr. Brittan Mr. Brittan spoke regarding the options, cooperation and the landscaping and negotiations on the addendum and meeting the obligation. 2:53:55 Continued Commission discussion The Commission continued discussion regarding the time frame. 28 September 24, 2012 City Commission Minutes Page 15 of 16 2:57:31 Vote on the Motion that after considering the staff memorandum and public comment, I hereby move to authorize the City Manager to sign the Addendum labeled "Version 9 21 12" extending the date of closing for the sale of the Story Mansion to February 28, 2013. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Andrus, Taylor, Deputy Mayor Krauss and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 5-0. 2:57:56 H. FYI/Discussion 2:58:02 1. Legislative Sub Committee Mr. Kukulski stated that there has been discussion around the Montana oil developments impact. Kukulski successfully got the committee to recognize coal impacts. The League is going to work to have both oil and coal impacts noted. 3:00:08 2. Interest in Staff to look at Accessory Dwelling Units and Corner Lots 3:01:09 I. Adjournment Mayor Becker adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m. ____________________________________ Sean Becker, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Stacy Ulmen, CMC, City Clerk PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Stacy Ulmen, CMC, City Clerk Approved on ___________________________ 29 1 of 8 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA October 1, 2012 ********************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in the Commission Room, City Hall at 121 North Rouse on Monday, October 1, 2012. Present were Mayor Sean Becker, Commissioner Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Chris Mehl, Commissioner Carson Taylor, City Manager Chris Kukulski, City Attorney Greg Sullivan and Deputy City Clerk Aimee Brunckhorst. 0:00:09 A. Call to Order - 6 p.m. - Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse 0:00:56 B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence 0:00:57 C. Changes to the Agenda Mayor Becker asked the City Manager if there were any changes to the agenda. City Manager, Chris Kukulski responded there were no changes to the agenda. 0:01:02 D. Authorize Absence of Commissioner Andrus 0:01:16 Motion and Vote to approve the absence of Commissioner Andrus. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Krauss to approve the absence of Commissioner Andrus. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Krauss, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 0:01:32 F. Consent 1. Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims (LaMeres) 2. Finally Adopt Ordinance No. 1842, authorizing City Manager to enter into a 2- year space lease with MSU-Extended University for the lease of an office and classroom in the Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building at 20 East Olive (Goehrung) 0:01:35 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment on Consent. Seeing none, he closed public comment. 0:01:44 Motion and Vote to approve Consent items F. 1 and 2 as submitted. 31 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 2 of 8 It was moved by Cr. Krauss, seconded by Cr. Taylor to approve Consent items F. 1 and 2 as submitted. Those voting Aye being Crs. Krauss, Taylor, Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 0:01:57 G. Public Comment Mayor Becker opened general public comment. 0:02:40 Christopher Spogis, Public Comment Mr. Spogis of 614 North Tracy Avenue provided public comment regarding concerns about the ice climbing wall that is being proposed at the Fairgrounds. He spoke regarding the parking requirements for the city and the noise that this type of venue would create. He feels the cities noise ordinance does not have any teeth. He asked that the city reconsider allowing concerts within the city limits. Mr. Spogis then played rap music loudly in the commission room. 0:05:48 Public Comment Closed Seeing no further public comment, Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:06:28 H. Action Items 0:06:32 1. Preliminary Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations for the Persons Creek House Renovation at 310 East Koch Street, Application Z-12216 (Quasi- Judicial) (Brekke) 0:06:35 Allyson Brekke, Department of Planning and Community Development Ms. Brekke provided the staff presentation on this item. 0:12:39 The Commission began asking questions of staff. 0:20:02 Ben Lloyd, on behalf of Applicant Jackie Persons Mr. Lloyd of Comma Q Architecture spoke on behalf of the applicant. He asked that the removal of all the parking in the front of the home be reconsidered asking that one space remain and explained why. He also explained what the current plan is for the possible changes to Bozeman Creek. 0:22:45 The Commission began questions for the applicant representative. 0:25:27 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment on this item. 0:25:40 Karen Mitchell, Public Comment Ms. Mitchell of 216 East Koch Street said she is unclear how far into the setback for the river corridor this application would go into. Her concern is that there is not a final plan for changes to the Bozeman Creek corridor and she would hate to see a large structure directly across the creek from the park. She also spoke regarding a foot bridge that had been proposed as part of the creek plan and would wonder how that would fit in with this application. She also spoke saying as a 32 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 3 of 8 resident on the street, she feels the front parking space proposed by the applicant would be a good use of space. 0:27:28 Public Comment Closed Seeing no further public comment, Mayor Becker closed public comment. 0:27:36 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12216 and move to approve the Persons Creek House Renovation Preliminary Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Cr. Mehl that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12216 and move to approve the Persons Creek House Renovation Preliminary Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 0:28:26 Discussion on the motion. 0:29:35 Amendment to the Main Motion to change condition #2 to read 'the site plan drawing shall be revised to show a front drive way for one car only and shall be shown in the final site plan application'. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Taylor to amend the Main Motion to change condition #2 to read 'the site plan drawing shall be revised to show a front drive way for one car only and shall be shown in the final site plan application'. 0:29:55 Discussion on the proposed amendment. 0:30:48 Vote on the amendment to the main motion to change condition #2 to read 'the site plan drawing shall be revised to show a front drive way for one car only and shall be shown in the final site plan application'. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Cr. Krauss. The amendment to the main motion passed 3-1 with Commissioner Krauss opposed. 0:31:01 Discussion on the main motion. 0:31:07 Commissioner Krauss explained why he does not support this deviation. 0:39:57 Vote on the motion as amended that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12216 and move to approve the Persons Creek House Renovation Preliminary Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations application with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code 33 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 4 of 8 provisions with an amendment to change condition #2 to read 'the site plan drawing shall be revised to show a front driveway for one car only and shall be shown in the final site plan application'. Those voting Aye being Cr. Taylor, Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being Cr. Krauss. The motion passed 3-1 with Commissioner Krauss opposed. 0:40:35 2. Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations from Groueff to allow construction of a Garage/Studio in the rear yard of 615 North Black Avenue, Application Z-12214 (Quasi-Judicial) (Thorpe) 0:40:37 Keri Thorpe, Department of Planning and Community Development Ms. Thorpe provided the staff presentation on this item. 0:45:48 Graham Goff, on behalf of Applicant Paul Groueff Mr. Goff from Goff Architecture said they have a concern with Condition #3, the consolidating of one internal lot line. He said that just about every residence in Bozeman is in violation of this Ordinance, which incurs a lot of additional cost. He asked if there was another way to streamline the process of consolidating the lot lines. 0:46:45 Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Mr. Sullivan said he has talked to Tim McHarg and they are looking into this alternatives as they recognize the aggregation process takes a significant amount of money. This stems from a building code requirement. 0:47:38 The Commission began asking questions of the applicant. 0:48:36 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment on this item. Seeing none, he closed public comment. 0:48:48 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12214 and move to approve the Groueff Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. It was moved by Cr. Mehl, seconded by Cr. Krauss that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12214 and move to approve the Groueff Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. 0:49:09 Discussion on the motion. 0:50:57 Vote on the motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12214 and move to approve the Groueff Certificate of 34 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 5 of 8 Appropriateness with Deviations with the recommended conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Those voting Aye being Crs. Mehl, Krauss, Taylor and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 0:51:41 3. Annexation of 10 acres located at the SE corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane and S. Cottonwood Road, Application A-12006 (Saunders) 0:51:54 Chris Saunders, Department of Planning and Community Development Mr. Saunders provided the staff presentation on this item. 0:57:50 The Commission began questions for staff. 0:59:34 Chris Budeski, representing Applicant Cresent Cross Mr. Budeski with Madison Engineering presented on behalf of the applicant. 1:01:36 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment on this item. 1:01:41 Dewin Madill, Public Comment Mr. Madill of 1200 Mount Ellis Lane, spoke representing the developer of the Loyal Garden subdivision, providing a brief historical background. Mr. Madill said that when they started the related project they hired TD&H to do engineering and design. Through that process they realized they would need a lift station and to run a force main line about a mile East on Huffine to intersect with Yellowstone Avenue. Sometime during that process, the city required that they oversize it for some adjacent parcels, one of which is the subject application before the Commission tonight. At the completion of construction, they had Susan Swimley craft language for a sewer payment district. He asked that the City Commission consider that payback for this parcel and include it in this application process. 1:04:54 Public Comment Closed Seeing no further public comment, Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:05:01 Motion discussion and vote. 1:05:11 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application A-12006 and move to approve the annexation with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions and direct the preparation of the required annexation agreement. It was moved by Cr. Krauss, seconded by Cr. Taylor that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application A-12006 and move to approve the annexation with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions and direct the preparation of the required annexation agreement. 35 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 6 of 8 1:05:59 Discussion on the Motion. 1:06:37 Commissioner Krauss, approved by Commissioner Taylor added a friendly amendment to his motion saying, Additional term of annexation public street of utility easement Friendly amendment a public street and utility easement or a public road dedication providing for 60 feet of the right of way on the east side of the section line shall be provided for Cottonwood Road which is one half of the principal arterial standard for the current Bozeman Transportation Plan. 1:07:10 Discussion on the motion. 1:08:00 Vote on the motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application A-12006 and move to approve the annexation with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions and direct the preparation of the required annexation agreement and a public street and utility easement or a public road dedication providing for 60 feet of the right of way on the east side of the section line shall be provided for Cottonwood Road which is one half of the principal arterial standard for the current Bozeman Transportation Plan. Those voting Aye being Crs. Krauss, Taylor, Mehl and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 1:09:06 4. Initial Zoning in conjunction with Annexation of 10 acres located at the SE corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane and S. Cottonwood Road to be designated B-2 (Community Business District), Application Z-12200 (Saunders) 1:09:08 Chris Saunders, Department of Planning and Community Development Mr. Saunders presented the staff report. 1:10:03 The Commission had no questions for staff. 1:10:05 Chris Budeski, representing the Applicant, Cresent Cross Mr. Budeski of Madison Engineering said they proposed B-2 Zoning because it fits well in this area of all commercial properties. 1:10:34 Public Comment Mayor Becker opened public comment. No person commented. Mayor Becker closed public comment. 1:10:45 Motion, Discussion and Vote. 1:10:51 Motion that having reviewed application materials, considered public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12200 and move to approve the initial zoning with contingencies as outlined 36 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 7 of 8 in the staff report and direct the preparation of the required implementing ordinance after return of an annexation agreement. It was moved by Cr. Taylor, seconded by Cr. Mehl that having reviewed application materials, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12200 and move to approve the initial zoning with contingencies as outlined in the staff report and direct the preparation of the required implementing ordinance after return of an annexation agreement. 1:11:22 Discussion on the motion. 1:16:49 Vote on the motion that having reviewed application materials, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-12200 and move to approve the initial zoning with contingencies as outlined in the staff report and direct the preparation of the required implementing ordinance after return of an annexation agreement. Those voting Aye being Taylor, Mehl, Krauss and Mayor Becker. Those voting No being none. The motion passed 4-0. 1:17:00 I. FYI/Discussion 1:17:04 1. 2012 Legislative Resolution from the Montana League of Cities and Towns City Manager Chris Kukulski spoke regarding materials sent out prior to the upcoming Montana League of Cities and Towns conference relating to upcoming legislation items. 1:19:33 Discussion on the legislative resolution. 1:20:25 2. Concern from Mr. Delaney Mr. Kukulski referred to an email he is drafting to Mr. Delaney saying this issue is much more complex than an issue of 60 or 62 feet. He said the city feels there is a real concern regarding traffic safety. Mr. Kukulski referred to efforts he plans to make to bring together Delaney's staff and city staff to come up with a superior design that will hopefully work for all. If not, there is an appeals process Mr. Delaney can go through. 1:22:04 Discussion regarding the Delaney concern. 1:24:28 3. Color Palette Discussion Mayor Becker said it may be time to have staff look into the need for a color palette requirement based on Cr. Mehl's questioning of this requirement on most applications. 1:25:43 Discussion on the color palette issue. 1:27:09 J. Adjournment Mayor Becker adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. 37 Bozeman City Commission Minutes for October 1, 2012 8 of 8 ____________________________________ Sean A. Becker, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Stacy Ulmen, CMC, City Clerk PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Aimee Brunckhorst, Deputy City Clerk Approved on ___________________________ 38 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brian LaMeres, City Controller Anna Rosenberry, Director of Administrative Services Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission approves payment of the claims. BACKGROUND: Section 7-6-4301 MCA states that claims should not be paid by the City until they have been first presented to the City Commission. Claims presented to the City Commission have been reviewed by the Finance Department to ensure that all proper supporting documentation has been submitted, all required departmental authorized signatures are present indicating that the goods or services have been received and that the expenditure is within budget, and that the account coding is correct. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: The total amount of the claims to be paid is presented at the bottom of the Expenditure Approval List posted on the City’s website at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Finance/Purchasing/Reports.aspx Individual claims in excess of $500,000: to be announced in weekly e-mail from Accounts Payable Clerks Jenna Louttit and Marcy Yeykal. Attachments: Expenditure Approval List (e-mailed) and posted on the City of Bozeman’s website at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Finance/Purchasing/Reports.aspx Report compiled on: October 26, 2012 39 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: James Goehrung, Facility Services Superintendent Chuck Winn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Award of bid to Lutey Construction for the remodel and renovation of the Water Department Building at 5519 Saxson Way, in the Laurel Glen subdivision. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to sign the award of bid to Lutey Construction for remodel and renovation of the Water Department Building in the Laurel Glen subdivision. The bid amount which includes alternate #1 and #2 is $53,515.00. SUGGESTED MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to sign the award of bid to Lutey Construction for the remodel and renovation of the Water Department storage building at 5519 Saxson Way. BACKGROUND: A pre-bid walk through for this project was conducted on October 4. Nine contractors attended. Bids were opened on this project on October 17. Four bids were received on the project. The proposals were reviewed by staff. The lot and construction of the original storage building was a condition of annexation for the final plat for phase two of the Laurel Glen Subdivision. After annexation the contractor was allowed to use the building for a time for a staging area for construction activities. After the five year timeline it was turned over to the city as part of the original agreement. The building will be used as a west end storage facility and staging area for the Water Department and other city departments. The renovation work will include the construction of a break area, restroom, and shower for staff to limit the need for travel across town. Pg -1 40 UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None at this time. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: The upgrades for this building are budgeted for in the Water Fund Capital Improvement Plan project budget under Water Operations. It is project number PW02. There is $100,000.00 currently budgeted and the balance of the money will be used for needed site improvements. Attachments: Commission Memo Bid Form Notice of Award Letter Report compiled on: October 23, 2012 41 BID FORM 1 BID FORM LAUREL GLEN WATER FACILITY BUILDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P.O. BOX 1230 CITY OF BOZEMAN BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59771 TO: City Clerk 121 North Rouse Ave. P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 THE UNDERSIGNED BIDDER, having familiarized themselves with the Work required by the Contract Documents, the site(s) where the work is to be performed, local labor conditions and all laws, regulations, municipal ordinances and other factors which may affect the performance of the Work, and having satisfied himself of the expense and difficulties attending performance of the work: HEREBY PROPOSES and agrees, if this bid is accepted, to enter into an Agreement, in the form attached, to perform all work for the construction of the LAUREL GLEN WATER FACILITY BUILDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, including the assumption of all obligations, duties, and responsibilities necessary for the successful completion of the contract and the furnishing of all materials and equipment required to be incorporated in, and form a permanent part of, the work; tools, equipment, supplies, transportation, facilities, labor, superintendence, and services required to perform the Work; Bonds, Insurance and Submittals; all as indicated or specified in the Contract Documents to be performed or furnished by Contractor within the time and for the prices set forth in the following schedules. Sealed Bids are due in the office of the City Clerk, second floor of City Hall by 2:00p.m., Wednesday, October 17, 2012. At which time the bids will be opened and read at 2:30p.m. in the City Commission Meeting Room. Please turn in this full page package for your bid. No electronic versions will be accepted. Mailed bids must be received by the date and time specified. Please submit the bid in a sealed envelope with the title – Laurel Glen Water Facility Remodel Project and list the name of your firm on the outside of the sealed bid envelope. The physical address is: City Clerk’s Office, Suite 200, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT. The mailing address is: City Clerk’s Office, Suite 200, City Hall, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT., 59771. The City reserves the right to reject any and all Responses to Bids received or to waive bid informalities. The City of Bozeman is an Equal Opportunity Employer. The undersigned bidder agrees to be bound by this Bid for a period not to exceed 60 days. 42 BID FORM 2 The undersigned Bidder agrees to furnish the required Bonds and to enter into a contract within fifteen (15) calendar days after Owner's acceptance of this Bid, and further agrees to complete all Work within the time specified per schedule after commencement of the contract time as defined in the General Conditions. The preferred contract time is approximately 90 calendar days. Where multiple schedules are awarded under a single Contract, the contract times shall run concurrently unless separate notices to proceed are issued for the awarded schedules. Liquidated Damages shall be as specified in the attached Scope of Work of the Agreement Form. The undersigned Bidder agrees that the unit prices shall govern in checking the Bid, and should a discrepancy exist in the total prices and total amount of Bid as listed above, after extensions are checked and corrections made, if any, the total amount of the Bid as corrected shall be used in awarding the contract. The undersigned Bidder agrees that he has been afforded access to the construction site and has performed those independent site investigations as he deemed necessary. The undersigned Bidder hereby certifies the following: A) That this Bid is genuine and is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, firm, or corporation, and is not submitted in conformity with any agreement or rules of any group, association, organization, or corporation; B) That he has not directly or indirectly solicited any other Bidder to put in a false or sham Bid; C) That he has not solicited or induced any person, firm, or corporation to refrain from bidding; D) That he has not sought by collusion to obtain for himself any advantage over any other Bidder or over the Owner. E) That he is not currently operating beyond the contract time on any previously awarded public works contract as defined and required by Article 15-50-203, MCA, as amended. The undersigned Bidder(s) either singularly or as a joint venture hereby certifies (certify) pursuant to Article 37-71-203, MCA, that he (they) is (are) duly and regularly licensed. BIDDER agrees to perform all the work described in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS for the following lump 43 BID FORM 3 sum: BID SCHEDULE Bid Item No. Description Total Amount 1 Construct a Break Room, Restroom and Shower in the South East Corner of the Pre-Fabricated Building $ Alternate 1 Install Floor Drain in Center of Shop Floor $ Alternate 2 Install Utility Sink in Break Room Area $ TOTAL CONTRACT BID PRICE $_________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ (TOTAL CONTRACT BID PRICE- WRITTEN WORDS) The undersigned Bidder acknowledged receipt of the following Addenda, which have been considered in preparation of this Bid: No._____________________________ Dated____________________ No._____________________________ Dated____________________ No._____________________________ Dated____________________ No._____________________________ Dated___________________ Submitted this _____ day of _____________________, 2012. SIGNATURE OF BIDDER:__________________________________________ Montana Contractor Registration Number______________________________ If an individual:_____________________________________________ doing business as_____________________________________________ If a Partnership:___________________________________________by 44 BID FORM 4 ________________________________________, partner _____________________________________________ If a Corporation:_____________________________________________ (a) ____________________________________________ by ____________________________________________ (Seal & Title___________________________________________ Attest) Business Address of Bidder: __________________________________ _______________________________________________ If Bidder is a joint venture, other party must sign below: Montana License Number and Class______________________________ If an Individual:_______________________________________ doing business as _________________________________________________. If a Partnership: __________________________________________ by ________________________________Partner __________________________________________ If a Corporation:____________________________________________ (a)______________________________Corporation by _________________________________________ (Seal & Title________________________________________ Attest) NON-DISCRIMINATION AFFIRMATION FORM 45 BID FORM 5 _________________________ [name of entity submitting] hereby affirms it will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability in the performance of work performed for the city of Bozeman, if a contract is awarded to it, and also recognizes the eventual contract, if awarded, will contain a provision prohibiting discrimination as described above and that this prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the _________________________ [name of entity submitting] employees and to all subcontracts it enters into in performance of the agreement with the city of Bozeman. Signature of Bidder: ______________________________ Person authorized to sign on behalf of the bidder SCOPE OF WORK AGREEMENT FORM LAUREL GLEN WATER FACILITY BUILDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY OF BOZEMAN P.O. BOX 1230 CITY OF BOZEMAN BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59771 Following is a summary of the proposed scope of work identified at the pre-construction walk through conducted on Thursday, October 4, 2012. The purpose of the project is to modify the existing building to add a Break Room, Restroom, and Shower to the existing pre-fabricated building. In addition to the bid number provided, the contractor is asked to provide a construction time line outlining the critical steps and stages of the project and a calendar showing how the work will be completed. Upon award, the contractor will complete the contract document that was provided during the walk through, an electronic version can be provided. The contractor will also need to provide proof of insurance at the rates specified and a performance bond for the project. The job will be subject to both state and local rules including: state prevailing wage rates; 1% Mt. Dept. of Revenue Withholding; and City of Bozeman non-discrimination resolution. The identified work components include: FRAMING 1. Frame walls with 2 by 4 or 2 by 6s in order to meet the load requirements for the upstairs 46 BID FORM 6 storage area over the bathroom and shower and to leave enough space for any needed plumbing. 2. Provide adequate backing for all hand rails and fixtures. 3. Walls on the inside of the remodeled area will be the required thickness of drywall with a smooth wall finish. The bathroom and shower will have four foot high wainscot application of FRP. 4. The exterior of the installed walls will be T-111 plywood siding. 5. The perimeter walls will be insulated. The interior walls will have sound batt insulation material in the walls. The ceiling areas over the bathroom and shower will also be insulated. 6. The break room area will have a drop ceiling installed just above the south wall window. The restroom and bathroom will have a hard lid with a full height of 8 feet. 7. A counter area will be installed in the break room for the sink and an under counter ice machine. 8. The doors will all be one hour rated metal doors with hook handles and privacy locks on the bathroom and shower. The entry door for the break room will have a window on the top half of the door. All doors will have closures with hold open devices. ELECTRICAL 1. The existing ceiling mounted light fixtures will be converted to four foot T-8 lamps. One fixture will be removed on the southeast corner and the second fixture on the south edge of the building will be moved to the west just outside of the installed perimeter wall. All lights will be on an occupancy sensor. 2. Six new two tube 4 foot T-8 fixtures will be installed in the new building areas. Over counter fixtures will be installed over the break room sink and the bathroom sink. A recessed can fixture will be installed in the shower stall. 3. Occupancy sensors will be installed in all three rooms of the new building area. 4. GFCI receptacles will be installed near the sinks in the break room and bathroom. 5. Outlets and switches will be installed per the plans and a phone and data connection in the break room. 6. Exhaust fans will be installed in the bathroom and shower and tied to a common duct which will exit the building on the north or east wall above the ceiling area. Timers will be installed 47 BID FORM 7 with the fans and lights in these areas. 7. An electrical connection will be needed for the under counter ice machine and over counter microwave. 8. Electrical service will be needed for the mechanical system that will be installed in the ceiling area above the bathroom and a service for the on demand hot water heater also located above the bathroom. 9. A light and switch for the area above the ceiling over the shower and bathroom will be installed for service work. 10. All electrical will be tied into the breaker panel on the west wall. All new services will be marked in the breaker panel. 11. The bathroom and shower rooms will each have a radiant heat panel installed on the ceiling. PLUMBING 1. Water and Sewer will be brought into the building in the southeast corner. The toilet, sinks, and shower will all meet ADA guidelines. Fixtures will match the ones installed at the City Shop Complex for the recent remodel. Floor drains will need to be installed for the shower and the bathroom. 2. The shower will be a similar model to the one installed at the City Shop Complex and include a bench. 3. The hot water heater will be an on demand unit and it will be installed in the attic area over the shower and bathroom. 4. A water and drain line will need to be installed for the under counter ice machine. 5. Alternate 1 - A floor drain will be installed mid-building for clean up and wash downs. 6. Alternate 2 - A utility sink will be installed on the west wall of the break room. 7. Appropriate size drain, waste, and vent lines will be installed per code. All water lines will be soldered copper lines and all will be insulated. MECHANICAL 1. Ceiling mounted exhaust fans will be installed in the bathroom and shower. A common fan 48 BID FORM 8 is acceptable and will be vented to the south or east wall. 2. A high efficiency forced air natural gas furnace will be installed in the attic area over the bathroom and shower. The natural gas line will need to be extended from the southwest corner of the building. The supply lines will be ducted to the bathroom, shower, and break room. 3. The unit will have a programmable thermostat. FINISHES 1. All paint will be low VOC. 2. Vinyl base will be installed in all interior areas of the three areas. 3. Flooring in the three added areas will be vinyl tile. 4. Install counter tops for the break room sink and for the under cabinet ice machine. 5. Install a microwave shelf above the counter. A pre-bid walk through is scheduled on site on Thursday, October 4, at 1:30 p.m. The building is located at 5519 Saxon Way. From Bozeman, take Durston Road west to Laurel Parkway, turn north and access the building off Saxon Way. Arrangements can be made for a closer inspection of the building and the construction components prior to submission of the bid. If other questions or concerns arise please contact: James Goehrung, City of Bozeman Facilities Superintendent, 582-3232 or e-mail jgoehrung@bozeman.net. 49 NOTICE OF AWARD TO: Lutey Construction Dated: October 22, 2012 ADDRESS: 420 South 13th Bozeman, MT 59715 PROJECT: Laurel Glenn Water Building Remodel CONTRACT FOR: Added Break Room, ADA Restroom, and ADA Shower You are notified that your Bid dated for the above Contract has been considered. You are the apparent Successful Bidder and have been awarded a Contract for: THE LAUREL GLEN WATER BUILDING REMODEL. The Contract Price of your Contract is: Fifty Three Thousand Five Hundred Fifteen Dollars ($53,515.00). Copies of each of the proposed Contract Documents (except Drawings) accompany this Notice of Award. Sets of the Drawings will be delivered separately or otherwise made available to you immediately. You must comply with the following conditions precedent within fifteen (15) days of the date of this Notice of Award, that is, by November 5, 2012. 1. You must deliver to the OWNER fully executed counterparts of the Agreement including all the Contract Documents, Work Calendar and Schedule, and Drawings. 2. You must deliver with the executed Agreement the Contract Performance Bond as specified in the Instruction to Bidders. 3. List other conditions precedent: Failure to comply with these conditions within the time specified will entitle OWNER to consider your Bid abandoned, to annul this Notice of Award, and to declare your Bid Security forfeited. Within ten (10) days after you comply with these conditions, OWNER will return to you one fully signed counterpart of the Agreement with the Contract Documents attached. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ATTEST: BY: __________________________________ BY: ____________________________ (CITY MANAGER) (CLERK OF COMMISSION) DATE: _______________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: ____________________________ (CITY ATTORNEY) 50 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Tim McHarg, Planning Director SUBJECT: Lot 7A, Block 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision (#P-12009) - Findings of Fact and Order MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent Agenda RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to sign the Findings of Fact and Order for the preliminary plat of the Lot 7A, Block 10, Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision. BACKGROUND: On September 24, 2012 the City Commission held a public hearing on an application for preliminary plat approval for the Lot 7A, Block 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 Minor Subdivision. The Commission approved the proposed subdivision, subject to conditions and code provisions to ensure the final plat would comply with all applicable regulations and all required criteria. State law provides that the governing body shall “provide a written statement to the applicant detailing the circumstances of the condition imposition.” The statement must include: 1) the reason for the condition imposition; 2) the evidence that justifies the condition imposition; and 3) information regarding the appeal process for the condition imposition. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Staff is unaware of any unresolved issues. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approval of the Findings of Fact as drafted. 2) Approval of the Findings of Fact with modifications. 3) As determined by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property. Impact fees will be collected with issuance of building permits for individual lots along with City sewer and water connection fees. Attachment: Findings of Fact Subdivision Preliminary Plat Report compiled on: October 23, 2012 51 52 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 1 BEFORE THE BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT BOZEMAN 1 LLC FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ORDER REVIEW OF A FOUR LOT MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LOT 7A, BLOCK 10 MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1 CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA PURSUANT to the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, Section 76-3-101 through 76-3-625, Montana Codes Annotated, and the City of Bozeman Growth Policy and City of Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, a public hearing was scheduled, after notice given, before the Bozeman City Commission on September 24, 2012, on the above-entitled application. The applicant presented to the City Commission a proposed preliminary plat for a Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision From a Tract of Record to subdivide 1.00 acres and create four residential lots. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider all relevant evidence relating to public health, safety, and welfare, including the required environmental assessment and recommendation of the Development Review Committee, to determine whether the plat should be approved, conditionally approved, or disapproved. It appeared to the City Commission that all parties and the public wishing to appear and comment were given the opportunity to do so, and therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before it regarding this application, the City Commission makes the following Findings of Fact, as required: FINDINGS OF FACT I. The complete application for the preliminary subdivision plat review of a Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision From a Tract of Record for 7A, Block 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, 53 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 2 Phase 1, a four residential subdivision, was submitted to the City of Bozeman Department of Planning and Community Development by Morrison Maierle Inc, on July 27, 2012. The subject property is legally described as Lot 7A, Block 10 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, of the amended subdivision plat, J-453-A situated in the SE1/4 SW1/4 of Section 23 T2S, R5E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. On August 8, 2012 the application was deemed acceptable for initial review by the Department of Planning and Community Development. On August 29, 2012 the Development Review Committee determined the required submittal material containing the detailed supporting information was adequate to allow for the review process to continue. II. No variances to the Uniform Development Code have been requested with this preliminary plat application and no specific variances have been identified during the review of the preliminary plat application. Pursuant to Section 38.03.040.A.4, BMC the Planning Director reviewed the four-lot minor subdivisions, provided findings in a staff report and make a written recommendation for consideration by the City Commission. The Planning Director found that the proposed preliminary plat would comply with the City’s adopted growth policy and the requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code if certain conditions were imposed, and therefore forwarded a recommendation of conditional approval for the preliminary plat to the Bozeman City Commission as set forth in the Planning Director’s findings and recommendation of the City Commission staff report for Planning Application #P-12009. III. The matter of preliminary plat review of the four-lot minor subdivision was considered at a public hearing before the City Commission on Monday, September 24, 2012. 54 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 3 The Planning Staff reviewed the project at that time and forwarded the Planning Director’s findings and recommendation of conditional approval of the preliminary plat as set forth in the City Commission Staff Report, Planning Application #P-12009. IV. Trever McSpadden of Morrison Maierle, Inc., representing the applicant stated that they have reviewed the recommended conditions of approval and finds all of the conditions of approval acceptable. The public hearing portion on this matter was then opened to hear public testimony on the matter with no members of the general public offering comment on the matter of the preliminary plat application. V. The City Commission then considered the Planning Office staff report, Planning Director’s findings and recommendation, public record, the developer's testimony, and weighed the proposed subdivision against the primary criteria for consideration of subdivisions established in Title 76-3-608, and found as follows: A. Primary Review Criteria 1. Effects on Agriculture The site is located within a developed (urban) part of the City being part of Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 and has no agricultural components that would be impacted by the proposed minor subdivision. 2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities No effects on agricultural water user facilities were identified. 3. Effects on Local Services Water/Sewer: Municipal sanitary sewer and water mains exist in the South 27th Avenue right-of-way. Service lines for the four individual lots were installed in 2006 with the filing of the final plat to service the individual lots. Police/Fire: The property is located within the City’s Police and Fire emergency response area. 55 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 4 Streets: Public streets in proximity to the subdivision currently exist as part of the subdivision’s street network for the major subdivision. No alterations to the present street network or egress/ingress access points are proposed with this application. Stormwater: The four-lot minor subdivision was included in the Stormwater Master Plan reviewed and approved by the City Engineer’s Office for the original subdivision platted in 2006. No significant site or grading changes are proposed as part of this minor subdivision. The applicant is on notice that with any future development of the proposed lots the existing stormwater facilities will be evaluated to meet City design standards and may require future improvements prior to any City Engineering office approval. Parklands: Dedicated public parkland required with this minor subdivision was met with the approved park master plan and dedicated parkland filed with the final plat for Phase 1. The workforce housing ordinance will not apply to this application while the City of Bozeman considers updates to the current affordable housing plan for implementation with future development. Utilities: All private utilities (electricity, gas, cable and phone utilities) currently exist in the adjacent streets or within utility easements on the subject property. NorthWestern Energy commented on June 8, 2012 that no changes to service the amended plat would be necessary if the realignment followed the original lot line boundaries 4. Effects on the Natural Environment This property is located in an area of the City which has been identified and developed for urban uses and no changes are proposed that would impact the natural environment. 5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat No known endangered species or critical game ranges have been identified on the subject property. This area of the City has been identified and developed for urban purposes in a location of the City which essentially eliminates the potential for development of any wildlife habitat. 6. Effects on Public Health and Safety The intent of the regulatory standards as set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision has been reviewed and, with the required conditions and code provisions, has been determined to be in general compliance with the title. Any conditions deemed necessary to ensure compliance with public health and safety have been listed by the Development Review Committee and are noted accordingly as conditions of approval in this staff report. B. Compliance with the survey requirements provided for in Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. The preliminary plat has been prepared in accordance with the survey requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. As noted in recommended condition #1, the final plat must comply with State statute and the Bozeman Municipal Code. C. Compliance with the Bozeman Unified Development Code. 56 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 5 The following requirements are standards of the Bozeman Unified Development Code and shall be addressed with the final plat submittal: 1. Pursuant to Section 38.03.040.A.5(f), conditional approval of the preliminary plat shall be in force for not more than one calendar year. Prior to that expiration date, the applicant may submit a letter of request for the extension of the period to the Planning Director for the City Commission’s consideration. The City Commission may, at the written request of the applicant, extend its approval for a mutually agreed upon time. More than one extension may be requested for a particular subdivision. Each request shall be considered on its individual merits as provided for in Section 38.03.040.A.5(g), BMC. 2. Pursuant to Section 38.03.040.A.1, the applicant shall submit with the application for final plat review and approval, a written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has been satisfactorily addressed, and specifically (tab, page, paragraph, etc.) where this information can be found. 3. Pursuant to Section 38.23.060.A, all easements, existing and proposed, shall be accurately depicted and addressed on the final plat and in the final plat application. 4. Pursuant to Section 38.27.090, executed waivers of right to protest the creation of special improvement districts (SIDs) for a park maintenance district will be required to be filed and of record with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder. 5. Section 38.41.050.A.8 requires that any noxious weeds be identified and mapped by a person with experience in weed management and knowledgeable in weed identification. A noxious weed management and revegetation plan, approved by the County Weed Control District, shall be submitted with the final plat. 6. When applicable, the final covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements shall be submitted with the final plat application for review and approval by the Planning Department and shall contain, but not be limited to, the provisions required in Section 38.38.020, BMC. 7. Pursuant to Section 38.39.01., if it is the developer’s intent to file the final plat prior to installation, certification, and acceptance of all required improvements by the City of Bozeman, an Improvements Agreement shall be entered into with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the completion of all improvements in accordance with the Preliminary Plat submittal information and conditions of approval. If the final plat is filed prior to the installation of all improvements, the developer shall supply the City of Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to 150 percent of the cost of the remaining improvements. D. Compliance with the required subdivision review process. A subdivision pre-application was submitted on April 20, 2012. The pre-application was reviewed by the DRC on May 2, 9 and 16, 2012 and summary review comments were forwarded to the applicant in preparation of the preliminary plat application. 57 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 6 A complete preliminary plat application was submitted on July 27, 2012. The preliminary plat was reviewed by the DRC on August 22 and 29, 2012. On the final week of DRC review, a favorable recommendation was forwarded for consideration by the Planning Director and City Commission. Public notice for this application was placed in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday, September 2, 2012. The site was posted with a public notice on August 31, 2012. Public notice was sent to adjacent property owners via certified mail, and to all other property owners of record within 200 feet of the subject property via first class mail, on August 31, 2012. No letters of public testimony have been received at the Department of Planning & Community Development in regards to this project. On September 13, 2012 this minor subdivision staff report was drafted and forwarded with a recommendation of conditional approval by the Planning Director for consideration by the City Commission. The City Commission is scheduled to make a final decision at their September 24, 2012 public hearing. The final decision for a Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision from a Tract of Record Preliminary Plat must be made within 45 working days of the date it was deemed complete or in this case by October 11, 2012. E. Provision of easements for the location and installation of any planned utilities. No new utilities are planned or necessitated as part of this subdivision. Installation of new individual water or sanitary sewer service lines to serve the four lots has already been completed. F. Provision of legal and physical access to each parcel. The four residential lots will have legal and physical access from the 30-foot wide public alleyway along the west boundary of the amended plat. As South 27th Avenue is designated as a collector road in the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (2007 Update) a 1-foot wide “No Access” strip is established for all residential lots fronting onto the collector road. VI. After considering all matters of record presented at the public hearings the City Commission found that the proposed preliminary plat for a four-lot minor subdivision to 1.00 acres and create four residential lots would comply with the requirements of the Bozeman Unified Development Code and the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act if certain conditions were imposed. VII. 58 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 7 The City Commission then considered approval of the preliminary plat application for a four- lot minor subdivision with the recommended conditions of approval provided in City Commission Staff Report, Planning Application #P-12009. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, on a vote of 5-0, that the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to subdivide 1.00 acres and create four residential lots has been found to meet the primary criteria of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and is therefore approved, subject to the conditions listed below. The evidence as stated in the Findings of Fact, justifies the conditions imposed on the subdivision to ensure that the final plat complies with all applicable regulations, and all required criteria, that appropriate and safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation is provided, adequate infrastructure and public services are provided, and adequate public access, utility easements, and rights-of-way are provided. 1. The Final Plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates. The Final Plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies; one (1) PDF copy; and five (5) paper prints. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. a. The Certificate of Director of Public Service will need to be amended to identify the new Director of Public Service, Craig Woolard. b. The Certificate of Completion of Improvements will still need to be included on the final plat to verify completion of the said subdivision improvements. 2. The applicant shall submit with the application for Final Plat review and approval, a written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval and noted code provisions have been satisfactorily addressed, and shall include a digital copy (pdf) of the entire Final Plat submittal. This narrative shall be in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer to the appropriate plat, plan, sheet, note, covenant, etc. in the submittal. 3. Per Section 38.26.050.F “Street Median Island Landscaping” – The street median island for South 27th Avenue situated between Kurk Drive and Meah Lane shall be landscaped and 59 Lot 7A, Block 11 Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 – Findings of Fact and Order 8 irrigated according to the requirements determined through the plan review process and the City of Bozeman Superintendent of Streets. 4. A notation shall be provided on the final plat to confirm the existing 1-foot wide “No Access” strip for all residential lots fronting onto the arterial road, South 27th Avenue. This City Commission order may be appealed by bringing an action in the Eighteenth District Court of Gallatin County, within 30 days after the adoption of this document by the City Commission, by following the procedures of Section 76-3-625, M.C.A. The preliminary approval of this subdivision shall be effective for one (1) year from the date of Preliminary Plat approval, or September 24, 2013. At the end of this period the City Commission may, at the written request of the subdivider, extend its approval as provided in the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance for not more than one (1) calendar year. DATED this day of , 2012. BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION SEAN A. BECKER, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Stacy Ulmen, City Clerk GREG SULLIVAN, City Attorney 60 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Keri Thorpe, Assistant Planner Tim McHarg, Planning Director SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement for Planning Services for Unified Development Code Amendments – N. 7th Avenue Urban Renewal Board (NSURB) MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Ratify the City Manager’s signing of the Professional Services Agreement for Planning Services for the NSURB BACKGROUND: As part of the NSURB FY2013 Annual Work Plan and Budget, the board requested $20,000 for Professional Planning Services to provide for a new zoning district for N. 7th Avenue. The FY2013 work plan reads: The NSURB sees value in codifying elements of the District Plan to improve predictability and ease redevelopment of commercial parcels within the District. The selected consultant will reconcile inconsistencies between plans previously adopted by the City and reinforce the goals and objectives of the District Plan by creating a development code specific to the commercial and light industrial portions of the District. A selection committee comprised of Assistant Planner Keri Thorpe, Planning Director Tim McHarg, Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders and NSURB member Scott Hedglin reviewed proposals submitted from seven firms. On October 4th, the NSURB approved the selection committee’s recommendation of contracting with Clarion Associates, LLC to prepare a new zoning code for the N. 7th Avenue Urban Renewal District. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS: Tax increment from the N. 7th Avenue Tax Increment Finance District account will be used to pay for these professional services. Attachments: Professional Services Agreement for Planning Services Report compiled on: October 25, 2012 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Stacy Ulmen CMC, City Clerk Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Approve cancelling the Commission meeting the week of November 12, 2012 MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: City offices will be closed in observance of Veteran’s Day Monday, November 12, 2012. The City Commission has decided not to meet that week. This item formalizes this decision. BACKGROUND: Historically, the City Commission may choose to meet on Tuesday when a holiday falls on a Monday. The Commission has indicated they do not want to meet at all the week of the 12th. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None. ALTERNATIVES: Meet on Tuesday, November 13, 2012. FISCAL EFFECTS: None Attachments: none Report compiled on: 10/26/2012 71 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Laurae Clark, Treasurer Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director SUBJECT: Approval of Pledged Securities MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Approve the depository bonds and pledged securities as of September 30, 2012. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the depository bonds and pledged securities as of September 30, 2012. BACKGROUND: Section 7-6-207 (2), MCA, requires the City Commission to approve pledged securities at least quarterly. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS: None Attachments: Depository Bonds & Pledges Securities Report as of September 30, 2012 Report compiled on: October 8, 2012 72 DEPOSITORY BONDS AND SECURITIES September 30, 2012 MATURITY CUSIP NO. TOTAL AMOUNT FIRST SECURITY BANK All Accounts Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation $ 250,000.00 Federal Home Loan Bank 04/30/2013 313374CR9 $ 2,000,000.00 Federal Home Loan Bank 09/11/2015 313370JB5 $ 1,000,000.00 TOTAL - First Security Bank $ 3,250,000.00 US BANK All Accounts Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation $ 250,000.00 FHLMC Pool J13238 10/01/25 3128PSS32 $ 9,955,612.46 FNMA Pool 890193 08/01/25 31410K7E8 $ 5,352,798.05 TOTAL – US Bank $15,558,410.51 This is to certify that we, the Commission of the City of Bozeman, in compliance with the provisions of Section 7-6-207, M.C.A., have this day certified the receipts of the First Security Bank and US Bank, for the Depository Bonds held by the Director of Finance as security, for the deposit for the City of Bozeman funds as of September 30, 2012, by the banks of Bozeman and approve and accept the same. _____________________________________________ 73 SEAN A. BECKER, Mayor _______________________________________ _______________________________________ JEFFREY K. KRAUSS, Deputy Mayor CHRIS MEHL, Commissioner _______________________________________ _______________________________________ CARSON TAYLOR, Commissioner CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS, Commissioner 74 PLEDGED SECURITIES AND CASH IN BANK As of September 30, 2012 ___ First Security Bank _______ Total Cash & CD’s on Deposit As of September 30, 2012 $ 5,257,841.79 FDIC Coverage $ 250,000.00 Amount Remaining $ 5,007,841.79 Pledges required 50% $ 2,503,920.90 Actual Amount of Pledges As of September 30, 2012 $ 3,000,000.00 Over (Under) Pledged As of September 30, 2012 $ 496,079.10 _____ US Bank ______ _______ Total Cash on Deposit 75 As of September 30, 2012 $ 13,280,753.34 FDIC Coverage $ 250,000.00 Amount Remaining $ 13,030,753.34 Pledges required104% $ 13,551,983.47 Actual Amount of Pledges As of September 30, 2012 $ 15,308,410.50 Over (Under) Pledged As of September 30, 2012 $ 1,756,427.03 REFERENCE: Section 7-6-207, M.C.A. 76 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Bob Murray, Project Engineer Rick Hixson, City Engineer SUBJECT: Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility, Phase 1 Improvements – Change Order No. 10. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Motion and vote to authorize the City Manager’s signature on the Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility, Phase 1 Improvements – Change Order No. 10. BACKGROUND: Attached is a copy of the summary of change order number ten for the above referenced project. This change order includes seventy items. Eight are credits while the other sixty two are additions. Pages two through ten of the attached document titled “Change Order No. 10 Summary” provides a short description of each of the items involved with this change. Additionally, the remainder of the document contains the detailed backup cost information for each item. This change also includes an extension of contract time of 55 days for substantial completion and final completion. The final recommended increase in cost and time extension for this change is reasonable and commensurate with the work involved. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: Overall this change order increases the contract amount by $102,586.00 from $36,798,705.90 to $36,901,291.90. This will decrease the contingency on the project from $1,444,071.99 to $1,341,485.99. The contingency is included in the overall budget for the project but not in the construction contract which is why the change order must be processed. Attachments: Change Order No. 10, Resolution No 4416 Report compiled on: 10/15/12 77 1 of 2 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4416 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING ALTERATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT WITH WILLIAMS BROTHER CONSTRUCTION, LLC., BILLINGS, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on the 10th day of November 2008, authorize award of the bid for the Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility Phase I Improvements project, to Williams Brother Construction, LLC., Billings, Montana; and WHEREAS, Section 7-5-4308, Montana Code Annotated, provides that any such alterations or modifications of the specifications and/or plans of the contract be made by resolution; and WHEREAS, it has become necessary in the prosecution of the work to make alterations or modifications to the specifications and/or plans of the contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, that the proposed modifications and/or alterations to the contract between the City of Bozeman, a municipal corporation, and Williams Brother Construction, LLC., as contained in Change Order No. 10, attached hereto, be and the same are hereby approved; and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract change order for and on behalf of the City; and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to attest such signature. 78 Resolution No. 4416, Change Order 10 for WRF 2 of 2 PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 5th day of November 2012. __________________________________________ SEAN BECKER Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance 1820 Authorizing the City Manager to Submit an Application for Approval of a Certificate of Survey to Relocate the Common Boundary Line between City-owned property at the Bozeman Public Library and the Adjacent Harrington’s Parcel. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent Item RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Second Reading of Ordinance 1820 BACKGROUND: On October 22, 2012 at its regularly scheduled meeting, the Bozeman City Commission voted 4 – 0 to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1820 (Attachment 1) as presented and directed staff to return to the Commission with Ordinance 1820 for final approval on the Commission’s Consent agenda. If approved, the effective date of Ordinance 1820 is December 5, 2012. On September 19, 2011, the City Commission took two actions related to encroachment of the Harrington’s building on City property. In two separate actions the Commission determined that: 1) The 700 square feet of city-owned property identified in the exhibits, was not needed for public use and that an appropriate associated maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance be executed. AND 2) Having found that 700 square feet of city-owned property identified in the exhibits, was not needed for public use, they directed staff to initiate the steps necessary to transfer 700 square feet of property to Harrington’s Inc. and to execute an appropriate maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance. The minutes from the September 19th City Commission meeting are submitted herein as Attachment 2. The packet material for the September 19, 2011 City Commission meeting can be found by clicking on this link. 90 2 Amended Covenants The Commission approved the proposed boundary line adjustment predicated on the recording of a revised Declaration of Restrictive Covenants on the Harrington’s parcel that includes all of the land transferred in addition to the remainder of the property owned by Harrington’s Inc. included within the CMC Asbestos Bozeman Facility. (Attachment 3) Maintenance Agreement At the September 19, 2011 public hearing, the Commission requested a maintenance agreement be executed between the property owner and the City of Bozeman in order to allow the appropriate access to the east side of the Harrington’s building for general maintenance and upkeep. (Attachment 4) UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None have been identified at this time. ALTERNATIVES: As recommended by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: None have been identified at this time. Attachments: 1) Ordinance 1820 2) Minutes from the September 19, 2011 City Commission meeting; 3) Amendment to Restrictive Covenant; 4) Executed maintenance access easement between the owners of the Harrington’s property and the City of Bozeman; 5) Exhibit to Certificate of Survey 460 depicting the proposed boundary line adjustment area; and 6) Aerial photograph of the Harrington’s Inc. Property and City Property depicting the encroachment on the east side of the Harrington’s building. Report compiled on: October 11, 2012 91 Page 1 of 4 ORDINANCE NO. 1820 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY TO RELOCATE THE COMMON BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN THE BOZEMAN PUBLIC LIBRARY AND THE ADJACENT HARRINGTON PARCEL. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has identified an encroachment of a building onto the real property acquired for and occupied by the Bozeman Public Library; and WHEREAS, Section 76-3-207, MCA, allows for divisions of land for the purpose of relocating common boundary lines between adjoining properties; and WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to move the boundary between these respective properties to remove the encroachment by the building; and WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on the 19th day of September, 2011, find that the approximately 700 square feet of property adjacent to the Harrington parcel at which the building encroaches is not needed for public use; and WHEREAS, the relocation of this common boundary line benefits the public interest because the encroachment afflicts the title to the land acquired for and occupied by the Bozeman Public Library; and WHEREAS, the relocation of this common boundary line will provide additional benefit to the public interest because the encroachment also afflicts the title to the land adjacent to the Bozeman Public Library, and removal of the encroachment will increase the marketability and development potential of said land; and WHEREAS, Section 2.11 of the Bozeman City Charter requires the Commission to adopt an ordinance when the Commission "convey(s), lease(es)or authorize(s) the conveyance or lease of any lands of the city." 92 Page 2 of 4 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA: Section 1 The City Commission hereby authorizes the City Manager to submit an application for approval of a Certificate of Survey to relocate the common boundary line between the Bozeman Public Library, and the adjacent Harrington parcel. The proposed Certificate of Survey is incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Ordinance. The City Commission further authorizes the City Manager to execute a deed conveying title of that portion of the land affected by the relocation of the boundary line, subject to approval of the boundary line adjustment application and further predicated on the recording of a revised Declaration of Restrictive Covenants on the Harrington parcel that includes all of the land transferred in addition to the remainder of the property owned by Harrington’s Inc. that is included within the CMC Asbestos Bozeman Facility. Final execution of the Certificate of Survey and deed are dependent upon final adoption of this Ordinance 1820, and the recording of the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, and as such the City Manager cannot execute the Certificate of Survey and deed until 30 days after second reading of this Ordinance and the Recording of the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants. Section 2 Repealer. All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3 Savings Provision. This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provision of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4 Severability. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. 93 Page 3 of 4 Section 5 Codification. This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances of the City and shall be organized in a category entitled “Conveyances and Leases of City Land.” Section 6 Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption. PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the 22nd day of October, 2012. ____________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ______ day of_______________, 2012. The effective date of this ordinance is ___________, ____, 2012. _________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk 94 Page 4 of 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 95 LINKED MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN MONTANA September 19 2011 The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in the Commission Room City Hall at 121 North Rouse on Monday September 19 2011 Present were Mayor Jeff Krauss Commissioner Cyndy Andrus Commission Sean Becker Commissioner Chris Mehl and Commissioner Carson Taylor Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn Finance Director Anna Rosenberry City Attorney Greg Sullivan and City Clerk Stacy Ulmen Please refer to the audio recording ofthis meetingfor additional detail 0 09 31 A Call to Order 6 p m Commission Room City Hall 121 North Rouse Mayor Krauss called the meeting to order 0 09 36 B Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence 0 10 27 Welcome Mayor Krauss welcomed everybody to the meeting 0 10 32 C Changes to the Agenda Mayor Krauss asked Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn if there were any changes to the Agenda Mr Winn stated no 0 10 39 D Consent L Authorize Payment of Accounts Payable Claims LaMeres 2 Authorize City Manager to sign and submit Grant application for the Montana Community Development Block Grant Economic Development Program 2011 Planning Grant in partnership with the State of Montana s Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Fontenot 3 Ratify Fire Chief s signature on 2011 Assistance to Firefighters Grant Application Shrauger 4 Approve the monthly report for the Building Inspection Division for August 2011 Risk 0 10 52 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment on the Consent Agenda No person commented Mayor Krauss closet public comment Page 1 of 13 96 Minutes ofthe Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 0 11 03 Motion and Vote to approve Consent Items D 1 4 It was moved by Cr Andrus seconded by Cr Becker to approve Consent Items D 1 4 Those votina Ave beine Crs Andrus Becker Mehl Taylor and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 0 11 20 E Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened general public comment No person commented Mayor Krauss closed general public comment 0 12 30 F Mayoral Proclamation Gold Star Mother s and Families Day September 24th Mayor Krauss declared September 24th as Gold Star Mother s and Families Day 0 15 42 G Action Items 0 15 46 1 Continued Consideration of Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness for Digital Skylines Application No Z 11139 705 Bridger Drive Saunders 0 15 51 Mayor Krauss Mayor Krauss stated that he will entertain public comment on all factors of this application 0 15 52 Chris Saunders Assistant City Planner Mr Saunders gave the staff presentation regarding the Continued Consideration of Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness for Digital Skylines Application No Z 11139 705 Bridger Drive 025 05 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff discussed expertise gaps in service and setbacks from residential areas 0 30 03 Kevin Howell Applicant representing Verizon Wireless Mr Howell gave the applicant presentation regarding the Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness for Digital Skylines Application No Z 11139 705 Bridger Drive 0 35 37 Commission Questions for Applicant The Commission and Applicant spoke regarding how far the signal would span along with the height of the tower needs and spectrums 1 02 29 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment 1 02 59 Jean TromhjE Public Comment Ms Trombly of 2413 Birdie Drive spoke regarding the M 1 Zoning the location and potential danger to residents She urged the Commission to not approve the Tower at this site Page 2 of 13 97 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 1 06 09 DavidAndreasi Public Comment Mr Amdreasi spoke regarding his condo project that is right in the path of the tower It is only 65ft from the tower and this poses a threat to his property The tower needs to have a safe site He stated that a no vote will say that the Commission cares 1 09 03 Don Lucker Public Comment Mr Lucker spoke regarding the future He stated that the City codes are out of date We need a moratorium to look at present codes He spoke regarding respecting quality of life He is not against cell activity but has a concern of safety He asked that the Commission deny the application and work with Verizon to find a different site 1 13 38 Brian Gallik Public Comment Mr Gallik stated that he is representing the core protection group and spoke regarding the August 18th letter that was submitted by the group he represents He spoke regarding the Federal standards and gap in coverage This is in the City s entry way corridor This will come back in the future He urged the Commission to act accordingly 1 15 39 Public Comment closed Mayor Krauss closed public comment 1 15 50 Commission Questions for staff The Commission and staff spoke regarding zoning and uses 1 20 25 Applicant Rebuttal The Applicant rebutted the public comment in regards to concerns regarding fall zones other locations and height 1 25 11 Questions for Applicant 1 31 56 Public Hearing Closed Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing 1 32 22 Greg Sullivan City Attorney Mr Sullivan reminded the Commission that there is a previous motion on the floor to be acted upon He stated that the staff recommendation is to withdraw the motion 1 32 34 Stacy Ulmen City Clerk Ms Ulmen read back to motion from the previous meeting 1 32 59 Motion and Vote to withdraw the motion from August 15 2011 as follows It was moved by Cr Taylor seconded by Cr Mehl that having heard and consideredpublic testimony the materials presented in the packet andfinding that the application is in conformance with the requirements of the City ofBozeman I move to approve application Z 11139 as amended by the August 3 2011 submittal with the conditions and code requirements contained in the staffreport It was moved by Cr Taylor seconded la Cr Mehl to withdraw the motion from August 153 2011 as follows It was moved hE Cr Taylor seconded by Cr Mehl that havin heard and Page 3 of 13 98 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 considered public testimony the materials presented in the packet and rindiLng that the y2plication is in conf re W ofBozeman I move toormancewiththeirementsoftheCq yMrove qMlication Z 11139 as amended by theAugust 3 2011 submittal with the conditions and code requirements contained in the staffreport Those voting Ave being Crs Taylor Mehl Andrus Becker and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 1 33 36 Motion that having heard and considered public testimony materials presented in the packet and finding that the application is in conformance with the requirements of the City of Bozeman I move to approve application Z 11139 as amended by the August 3 2011submittal with the conditions and code requirements contained in the staff report It was moved by Cr Becker seconded by Cr Mehl that Having heard and considered public testimony materials presented in the packet and finding that the application is in conformance with the requirements of the City of Bozeman I move to approve application Z 11139 as amended by the August 3 2011submittal with the conditions and code requirements contained in the staff report 1 34 02 Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission spoke regarding alternatives gaps in service public comment the appearance of the tower setbacks safety utilities moratoriums height view shed and other locations 2 06 32 Greg Sullivan City Attorney Mr Sullivan pointed out aesthetics and how it is applied within the Bozeman Municipal Code within the telecommunications area 2 08 41 Amendment to the Main Motion that the language read by Cr Becker would remain the same but add the finding after the City of Bozeman if the tower is 60ft or less It was moved by Cr Mehl seconded by Cr Taylor that the language read by Cr Becker would remain the same but add the finding after the City of Bozeman if the tower is 60ft or less 2 09 19 Commission Discussion on the Amendment 2 11 54 Friendly Amendment to the Amendment to add and use the September 7th mono pole submittal Cr Mehl and Cr Taylor agreed to add and use the September 7th mono pole submittal to the amendment 2 12 40 Commission Discussion 2 12 52 Vote on the Amendment that the language read by Cr Becker would remain the same but add the finding after the City of Bozeman if the tower is 60ft or less and use the September 7th mono pole submittal Page 4 of 13 99 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 Those voting Aye being Crs Mehl Talor and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being Crs Andrus and Becker The motion passed 3 2 2 13 19 Vote on the Main Motion that having heard and considered public testimony materials presented in the packet and finding that the application is in conformance with the requirements of the City of Bozeman if the tower is 60ft or less I move to approve application Z 11139 as amended by the August 3 2011 September 7th Mono Pole submittal with the conditions and code requirements contained in the staff report Those voting Aye being Crs Mehl Talor and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being Crs Becker and Andrus The motion passed 3 2 2 13 43 Break Mayor Krauss declared a break 2 27 41 Meeting called back to order Mayor Krauss called the meeting back to order 2 28 04 2 Public Hearing and Consideration of Audrey s Pizza Outdoor Seating Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation Application No Z 11198 Riley 2 28 38 Doug Riley Associate Planner Mr Riley gave the staff presentation regarding Audrey s Pizza Outdoor Seating Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation Application No Z 11198 234 20 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff spoke regarding the distance of the overhang on the building and the awning 2 35 59 Angie Schlegal Applicant Ms Schlegal gave the Applicant presentation regarding Audrey s Pizza Outdoor Seating Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation Application No Z 11198 2 36 57 Commission Questions for Applicant The Commission and applicant spoke regarding outdoor music and parking problems 2 38 30 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment 2 38 48 Julie Maxwell Public Comment Ms Maxwell stated that she owns property near the restaurant Her concern is the noise level and the impact to her property She has windows open in the spring summer and fall and would like the Commission to make the fence higher on the south side In regards to the hours of operation she asked that the patio be closed at 9 p m Page 5 of 13 100 Minutes ofthe Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 2 41 50 Public comment closed Mayor Krauss closed public comment 2 42 05 Commission discussion with Staff Mr Riley spoke with the Commission about the setbacks fencing and outside seating 2 44 58 Public Hearing closed Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing 2 45 00 Motion that having reviewed the application materials considered public comment and all information presented I hereby move to approve Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation application Z 11198 to allow a new outdoor seating area including a setback deviation and the expansion of the sale of alcohol for on premise consumption within the outdoor seating area at 401 East Peach Street commonly known as Audrey s Pizza Oven hereby incorporating by reference the conditions of approval and findings included in the staff report It was moved by Cr Mehl seconded by Cr Taylor that Havine reviewed the application materials considered public comment and all information presented 1hereby move to approve Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation application Z 11198 to allow a new outdoor seating area including a setback deviation and the expansion of the sale of alcohol for on premise consunintion within the outdoor scatin area at 401 East Peach Street commonly known as Audrey s Pizza Oven hereby incorporating by reference the conditions of approval and findings included in the staff report 2 45 42Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission spoke regarding noise fencing requirements and the zoning of the area 2 48 45 Vote on the Motion that having reviewed the application materials considered public comment and all information presented I hereby move to approve Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviation application Z 11198 to allow a new outdoor seating area including a setback deviation and the expansion of the sale of alcohol for on premise consumption within the outdoor seating area at 401 East Peach Street commonly known as Audrey s Pizza Oven hereby incorporating by reference the conditions of approval and findings included in the staff report Those voting Ave being Crs Mehl Taylor Andrus Becker and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 2 49 28 3 Request to Amend Fiscal Year 2012 Transportation Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program Saunders 2 49 34 Chris Saunders Assistant Planning Director Mr Saunders gave the staff presentation regarding the request to Amend Fiscal Year 2012 Transportation Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program Page 6 of 33 101 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 2 51 24 Commission questions for Staff The Commission and staff discussed credit towards future work and transferring credits 2 55 11 Applicant Presentation The Applicant representing Norton Properties and the J D Family Partnership gave the presentation regarding the request to Amend Fiscal Year 2012 Transportation Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program 3 02 24 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment No person commented Mayor Krauss closed public comment 3 02 34 Commission Questions for staff The Commission and Staff spoke regarding growth and the Capital Improvement Plan creating Special Improvement Districts and conversations with developers 3 05 55 Public hearing closed Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing 3 06 05 Motion that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find that amending the capital improvement program to include the center turn lane of West Babcock Street west of North Cottonwood Road and the widening of North Cottonwood Road at this time is detrimental to the proper operation of the transportation impact fee program and negatively affects other prioritized projects already included on the CIP and therefore I move to retain the Transportation Impact Fee capital improvement program as currently established It was moved by Cr Taylor seconded ky Cr Andrus that Having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find that amendina thecapital improvement program to include the center turn lane of West Babcock Street west of North Cottonwood Road and the widenina of North Cottonwood Road at this time is detrimental to the l2roPer operation of the transportation impact fee program and negatively affects other 12rioritized projects already included on the CIP and therefore I move to retain the Transportation Impact Fee capital improvement Program as currently established 3 06 49 Discussion on the Motion 3 16 24 Vote on the Motion to that Having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find that amending the capital improvement program to include the center turn lane of West Babcock Street west of North Cottonwood Road and the widening of North Cottonwood Road at this time is detrimental to the proper operation of the transportation impact fee program and negatively affects other prioritized projects already included on the CIP and therefore I move to retain the Transportation Impact Fee capital improvement program as currently established Those voting Ale being Cr Taylor Those voting No being Crs Andrus Becker Mehl and Mayor Krauss Page 7 of 13 102 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 The motion failed 1 4 3 16 47 Motion that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find the addition of a center turn lane on W Babcock Street and the expansion of North Cottonwood Road is both capacity expanding and not project related as both terms are defined in Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code therefore I move to add these system improvements to the FY12 Transportation Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of 63 003 28 for West Babcock Street and the amount of 5689 250 01 for North Cottonwood Road It was moved by Cr Taylor Seconded ba Cr Andrus that having heard and considered evidence and public testimogy I rind the addition of a center turn lane on W Babcock Street and the expansion of North Cottonwood Road is both capacity expanding and not project related as both terms are defined in Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code therefore I move to add these system improvements to the FY12 Transportation Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of 63 003 28 for West Babcock Street and the amount of 689 250 01 for North Cottonwood Road 3 17 33 Discussion on the Motion 3 21 38 Vote on the Motion that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find the addition of a center turn lane on W Babcock Street and the expansion of North Cottonwood Road is both capacity expanding and not project related as both terms are defined in Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code therefore I move to add these system improvements to the FY12 Transportation Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of S63 003 28 for West Babcock Street and the amount of 5689 250 01 for North Cottonwood Road Those voting Aye bcin2 Crs Taylor Andrus Becker Mehl and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 3 22 07 4 Request to Amend Fiscal Year 2012 Water Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program Saunders 3 22 27 Chris Saunders Assistant Planning Director Mr Saunders gave the staff presentation regarding the request to Amend Fiscal Year 2012 Water Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program 3 23 42 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff spoke regarding the completion of the water plant 3 25 09 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment No person commented Mayor Krauss closed public comment Page 8 of 13 103 Minutes ofthe Bozeman City Commission September 19 2021 3 25 17 Motion that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find that the over sizing of the water main from 8 inch to 12 inch diameter underlying W Babcock Street for approximately 1 520 feet west of North Cottonwood Road is both capacity expanding and not project related as defined pursuant to Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and therefore I move to add this improvement to the FY12 Water Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of 20 065 It was moved by Cr Andrus seconded by Cr Becker that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I rind that the over sizing of the water main from 8 inch to 12 inch diameter underlyinLy W Babcock Street for approximateLy 1 520 feet west ofNorth Cottonwood Road is both capacityex 2anding and not project related as defined pursuant to Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and therefore I move to add this improvement to the FY12 Water Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of 20 065 3 25 56 Commission Discussion on the Motion 3 26 48 Vote on the Motion to that having heard and considered evidence and public testimony I find that the over sizing of the water main from 8 inch to 12 inch diameter underlying W Babcock Street for approximately 1 520 feet west of North Cottonwood Road is both capacity expanding and not project related as defined pursuant to Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and therefore I move to add this improvement to the FY12 Water Capital Improvements Program list and provide for its funding in the amount of 520 065 Those voting Ave being Crs Andrus Becker Mehl Taylor and Ma or Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 3 27 05 5 Continued Public Hearing and Consideration of Impact Fee Appeal No 1102 and Impact Fee Credit Request No 1101 from Norton and J D Family Partnership Saunders 3 27 15 Chris Saunders Assistant Planning Director Mr Saunders gave the staff presentation regarding Continued Public Hearing and Consideration of Impact Fee Appeal No 1102 and Impact Fee Credit Request No 1101 from Norton and J D Family Partnership 3 29 06 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and Staff discussed project related improvements 3 30 52 Applicant Presentation The Applicant representing Norton Properties and the J D Family Partnership gave the presentation regarding the continued Public Hearing and Consideration of Impact Fee Appeal No 1102 and Impact Fee Credit Request No 1101 from Norton and J D Family Partnership The applicant stated that cash is preferred for the credit Page 9 of 13 104 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 3 31 56 Public Comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment No person commented Mayor Krauss closed public comment 3 32 10 Motion that having previously adopted motions which directed the applicant s request for impact fee credits to be added to the water and transportation impact fee capital improvement programs and finding the request for credit consistent with the criteria for approval in Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code I move to approve the requested impact fee credits in the amounts of 20 065 from the water impact fee fund provide for its funding in the amount of 63 003 28 and 5689 250 01 from the transportation impact fee fund subject to the conditions as recommended by staff It was moved by Cr Becker seconded by Cr Mehl that having previously adopted motions which directed the applicant s request for impact fee credits to be added to the water and transportation impact fee capital improvement programs and finding the request for credit consistent with the criteria for approval in Chal2ter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code I move to approve the re nested impact fee credits in the amounts of 20 065 from the water impact fee fund provide for its funding in the amount of 63 003 28 and 689 250 01 from the transportation impact fee fund subject to the conditions as recommended by staff 3 33 14 Commission Discussion on the Motion The Commission and staff spoke regarding the cash payment the amount oftime it will take for the credit 3 34 35 Vote on the Motion that having previously adopted motions which directed the applicant s request for impact fee credits to be added to the water and transportation impact fee capital improvement programs and finding the request for credit consistent with the criteria for approval in Chapter 3 24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code I move to approve the requested impact fee credits in the amounts of 20 065 from the water impact fee fund provide for its funding in the amount of 63 003 28 and 5689 250 01 from the transportation impact fee fund subject to the conditions as recommended by staff Those voting Aye being Crs Becker Mehl Taylor Andrus and Mayor Krauss Those voting No beini none The motion passed 5 0 3 35 09 6 Need Hearing to Determine whether 700 square feet of city owned property at 200 South Wallace is no longer needed for public use Fontenot 3 3 5 12 Brit Fontenot Economic Development Director Mr Fontenot gave the staff presentation regarding the Need Hearing to determine whether 700 square feet of city owned property at 200 South Wallace is no longer needed for public use Page 10 of 13 105 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 3 41 09 Commission Questions for Staff The Commission and staff spoke regarding the next time that the Commission will see the transfer ofthe property zero lot lines non conformance square footage values removing encroachments and covenants 3 49 33 Public comment Mayor Krauss opened public comment No person commented Mayor Krauss closed public comment 3 49 41 Motion that having considered the information presented by Staff I move that the Commission rinds that 700 square feet of city owned property depicted on the attached Exhibit to Certificate of Survey 460 is not needed for public use and that an appropriate associated maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance be executed It was moved by Cr Mehl seconded by Cr Taylor that Having considered the information presented by Staff I move that the Commission finds that 700 square feet of city owned property depicted on the attached Exhibit to Certificate of Surv2j 460 is not needed for public use and that an appropriate associated maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance be executed 3 50 01 Commission discussion on the Motion The Commission spoke regarding the value of the area asbestos cost of cleanup that this needs to be added to the Tax Increment Financing TIF District moving from non taxable to a taxable status 3 55 16 Vote on the Motion to that having considered the information presented by Staff I move that the Commission finds that 700 square feet of city owned property depicted on the attached Exhibit to Certificate of Survey 460 is not needed for public use and that an appropriate associated maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance be executed Those voting Aye being Crs Mehl Taylor Andrus Becker and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 3 55 29 Motion and Vote that Having found that 700 square feet of city owned property depicted on Exhibit Certificate of Survey 460 is not needed for public use I move to direct staff to initiate the steps necessary to transfer 700 square feet of property to Harrington s Inc and to execute an appropriate maintenance agreement on City property for building maintenance It was moved by Cr Mehl seconded by Cr Taylor that Having found that 700 square feet of city owned property depicted on Exhibit Certificate of Surva 460 is not needed for public use I move to direct staff to initiate the steps necessan to transfer 700 sguare feet of property to Harrington s Inc and to execute an appropriate maintenance agreement on City aroperty for building maintenance Page 11 of 13 106 Minutes ofthe Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 Those voting Ave being Crs Mehl Taylor Andrus and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being Cr Becker The motion passed 4 1 3 56 39 7 Public Hearing and Consideration of Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No 1816 Codifying the Bozeman Municipal Code Sullivan 3 56 44 Greg Sullivan City Attorney Mr Sullivan gave the staff presentation regarding the Consideration of Provisional Adoption of Ordinance No 1816 Codifying the Bozeman Municipal Code 4 06 39 Rules suspended Mayor Krauss suspended the Rules to 10 30 p m 4 08 18 Commission and Staff Discussion Commission and Staff spoke regarding the items that were taken out of the Code during the re codification indemnification typos and editorial changes 4 13 55 Public Comment Mayor Krauss noted that there were no public members present for public comment 4 14 08 Motion to provisionally adopt Ordinance No 1816 Codifying the Bozeman Municipal Code as set out in the 2011 final proof It was moved by Cr Taylor seconded by Cr Andrus to provisionally ado Ordinance No 1816 Codifying the Bozeman Municipal Code as set out in the 2011 final j2roof 4 14 22 Commission Discussion on the Motion 4 15 58 Vote on the Motion to provisionally adopt Ordinance No 1816 Codifying the Bozeman Municipal Code as set out in the 2011 final proof Those voting Aye being Crs Taylor Andrus Becker Mehl and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The Motion passed 5 0 4 16 16 8 Re Appointments to the Building Board of Appeals Kissel 4 16 27 Motion and Vote to re appoint Robert Lashaway and appoint Andrea Michael to the Building Board of Appeals It was moved by Cr Mehl seconded by Cr Taylor to re appoint Robert Lashawgj and appoint Andrea Michael to the Building Board of Appeals Those voting Aye beine Crs Mehl Taylor Andrus Becker and Mayor Krauss Those voting No being none The motion passed 5 0 Page 12 of 13 107 Minutes of the Bozeman City Commission September 19 2011 4 16 50 H FYI Discussion 4 16 58 1 MMTA Email regarding Workman s Comp award Mr Winn spoke regarding a recent award given to the City by MMIA for Workman s Comp 4 18 01 2 Thursday District Hearing 4 18 52 3 Video Tour Book is up and Live 4 20 17 4 Recommendations coming forward from the Parking Commission and the Cash in lieu program 4 21 04 5 Staff and Mayor have met with Department of Revenue regarding taxable valuations 4 33 35 1 Adjournment Mayor Krauss adjourned the meeting at 10 23 p m B 0 Jsz0Jeffor ATEST Uity C IerkStaeITCM 7 83 d C0 0 PREPA RED B rM Stacy In en MC City Clerk Approved oil Page 13 of 13 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Chris Saunders, Assistant Director Tim McHarg, Director SUBJECT: Final adoption and second reading of Ordinance 1843 to revise Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Impact Fees, BMC to remove specific references. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Give final approval to Ordinance 1843. SUGGESTED MOTION: Having reviewed the ordinance draft and considered public comment I finally approve Ordinance 1843. BACKGROUND: The impact fee authorizing ordinance was initially adopted in 1996. Since then the municipal code has been restructured. The proposed changes revise references to the impact fee studies and remove overly detailed specifics from the ordinance. No policy change is proposed with this ordinance. The adopted fees remain in place as is. The City Attorney believes the municipal code should be structured to provide overall guidance and the details of implementation be addressed by Commission Resolution and policy. Preliminary approval was given on October 22nd. These changes would remove specific reference to individual studies and instead provide a general framework for the impact fee program. Adoption of each study would then be completed by Commission Resolution. This ordinance change is proposed at this time to enable a cleaner completion of the present fee update process. Additional ordinance changes may be suggested in the future to resolve certain policy issues. Those changes will be processed separately. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None. ALTERNATIVES: As identified by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: This ordinance change does not have a fiscal impact. It does not change amounts or types of fees assessed or when charges are collected or fees used. Attachments: Ordinance 1843 Report compiled on: 10/24/2012 117 Page 1 of 37 ORDINANCE NO. 1843 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE AMENDED BY REVISING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6, DIVISION 9, IMPACT FEES, TO REMOVE REFERENCES TO SPECIFIC IMPACT FEE STUDIES AND COSTS. Preamble WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman is committed to addressing the community’s needs and expressed desires for services; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman is committed to meeting those desires and demands for services in a fiscally responsible manner; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman is committed to meeting those desires and demands for services in a manner which recognizes the fiscal and legal interest of all of the system users now and in the future and not a limited subset of users; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has developed and adopted an impact fee capital improvements program, which distinguishes current and future needs and provides a lawful, logical, balanced, operationally sound, and cost effective basis upon which to maintain and develop the City’s transportation, fire protection and emergency medical services, water and wastewater systems; and WHEREAS, Sections 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, MCA provide specific authority and guidance about the necessary documentation to establish an impact fee and procedures to adopt and administer an impact fee; and WHEREAS, The City of Bozeman adopted an impact fee program in 1996 through ordinance 1414 which has been amended from time to time; and, WHEREAS, the State of Montana adopted Sections 7-16-1601 through 7-16-1604 providing guidance to local governments regarding impact fees and establishing certain standards for impact fee adoption; and, 118 Page 2 of 37 WHEREAS, Bozeman previously included very specific references to individual fee studies and costs within the adopted ordinances; and, WHEREAS, state enabling law for impact fees allows for adoption of an impact fee study by either ordinance or resolution; and, WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman wishes to take a different approach to organizing its ordinances and intends that the adopted ordinance provide a general framework for the impact fee program and the individual fee studies be adopted by resolution instead of ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the amendments were the subject of a public hearing held on October 22, 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, that: Section 1 Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such division shall read as follows: Sec. 2.06.1600. - Legislative findings. A. The city commission finds that: 1. 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. 2. New residential and nonresidential development imposes increased and excessive demands upon existing city facilities. 3. 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. 4. New development is expected to continue and will place ever-increasing demands on the city to provide public facilities to serve new development. 5. 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. 119 Page 3 of 37 6. All types of development that are not explicitly exempted from the provisions of this division will generate demand for city's transportation, fire protection, water, and wastewater services or facilities that will require improvements to city facilities and equipment. 7. The city's transportation adopted impact fee studies 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 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. 8. 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. 9. The documentation required by MCA 7-6-1602, 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. 10. The development impact fees described in this division are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of new development and are based on the impact fee studies and documentation cited in subsection 7 of this section 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. 11. 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 division 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 120 Page 4 of 37 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. 14. 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. 15. There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development impacts created by each type of development covered by this division and the development impact fees that such development will be required to pay. 16. 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 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. 17. This division 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. 18. This division 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. Sec. 2.06.1610. - Authority and applicability. A. This division is enacted pursuant to the city's self-government powers, the authority granted to the city by the Montana State Constitution, MCA 7-6-1601 through 7-6-1604, and MCA 7-1-4123, 7-1-4124, 7-3-4313, 7-7-4404, 7-7-4424, 7-13-4304, and 69-7-101. B. The provisions of this division shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city. C. The provisions of this division 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 division related to water impact fees shall also apply to all properties located outside the city that are connected to the city water system. 121 Page 5 of 37 E. The provisions of this division related to wastewater impact fees shall also apply to all properties located outside the city that are connected to the city wastewater system. Sec. 2.06.1620. - Intent. A. This division is adopted to help implement the growth policy comprehensive plan of the city, the city's 2001 most recently adopted long range transportation plan update prepared by Robert Peccia & Associates, and as updated, the September 2006 draft of the most recently adopted 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 most recently adopted wastewater facility plan prepared for the city by HDR Engineering and Morrison-Maierlie, Inc., and as updated, and the August 2006 draft of the most recently adopted fire protection/EMS master plan prepared for the city by Emergency Services Consulting, Inc, and as updated. B. The intent of this division 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. C. It is the further intent of this division 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 division 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 division that any moneys collected from any development impact fee and deposited in an impact fee fund ever be co-mingled with moneys 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. Sec. 2.06.1630. - Definitions. A. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 122 Page 6 of 37 1. "Central Business District" (CBD) means land uses established within the B-3, "Central Business District," zoning district. 2. "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. 3. "Development impact fees" means the transportation impact fee, fire protection impact fee, water impact fee, and wastewater impact fee established by this division. 4. "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. 5. "Encumber" means to legally obligate by contract, or otherwise commit to use by appropriation or other official act of the city. 6. "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 moneys 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. 7. "Impact fee coordinator" means the director of the city's department of planning and community development. 8. "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 division. 9. "Impact fee studies" means the studies most recently adopted by resolution of the City Commission for each impact fee which set forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining the impacts of various types of development on the city's street, fire protection and emergency medical services, water and wastewater systems or other services or facilities for which an impact fee may be charged 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. 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. 10. "Improvement" means planning, land acquisition, engineering design, construction inspection, on-site construction, off-site construction, equipment purchases, and financing costs 123 Page 7 of 37 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. The term "improvement" does not include maintenance, operations, or improvements that do not expand capacity. 11. "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 division or by the city. 12. "Initiation of construction" means the date of the preconstruction meeting with the city engineer, 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. 13. "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. 14. "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 most current long range transportation plan or the city's impact fee capital improvement program, and which will benefit new development as required by law and this division. 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 division. The "transportation system" does not include project-related improvements. 15. Trip exchange district. 124 Page 8 of 37 a. "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 2.06.1640.B.3: (1) The use of shared and consolidated parking; (2) A high degree of pedestrian and bicycle access to and throughout the proposed development; (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; b. 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 building, 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; (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 percent developed as measured by lot area utilized; and (9) The area is the subject of a city enforceable common plan of development, such as an urban renewal plan. Sec. 2.06.1640. - Street impact fees. A. Imposition of transportation impact fees. 1. On or after March 23, 1996, any 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 the Commission resolution adopting the most recent transportation impact fee study 125 Page 9 of 37 and establishing the transportation impact fee and as updated as required in this division. Table 2.06.1640 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 the ordinance from which this division is derived; or d. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the city commission in accordance with chapter 10, article 8. 2. Notwithstanding subsection A.1 of this section, no impact fee shall be imposed earlier than the issuance of a building permit for developments requiring a building permit. 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 division 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 division 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 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 30 percent as compared with its size on February 22, 1996, or 2,000 square feet, whichever is less. b. The transportation impact fees adopted are those shown in adopted by resolution of the Commission Table 2.06.1640 and as updated as provided for in this division. Beginning on February 16, 2008, the amount of the fee collected shall be 60 percent 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 the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study Table 2.06.1640. The fee amounts set forth in such study 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. 126 Page 10 of 37 a. If the applicant's development is of a type not listed in the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study Table 2.06.1640, then the city shall use the fee applicable to the most nearly comparable type or land use in the study 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 study table, then a new fee shall be determined by: (1) Finding the most nearly comparable trip generation rate from the publication noted in subsection B.2.a. of this section; 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 the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study Table 2.06.1640, 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 the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study. Table 2.06.1640 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 division 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 division 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 the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study Table 2.06.1640. 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, 127 Page 11 of 37 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 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 and methodology contained within the most recently adopted transportation impact fee study 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 percent interest rate and 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. 128 Page 12 of 37 % New Trips = adjustment factor to account for trips that are already on the roadway. Divide by two = The total daily miles of travel generated by a particular category (i.e., rate X length X percent 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 percent). Cost per Lane Mile = unit cost to construct one lane mile of roadway, in $/lane mile ($3,678,522.00 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). 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 percent 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 division to the city prior to the issuance of any such permit. 2. All funds paid by an applicant pursuant to this division 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 division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. 129 Page 13 of 37 E. Use of transportation impact fee funds. The moneys 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 division, in accordance with the requirements of state 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 section 2.06.1680 or 2.06.1690.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. 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 division or where a mobile home legally existed on such site on or prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived; 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 130 Page 14 of 37 exceeds the transportation impact fee that would be required by this division 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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection F.1 of this section. _____ Table 2.06.1640-1 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 (in dollars)* 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 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 6,463 131 Page 15 of 37 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 sf 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: 132 Page 16 of 37 110 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-1. (2) Defined as 50 percent of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median Income (AMI). (3) Defined as 80 percent 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. Table 2.06.1640-2 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 (in dollars)* 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 4,333 133 Page 17 of 37 411 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 2,475 710 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 1,684 134 Page 18 of 37 912 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 percent of city median income based on 2007 Gallatin County Average Median Income (AMI). (3) Defined as 80 percent 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 section 2.06.1700.K. Sec. 2.06.1650. - Fire protection and emergency medical service impact fees. A. Imposition of fire protection and emergency medical service impact fees. 1. On or after March 23, 1996, any Any person who seeks to obtain any of the following forms of development approval is required to pay a fire/EMS impact fee in the amount specified in the Commission resolution adopting the most recent fire/EMS impact fee study and establishing the fire/EMS impact fee and as updated as required in this division: 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 the ordinance from which this division is derived, is required to pay a fire protection impact fee in the amount specified in this division; or d. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the city commission in accordance with chapter 10, article 8. 135 Page 19 of 37 2. No permits of the types described in subsection A.1 of this section shall be issued until the fire protection/EMS impact fee described in this division 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/EMS impact fee. 1. An applicant required by this division to pay a fire protection/EMS 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 30 percent as compared with its size on February 22, 1996, or 2,000 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 the most recently adopted fire impact fee study. Table 2.06.1650 a. If the type of development that a permit is applied for is not listed in the most recently adopted fire impact/EMS fee study Table 2.06.1650, then the city shall use the fee applicable to the most nearly comparable type or land use in the study table. b. If the type of development that a permit is applied for includes a mix of those uses listed in the most recently adopted fire impact fee study Table 2.06.1650, 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 the most recently adopted fire impact fee study. Table 2.06.1650 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 division 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 division 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 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/EMS protection impact fee by reference to an independent fee calculation study for the applicant's 136 Page 20 of 37 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/EMS used in the most recently adopted fire/EMS 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/EMS facilities and equipment created by the applicant's proposed development than the applicable fee shown in the most recently adopted fire impact fee study Table 2.06.1650, then the fire protection/EMS impact fee due under this division may be calculated according to such study. C. Payment of fire protection/EMS impact fees. 1. An applicant required by this division to pay a fire protection/EMS 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 division shall be identified as fire protection/EMS impact fees and shall be promptly deposited in the fire protection/EMS impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Fire protection/EMS impact fee funds. 1. A single fire protection/EMS 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/EMS impact fees collected pursuant to this division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of fire protection/EMS impact fee funds. The moneys in the fire protection/EMS impact fee fund shall be used only: 1. To acquire or construct fire protection/EMS 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/EMS improvements within the city; or 3. As described in section 2.06.1680 or 2.06.1690.G. F. Exemptions from fire protection/EMS impact fee. 137 Page 21 of 37 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the fire protection/EMS impact fee: a. Reconstruction, expansion, or replacement of a previously existing residential unit that does not create any additional or larger 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/EMS from such land than existed prior to issuance of such permit. d. Projects for which a fire protection/EMS impact fee has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the fire protection/EMS impact fee that would be required by this division. 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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection F.1 of this section. Table 2.06.1650 Fire/EMS Impact Fee Schedule 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 section 2.06.1700.K. Sec. 2.06.1660. - Water impact fees. A. Imposition of water impact fees. 1. On or after March 23, 1996, any Any person who seeks to obtain a permit for connection to the city water system, or who is subject to subsection B.2.b of this section 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 the ordinance from which this division is derived, is required to pay a water impact fee in the amount specified in the 138 Page 22 of 37 Commission resolution adopting the water impact fee study and establishing the water impact fee and as updated as required in this division; or 2. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the city commission in accordance with chapter 10, article 8. 3. No permits for connection to the city water system shall be issued until the water impact fee described in this division 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 water impact fee. 1. The city shall determine the amount of the required water impact fee by reference to the most recently adopted water impact fee study Table 2.06.1660 unless the applicant chooses to submit an individualized calculation pursuant to subsection B.2.a of this section or the city determines the application to be subject to subsection B.2.b of this section. 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 division 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 division 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 most recently adopted 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 the most recently adopted water impact fee study Table 2.06.1660, then the water impact fee due under this division 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 the calculated charges in the most recently adopted water impact fee study Table 2.06.1660. In this circumstance the city shall prepare a customized calculation based upon 139 Page 23 of 37 the most recently adopted water impact fee study large meter calculation methodology in Exhibit 6 of the water impact fee study. The impact fee paid for water meters larger than three inches as of the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived may be adjusted based on actual usage. If usage is greater than 110 percent of anticipated volume during the 12-month period of time beginning six 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 impact fee based upon the metered demand. C. Payment of water impact fee. 1. An applicant required by this division 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 division 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 division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of water impact fee funds. The moneys 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 section 2.06.1680 or 2.06.1690.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 nonresidential building that does not require an additional or larger water meter; 140 Page 24 of 37 b. Replacement of a nonresidential 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; The reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential unit that does not create any additional or larger residential units. 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 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. Table 2.06.1660 Water Impact Fee Schedule* Size of Water Meter Cost Per Meter ¾ inch $3,310.00 1 inch $8,275.00 1½ inch $16,550.00 2 inch $26,480.00 3 inch $52,960.00 Larger than 3 inch Calculated Compiler's Note: The cost per meter fees listed in this formula shall be adjusted annually as per section 2.06.1700.K. Sec. 2.06.1670. - Wastewater impact fees. A. Imposition of wastewater impact fees. 1. On or after March 23, 1996, any Any person who seeks to obtain a permit for connection to the city wastewater system, or who is subject to subsection B.2.b of this section 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 the ordinance from which this division is derived is required to pay a wastewater impact fee in the amount 141 Page 25 of 37 specified in the Commission resolution adopting the wastewater impact fee study and establishing the wastewater impact fee and as updated as required in this division; or 2. Any delayed payment of impact fees as specified and approved by the city commission in accordance with chapter 10, article 8. 3. No permits for connection to the city water system shall be issued until the water impact fee described in this division 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 the most recently adopted wastewater impact fee study Table 2.06.1660 unless the applicant chooses to submit an individualized calculation pursuant to subsection B.2.a of this section or the city determines the application to be subject to subsection B.2.b of this section. 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 division 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 division for the same structure, there shall be no refund of wastewater impact fees previously paid. 2. Individualized calculations. 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 most recently adopted 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 the most recently adopted wastewater impact fee study Table 2.06.1660, then the wastewater impact fees due under this division 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 in the most recently adopted wastewater impact fee study which generated Table 2.06.1670. 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 142 Page 26 of 37 discharge will be applied. The impact fee paid for water meters larger than three inches as of the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived may be adjusted based on actual usage. If usage is greater than 110 percent of anticipated volume or other measure of demand during the 12-month period of time beginning six 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 division 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 division 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 division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of wastewater impact fee funds. The moneys 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 2.06.1680 or section 2.06.1690.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 nonresidential building that does not require an additional or larger water meter; b. Replacement of a nonresidential building or structure of the same size that does not require an additional or larger water meter; 143 Page 27 of 37 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; The reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential unit that does not create any additional or larger residential units. 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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection F.1 of this section. Table 2.06.1670 Wastewater Impact Fee Schedule Size of Water Meter Cost Per Meter* ¾ inch $2,955.00 1 inch $7,388.00 1½ inch $14,775.00 2 inch $23,640.00 3 inch $47,280.00 Larger than 3 inch calculated Compiler's Note: The cost per meter fees listed in this formula shall be adjusted annually as per section 2.06.1700.K. Sec. 2.06.1680. - Refunds of development impact fees paid. A. Refunds of development impact fees shall be made only in the following instances and in the following manner: 1. 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. 2. Expenses and encumbrances. a. 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 division or MCA 17-6- 1602. 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. 144 Page 28 of 37 b. 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 30 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." 3. If an applicant has paid a development impact fee required by this division and has obtained any of the types of permits or extensions listed in 2.06.1640.A.1, 2.06.1650.A.1, 2.06.1660.A.1, or 2.06.1670.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 30 days after the expiration of the permit or extension for which the fee was paid. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. A refund shall include a pro rata share of interest actually earned on the unused or excess development impact fee paid. 7. All refunds shall be paid within 60 days after the impact fee coordinator determines that such refund is due. 8. 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. 9. Once paid, an impact fee may not be refunded in exchange for impact fee credits issued according to 2.06.1690 Sec. 2.06.1690. - Credits against development impact fees. A. After the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived, 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 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: 145 Page 29 of 37 1. Projects or land dedications not listed on the impact fee capital improvements program (CIP); or 2. Land dedications for, or acquisition or construction of, project-related improvements as defined in section 2.06.1630; 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 MCA 7-6-1602 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 division 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 of this section. 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 $1,000,000.00 from a single impact fee fund shall be made by the city commission. 146 Page 30 of 37 (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 of staff decisions on credit requests may be appealed to the city commission per section 2.06.1700 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. 100 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 department of finance. Upon request of the credit holder, the city shall send the credit holder a letter stating the credit balance available to the credit holder. 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 147 Page 31 of 37 c. All design, construction, inspection, testing, bonding, and acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all applicable city and state procedures. 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 department of finance. Upon request of the credit holder, the city shall also send the credit holder a letter stating the credit balance available to the credit holder. 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 division 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 2.06.1640, 2.06.1650, 2.06.1660, or 2.06.1670, 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 the credit holder. F. Approved credit shall only be used to reduce the amount of development impact fees of the same type otherwise due under this division 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 moneys 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 division, 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: 148 Page 32 of 37 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 3. Reject the request for cash and provide credit. Such excess credit shall be valued at 100 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 transferor 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 the county after the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived, 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 section 2.06.1640.A.1 or 2.06.1650.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. Sec. 2.06.1700. - Miscellaneous provisions. A. Interest earned on moneys 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 moneys 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 the ordinance from which this division is derived. C. Nothing in this division 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 2.06.1690 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 149 Page 33 of 37 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 manager 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 division, exclusive of any improvements needed to correct existing deficiencies or for operation or maintenance purposes. Such capital improvements program shall assign moneys 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. Any moneys, including any accrued interest, not assigned to specific projects within such capital improvements program and not expended pursuant to section 2.06.1680 or 2.06.1690.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 division. 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 division. 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 30 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 30 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 30-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 chapter 10, article 8, by paying some or all of the impact fee from other funds of the city that are 150 Page 34 of 37 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 division 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. 1. Any determination made by any official of the city charged with the administration of any part of this division may be appealed to the development impact fees review committee by filing: a. A written notice of appeal on a form provided by the city; b. A written explanation of why the appellant feels that a determination was in error; and c. An appeal fee of $500.00 with the impact fee coordinator within ten working days after the determination for which the appeal is being filed. 2. The development impact fees review committee shall meet to review the appeal within 30 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 division was in error, then the appeal fee described in this subsection shall be returned to the appellant. J. Updating of impact fee information. 1. The facility plans described in this division 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 division, fee studies, data and analysis relied upon and required by MCA 7-6-1602, and the administrative procedures and manual of this division 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 2.06.1700.E. 151 Page 35 of 37 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 moneys 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 the most recently adopted impact fee studies Tables 2.06.1640, 2.06.1650, 2.06.1660, and 2.06.1670 shall be adjusted annually to reflect the effects of inflation on those costs for improvements set forth in the impact fee studies. On January 1 of each year unless and until the impact fee studies fees in Tables 2.06.1640, 2.06.1650, 2.06.1660, and/or 2.06.1670 are revised or replaced, and then beginning in the subsequent calendar year, each fee amount set forth in each such study table shall be adjusted by multiplying such amount by one 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 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. L. Violation of this division shall be a misdemeanor and shall be subject to those remedies provided in section 1.01.210. Knowingly furnishing false information to any official of the city charged with the administration of this division on any matter relating to the administration of this division, including without limitation the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size, use, or traffic impacts from a proposed development, shall be a violation of this division. In addition to, or in lieu of, any criminal prosecution, the city or any applicant for a permit of the types described in section 2.06.1640.A.1, 2.06.1650.A.1, 2.06.1660.A.1, or 2.06.1670.A.1 shall have the right to sue in civil court to enforce the provisions of this division. M. The section titles used in this division are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this division. 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 90 days following the date of imposition of the fee or the final determination of the city commission, whichever is the later. 152 Page 36 of 37 Section 2 Repealer All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3 Savings Provision This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provision of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4 Severability That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. Section 5 Codification The provisions of Section 1 shall be codified as appropriate in Chapter 2 of the Bozeman Municipal Code; Section 6 Effective Date This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption. PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the 22nd day of October, 2012. 153 Page 37 of 37 ____________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ____ day of ________________, 2012. The effective date of this ordinance is __________, __, 2012. ____________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 154 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Chris Saunders, Assistant Director Tim McHarg, Planning Director SUBJECT: Second reading and final approval of Ordinance 1845 adopting an initial zoning designation of R-S for Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision 35C in conjunction with annexation, Z-12068. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Commission finally approve Ordinance 1845 establishing an initial zoning designation of R-S for Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision 35C. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “Having considered all of the information presented and a public hearing having previously been held on June 11, 2012, I hereby approve Ordinance 1845 establishing an initial zoning designation of R-S, Residential Suburban, for Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision 35C and adjacent right-of-way” BACKGROUND: Mahar Montana Homes received preliminary approval to annex a 5.01 acre parcel and adjacent right-of-ways at 3601 Good Medicine Way on June 11, 2012. The annexation agreement has been signed and returned to the City for processing. The initial zoning of R-S, Residential Suburban, was approved for this area by the Commission, and now requires the implementing ordinance in association with the completion of the annexation process. Preliminary approval of Ordinance 1845 occurred on October 15, 2012. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the resolution and annexation agreement. 2. Deny the resolution and annexation agreement. FISCAL EFFECTS: No significant fiscal effect has been identified. Attachments: Ordinance 1845 and map Report compiled on: October 16, 2012 155 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONE MAP TO INCLUDE THE AREA OF LOT 4A, MINOR SUBDIVISION 35C AND ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAYS, LOCATED IN THE NE ¼ OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, P.M.M. AS “R-S” (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN DISTRICT) FOR 6.564 ACRES LOCATED IN THE SW1/4 OF SECTION 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the proposed zone map amendment to establish an initial municipal zoning designation of “R-1” (Residential Single Household Low-Density District) has been properly submitted, reviewed and advertised; and WHEREAS, the Bozeman Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 15, 2012, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the Bozeman Zoning Commission did not recommend to the Bozeman City Commission that the zone map amendment be approved as proposed; and WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held its public hearing on June 11, 2012, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has reviewed and considered the thirteen zone map amendment criteria established in Section 76-2-304, M.C.A., and found that the proposed zone map amendment to R-1 would not be in compliance with the thirteen criteria but that R-S (Residential Suburban District) would be; and WHEREAS, the applicant’s representative informed the City Commission that R-S 156 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 Page 2 of 5 zoning would be acceptable to the property owner; and WHEREAS, at its meeting held on June 11, 2012, the City Commission found that the proposed zone map amendment would be in compliance with Bozeman’s adopted growth policy and would be in the public interest if R-S was the adopted initial zoning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana: Section 1 That the zoning district designation of the following-described property is hereby designated as "R-S" (Residential Suburban District): A parcel of land, said parcel being Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision 35C and adjacent right-of-ways, located in the NE ¼ of Section 25, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M. said parcel being further described as follows: Legal Description (Lot 4A) Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision No. 35C, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, Gallatin County, Montana, and located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 25, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, Montana, and further described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 4A; thence westerly 269° 40' 00", assumed azimuth from north, 630.09 feet along the south line of said Lot 4A to a point on a curve with the center of circle lying westerly 285° 10' 42" azimuth 1534.89 feet from said point; thence on the following courses along the boundary of said Lot 4A; northerly 403.85 feet along said curve, radius 1534.89 feet and central angle 015° 04' 31"; northerly 000° 06' 11" azimuth 69.39 feet, tangent to said curve; easterly 089° 40' 00" azimuth 325.29 feet; southeasterly 151° 43' 00" azimuth 530.00 feet to the point of beginning. Area = 218,249 square feet, 5.0103 acres or 20,276 square meters. Subject to existing easements. Legal Description (South 3rd Avenue R/W) That part of South Third Avenue described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision No. 35C (the south line of said Lot 4A has an assumed azimuth from north of 269° 40' 00"); thence westerly 285° 10' 42"azimuth, 77.50 feet to a point on a curve with the center of circle lying westerly 285° 10' 42" 157 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 Page 3 of 5 azimuth 1457.39 feet from said point; thence northerly 383.46 feet along said curve, radius 1457.39 feet and central angle 015° 04' 31"; thence northerly 000° 06' 11" azimuth 69.29 feet, tangent to said curve; thence easterly 090° 06' 11" azimuth 65.00 feet; thence easterly 089° 40' 00" azimuth 12.50 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 4A; thence southerly 180° 06' 11" azimuth 69.39 feet along the western boundary of said Lot 4A; thence southerly 403.85 feet on a tangential curve, concave to the west, radius 1534.89 feet and central angle 015° 04' 31" along the west line of said Lot 4A to the point of beginning. Area = 35,879 square feet, 0.8237 acres or 3,333.3 square meters. Subject to existing easements. Legal Description (Good Medicine Way R/W) That part of Good Medicine Way described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 4A, Minor Subdivision No. 35C; thence northwesterly 331° 43' 00", assumed azimuth from north, 530.00 feet along the east line of said Lot 4A to the northeast corner of said Lot 4A; thence northeasterly 061° 43' 00" azimuth 60.00 feet to the east right-of-way line of Good Medicine Way, thence southeasterly 151° 43' 00" azimuth 529.88' along said east right-of-way line; thence southwesterly 241° 36' 09" azimuth 60.00 feet to the point of beginning. Area = 31,796 square feet, 0.7299 acres or 2,953.9 square meters. Subject to existing easements. The described parcel has an area of 6.564 acres, more or less and is along with and subject to any existing easements and includes adjacent un-annexed Road R/Ws for South 3rd Avenue and Good Medicine Way as described on the Mahar Good Medicine Way Zone Map Amendment. Section 2 Repealer. All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3 Savings Provision. This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. 158 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 Page 4 of 5 Section 4 Severability. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. Section 5 Codification. This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances of the City and shall be organized in a category entitled “Zoning Map Amendments.” Section 6 Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption. PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading, at a regular session thereof held on the 15th day of October 2012. _____________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk 159 ORDINANCE NO. 1845 Page 5 of 5 PASSED, ADOPTED AND FINALLY APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on second reading, at a regular session thereof held on the 5th day of November, 2012. __________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 160 161 REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM Doug Riley, Associate Planner Tim McHarg, Director, Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: South Wallace Zone Map Amendment #Z-12122 – Ordinance 1846 MEETING DATE: Monday, November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent RECOMMENDATION: Approve the 1st reading of Ordinance 1846 adopting zoning of B-3 (Central Business District) on the 2.8751 acre tract known as the South Wallace Zone Map Amendment. BACKGROUND: The City received an application to amend the City of Bozeman Zone Map to rezone approximately 2.9 acres from R-4 (Residential High Density District) to B-3 (Central Business District) from the Gallatin Seed Company Condominium Association and Olive and Wallace LLC. The subject properties are located on South Wallace Avenue, in the vicinity of East Olive and East Curtiss Streets (immediately west of the Bozeman Public Library). The properties are more commonly known as the Gallatin Seed Company property located on the west side of South Wallace Avenue between East Olive Street and East Curtiss Street; the old Harrington’s building located on the east side of South Wallace Avenue and the vacant property immediately to its south. The City Commission acted favorably on the request for the rezoning of the properties at the public hearing on August 6, 2012. The Zone Map Amendment now needs the implementing ordinance to be finalized. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the ordinance as provided by staff. 2) Approve a modified ordinance as directed by the City Commission. 3) Not approve the ordinance. FISCAL EFFECTS: Rezoning the property will not have any immediate fiscal effects to the City. Future development/redevelopment of the properties under the requested B-3 zoning may increase tax values and corresponding revenue from the properties. Attachments: Ordinance 1846 and Zoning Map of Amended area Report compiled on: October 24, 2012 Commission Memorandum 162 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1846 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONE MAP TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 2.9 ACRES FROM R-4 (RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY DISTRICT) TO B-3 (CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE SOUTH WALLACE ZONE MAP AMENDMENT TRACT LOCATED IN THE SE1/4 OF SECTION 7, T2S, R6E, PMM, CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the proposed zone map amendment to rezone approximately 2.9 acres from R-4 (Residential High Density District) to B-3 (Central Business District) has been properly submitted, reviewed and advertised; and WHEREAS, the Bozeman Zoning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 2012, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the Bozeman Zoning Commission recommended to the Bozeman City Commission that the zone map amendment be approved as proposed; and WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held its public hearing on August 6, 2012, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has reviewed and considered the thirteen zone map amendment criteria established in Section 76-2-304, M.C.A., and found that the proposed zone map amendment would be in compliance with the thirteen criteria; and WHEREAS, at its meeting held on August 6, 2012, the City Commission found that the proposed zone map amendment would be in compliance with Bozeman’s adopted growth 163 2 of 3 policy and would be in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana: Section 1 That the zoning district designation of the following-described property is hereby amended from R-4 (Residential High Density District) to B-3 (Central Business District): A tract of land located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 6 East of the Principal Meridian of Montana, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, and being further described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Parcel A of Amended Plat C-6-____. Thence South 00°06'06" West along the East line of said Parcel A, a distance of 145.00 feet. Thence North 89°41'25" West along the South line of said Parcel A, a distance of 5.18 feet. Thence South 00°22'47" West along the East line of Parcel 52-51-50-49-52, Certificate of Survey No. 460, a distance of 95.36 feet. Thence South 00°17'40" West along the East line of Amended Plat C-6-B, a distance of 186.46 feet. Thence North 89°40'45" West along the South line of said Amended Plat, a distance of 116.54 feet to a point in the Centerline of South Wallace Ave. Thence along the Centerline of South Wallace Avenue, North 00°10'45" East, a distance of 45.25 feet to the Centerline intersection of South Wallace Ave., and East Curtiss St. Thence along the Centerline of East Curtiss St., South 89°26'37" West, a distance of 207.04 feet to the intersection of the Centerline of East Curtiss St. and the Centerline of the Alley in Block D, Rouse's 2nd Addition to Bozeman. Thence along the Centerline of said Alley, North 00°14'47" East, a distance of 360.54 feet to the intersection of the Centerline of said Alley and the Centerline of East Olive St. Thence along the Centerline of East Olive St., North 89°20'40" East, a distance of 207.71 feet to the intersection of the Centerline of East Olive St., and the Centerline of South Wallace Ave. Thence along the Centerline of South Wallace Ave., North 00°30'08" East, a distance of 20.64 feet. Thence South 89°41'25" East and along the North line of Parcel A, Amended Plat C-6-___, a distance of 121.02 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said tract of land being 2.8751 acres along with and subject to any existing easements of record or apparent on the ground. Section 2 The effective date is thirty days after final adoption of this ordinance on second reading. 164 3 of 3 PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading, at a regular session thereof held on the ____ day of ___________________ 2012. _________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk PASSED, ADOPTED AND FINALLY APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on second reading, at a regular session thereof held on the ____ day of ________________ 2012. _________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 165 166 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Tim McHarg, Planning Director SUBJECT: First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment #Z-12219 MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action (Legislative) RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission reviews the application materials, considers public comment and, as recommended in the staff report and by the Zoning Commission, approves the zone map amendment from R-3 to R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies listed in the staff report; and denial of the R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233, with recommendation for approval of alternative R-3 zoning.” RECOMMENDED MOTION: Having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment, and considered all of the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for file #Z-12219 and Zoning Commission Resolution #Z-12219, and move to approve the zone map amendment of R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies listed in the staff report; and denial of the R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233, and direct Staff to prepare an ordinance for the zone map amendment. BACKGROUND: The property owner, First Baptist Church of Bozeman, represented by Madison Engineering, LLC, has made application to the Bozeman Department of Planning and Community Development for a Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) to amend the City Zone Map from R-3 (Residential Medium Density) to R-4, Residential High Density District) on approximately 12.3± acres of undeveloped land. The subject property is currently located in the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman being part of the original Van Horn Subdivision. The intent of the R-4 (Residential High Density District) is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This will provide for a variety of compatible housing types to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. Although some office use is permitted, it shall remain as a secondary use to residential development. Secondary status shall be as measured by percentage of total building area. This rezoning application includes properties that have been historically developed as larger rual and suburban lots under the jurisdiction of the Gallatin County as part of County Zoning District #1. As surrounding lands have annexed to the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman and developed at urban densities the area has developed with a broad range of residential land use 167 types and become very eclectic in nature. This includes the public lands of the West Babcock Park to the west, Bozeman Ponds to the south, new Hyalite elementary school further to the west, and the Gallatin Valley Mall to the southeast. While Objective LU-1.3 of the Bozeman Community Plan encourages provisions to provide for and support infill development and redevelopment which provides additional density of use it also calls for respecting the context of the existing development which surrounds it. This is further emphasized under the “Residential” land use category description where all residential housing should be arranged with consideration of compatibility with adjacent development, natural constraints such as watercourses or steep slopes, and in a fashion that advances the overall goals of the Bozeman growth policy. Based on the findings provided in the staff report as noted in the Review Criteria section beginning on page four the Planning Department is recommending a partial approval for only the west half of the site and denial of the east half as provided above in the recommended motion. The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2012 to formally receive and review the application and all written and oral testimony on the proposal. The Zoning Commission voted 3-0 to recommend approval of the requested R-4 zoning to the City Commission for only the west parcel (Tract C of the Van Horn Subdivision) with the recommended contingencies included in the staff report and denial of the east two parcels (Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 223). The Zoning Commission discussion and public comment received at the hearing are found in the attached minutes from their meeting, as well as the attached Zoning Commission Resolution No. Z-12219. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the zone map amendment as recommended by Staff, the Development Review Committee and Zoning Commission. 2) Deny the zone amendment request. 3) Make alternate findings to the criteria for a zone map amendment and decide an alternative zoning district. Per Section 38.37.030.D.2, to consider the alternative the City Commission must continue the application for at least one week to enable the applicant to consider options regarding the possible alternate district. 4) Other as identified b the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: Rezoning the property will not have any immediate fiscal effects to the City. Future development/redevelopment of the properties under the requested R-4 zoning may increase tax values and corresponding revenue from the properties. Attachments: Staff Report, Applicant’s submittal materials, Zoning Commission Resolution #Z-12219, Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes 10-16-12 Report compiled on: October 24, 2012 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 1 of 11 First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment File # Z-12219 Zoning Commission and City Commission Staff Report Item: Zoning Application #Z-12219 – An application to amend the City of Bozeman Zone Map from R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) to R-4 (Residential, High Density District) on approximately 12.3 acres. Owner/Applicant: First Baptist Church of Bozeman, 120 South Grand Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59718 Representative: Madison Engineering, LLC, 895 Technology Blvd., Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Zoning Commission on Tuesday, October 16, 2012 at 6:00 PM in the Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana; and before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, November 5, 2012 at 6:00 PM in the Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana Report By: Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Recommendation: Approval of R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies; and denial of R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233 with recommendation for approval of alternative R-3 zoning. __________________________________________________________________________________ LOCATION The subject property is situated southeast of the intersection of Fowler Avenue and West Babcock Street and is generally located east of Fowler Avenue, approximately 350± feet south of West Babcock Street and west of Wilda Lane. The subject property is 12.3± acres in size and is legally described Tract C of the Van Horn Subdivision and Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233 located in the Southwest One-Quarter of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Said properties are more commonly referred to as 131 and 132 Pond Row and the 3300 and 3400 Block of Ravalli Street extended. Please refer to the vicinity map on the following page. RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES The Planning Department’s recommended motion for consideration by the Zoning Commission for this Zone Map Amendment application is as follows: “Having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment, and considered all of the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application #Z-12219 and move to recommend approval of the requested Zone Map Amendment to the City Commission of R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies listed in the staff report; and denial of the R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233, with recommendation for approval of alternative R-3 zoning.” 190 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 2 of 11 Recommended contingencies: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to rezone the property(s) shall be identified as the “First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment”. 2. That the applicant submit a zone amendment map, titled “First Baptist Church Zone Map Amendment”, on a 24” by 36” mylar, 8 ½” by 11”, or 8 ½” by 14” paper exhibit, and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, acceptable to the Director of Public Service, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property(s) and zoning districts, and total acreage of the property(s). 3. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides a metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor and map of the area to be rezoned, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the zone map. PROPOSAL The property owner, First Baptist Church of Bozeman, represented by Madison Engineering, LLC, has made application to the Bozeman Department of Planning and Community Development for a Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) to amend the City Zone Map from R-3 (Residential Medium Density) to R-4, Residential High Density District) on approximately 12.3± acres of undeveloped land. The subject property is currently located in the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman being part of the original Van Horn Subdivision. The applicant’s narrative is requesting the zone map amendment for the purposes to allow for a more efficient use and development of the property for the purposes for marketing the subject property. The applicant is also requesting the City to grant a relaxation for street frontage improvements to Fowler Avenue when the property is developed until such time that the remainder of the minor arterial between West Babcock Street and West Main Street is constructed. Said request to consider the scheduling of street improvements to Fowler Avenue with this Zone Map Amendment application is not appropriate. The request should be deferred until application for a site specific development or further subdivision is considered. 191 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 3 of 11 On September 19, 2012 the Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the Zone Map Amendment application and recommended approval of the application for the west parcel (Tract C of the Van Horn Subdivision) with the recommended contingencies included in this staff report and denial of the east two parcels (Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 223). LAND CLASSIFICATION AND ZONING The property is currently vacant undeveloped lands contiguous to developed lands to the north, south, east and west. The following existing land uses and zoning are adjacent to the subject property: North: Annexed residential land zoned “R-3” – Designated “Residential” on the City of Bozeman Future Land Use Map. South: Pubic parklands (Bozeman Ponds) zoned “PLI” (Public Lands and Institutions District) - Designated “Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands” on the City of Bozeman Future Land Use Map. East: Partially developed City lands zoned R-2 and R-3 and partially developed County lands under the jurisdiction of the Gallatin County – both designated “Residential” on the City of Bozeman Future Land Use Map. West: Developed annexed land zoned R-3 (Medium Density District) and R-4 (Residential High Density District) – Designated “Residential” on the City of Bozeman Future Land Use Map. The intent of the R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) is to provide for the development of one- to five-household residential structures near service facilities within the city. It should provide for a variety of housing types to serve the varied needs of households of different size, age and character, while reducing the adverse effect of nonresidential uses. The intent of the R-4 (Residential High Density District) is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This will provide for a variety of compatible housing types to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. Although some office use is permitted, it shall remain as a secondary use to residential development. Secondary status shall be as measured by percentage of total building area. Existing Zoning and Future Land Use Maps 192 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 4 of 11 REVIEW CRITERIA The establishment of a zoning district is a legislative act to set policy relating to future development proposals. The Bozeman Planning Office has reviewed the application for a Zone Map Amendment against the Bozeman Community Plan, the City of Bozeman Unified Development Code (UDC), and the thirteen (13) criteria established in Section 76-2-304, Montana Codes Annotated, and as a result offer the following summary-review comments for consideration by the Zoning and City Commission. A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Yes. The subject property is recognized as “Residential” on Figure 3-1 Future Land Use Map of the Bozeman Community Plan as noted on the attached map at the end of this staff report. The “Residential” land use designation of the Bozeman Community Plan indicates that: “This category designates places where the primary activity is urban density dwellings. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. High density residential areas should be established in close proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities to persons without requiring the use of an automobile. Implementation of this category by residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in proximity to commercial centers. The residential designation indicates that it is expected that development will occur within municipal boundaries, which may require annexation prior to development. The dwelling unit density expected within this classification varies between 6 and 32 dwellings per net acre. A higher density may be considered in some locations and circumstances. A variety of housing types can be blended to achieve the desired density. Large areas of single type housing are discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints and natural features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower density than normally expected within this category. All residential housing should be arranged with consideration of 193 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 5 of 11 compatibility with adjacent development, natural constraints such as watercourses or steep slopes, and in a fashion which advances the overall goals of the Bozeman growth policy. The residential designation is intended to provide the primary locations for additional housing within the planning area.” Figure 3-1 (Future Lane Use Map) is not the only element of the growth policy which must be considered. There are many goals, objectives, and other text which must also be evaluated. While not every element will apply to every proposal, a broad evaluation of compliance is needed. A proposal may comply with Figure 3-1 but not the other elements of the plan. To be in accordance with the growth policy compliance must be to both Figure 3-1 and the other plan elements. Chapter 3 of the Bozeman Community Plan addresses land uses. Beginning on page 3-3, there are seven principles laid out which provide a foundation for Bozeman’s land use policies and practices. There is a description of each of them provided in the provided pages attached to this report. These are: Neighborhoods, Sense of Place, Natural Amenities, Centers, Integration of Action, Urban Density, and Sustainability Supportive examples of applicable goals and objectives for this application include: Chapter 3 Land Use Goal LU-1: Create a sense of place that varies throughout the City, efficiently provides public and private basic services and facilities in close proximity to where people live and work, and minimizes sprawl. Objective LU-1.4: Provide for and support infill development and redevelopment which provides additional density of use while respecting the context of the existing development which surrounds it. Respect for context does not automatically prohibit difference in scale or design. Chapter 6 Housing Goal H-1: Promote an adequate supply of safe, quality housing that is diverse in type, density, cost, and location with an emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and stability. Rationale: A community needs a variety of housing stock to accommodate the diversity in personal circumstances and preferences of its population. The type of housing required may be different throughout a person’s life. A healthy community has a wide range of citizens with differing age, education, economic condition, and other factors. Stable neighborhoods encourage reinvestment, both financial and emotional that strengthens and builds the community. Objective 1.1 - Encourage and support the creation of a broad range of housing types in proximity to services and transportation options. Goal H-2: Promote the creation of housing which advances the seven guiding land use principles of Chapter 3. Rationale: Housing is the land use which consumes the greatest land area in the community. It is critical in advancing and achieving the community’s aspirations. Choice of housing location and type strongly influences other issues such as mode of travel and participation in the society building aspects of the community. Objective 2.1 - Encourage socially and economically diverse neighborhoods. The site is vacant and vegetated with native grasses and can be considered an infill development site with access to all necessary City infrastructure (streets, sewer, water, etc.) to allow infill density. The city’s policies support development within the utilities service area, preferably taking advantage of 194 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 6 of 11 existing service mains to reduce the amount of extensions needed to provide service. Existing adjoining streets on the western and north sides of the property allow vehicular and pedestrian connections and circulation. In considering the appropriateness of a particular zoning district for a site, it is appropriate to consider what district will most fully advance the community plan goals and aspirations. As a zone map amendment is a legislative, not quasi-judicial matter the City has broad discretion to decide the course considered most suitable. B. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Yes. The site has frontage on and access from Fowler Avenue which is classified as a minor arterial street in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (GBATP) Figure 9-2; and from West Babcock Street to the north which is a collector street. An existing public access easement from West Babcock identified as Pond Row will extend southward and align with Ravalli Street extended from the west that will provide adequate vehicular circulation to the minor arterial and collector streets with development of the site. Future development review will require evaluation of street access depending on the design of the subject property, which may require improvements to the areas transportation network system; including, but not limited to Fowler Avenue street improvements. In terms of non-motorized transportation, the GBATP Figure 2-14 recognizes the bike lane constructed with improvements to Babcock Street in 2005. The Bozeman Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (PROST) Plan also identifies a proposed trail corridor in the immediate area of the zone map amendment that will follow the general location of a seasonal stream draining from the Bozeman Ponds to the south. A 10’ wide pedestrian and bicycle trail easement also exists along the east side of the Fowler Avenue right-of-way. With development of the site improvements to Pond Row and Ravalli Street extended will require evaluation of adequate pedestrian circulation facilities that take into consideration the proposed trail corridor identified in the PROST Plan. C. Secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers. Yes. The regulatory provisions established in all of the zoning designations, in conjunction with provisions for adequate transportation facilities, properly designed water mains and fire service lines and adequate emergency exits/escapes, will address safety concerns with any future subdivision and/or other development of the property. All new structures and development on the subject property would be required to meet the minimum zoning requirements for setbacks, lot coverage, height limitations and lot sizes to ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Per Section 38.01 .050 of the UDC, the City of Bozeman has the authority and power to require more stringent standards than the minimum requirements if it ensures the best service to the public interest. A detailed analysis of the specifics of future development proposals will enable the determination of whether a greater than minimum standard is required. At this time such details are not available for review. D. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Yes. The regulatory provisions established through the City’s municipal code under Chapter 38, Unified Development Code (UDC), BMC, will adequately address the issues of health and general welfare. Further development of the subject property also requires review and approval by the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, City Engineer's Office and Director of Public Service. The property, upon further development, would be required to come into conformance with all requirements of the zoning ordinance. Any homes or other buildings constructed on the site will be subject to review for building codes which will ensure they are constructed in a manner which reduces 195 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 7 of 11 risk for fire, loss during earthquake, are structurally sound, and well fit for their purpose. The City’s adopted zoning requires compliance with building codes by Section 38.34.100. Additional development issues related to municipal infrastructure (i.e., water and sanitary sewer) and public services (i.e., police and fire protection) will be addressed with subdivision and/or site plan review when residential densities and demand can be more closely calculated. Water and sewer infrastructure are in the vicinity and available to the site. See also Item “H”. An intensification of residential density with R-4 development would also subject future development to conform to dedicated parkland requirements and provision of water rights or payment-in-lieu of water rights. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Yes. The regulatory standards set forth in the City of Bozeman Uniform Development Code (UDC) for the requested “R-4” zoning district provides the necessary provisions (i.e., yard setbacks, lot coverage, open space and building heights), which are intended to provide for adequate light and air for any proposed development on the subject property. The amount of parkland required is proportional to the number of dwelling units proposed. See also Item F and G. F. Prevention of overcrowding of land. Yes. The minimum yard setbacks established in the “R-4” district, as well as the limitations of lot coverage for principal and accessory structures and off-street parking facilities, would maintain the desired percent of buildable area. Minimum yard setbacks, height requirements, maximum lot coverage and required parking are also limiting factors that help prevent the overcrowding of land. Such regulatory standards should prevent the overcrowding of land, and maintain compatibility with the character of the surrounding area. Overcrowding is a condition which results when the infrastructure and buildings in an area are incapable of serving the density of users. A perception of being more intensely used than is preferred by a particular person or group does not establish an actual condition of overcrowding. As discussed elsewhere in this report, any development within Bozeman is required to demonstrate that there is adequate transportation, water, sewer, and other necessary public services to support the development. This requirement ensures that land will not be overcrowded. G. Avoiding undue concentration of population. Yes. Future development of the subject property zoned under this proposal will result in a density increase beyond what currently exists on the vacant property. While the applicant intends to construct a single-household residential dwelling as the principle use, compliance with the regulatory standards set forth in the UDC and the International Building Code will aid in providing adequately sized dwelling unit(s) to avoid undue concentration of population. According to the census information for the City of Bozeman the average household size has been declining from 5.74 in 1930 to 2.83 with the latest census. This historical trend is anticipated to continue and would indicate that the undue concentration of the population is not a significant issue with any zoning designation. The standard does not seek to avoid concentration of population, but rather undue concentration. Undue is typically understood to mean exceeding that which is appropriate and normal. This is a standard which is specific to a particular site and is not a specific number or intensity of use. The R-4 district has been considered and adopted with a set of standards for lot sizes, setbacks, and other standards that in the opinion of the City Commission are not undue concentrations of population. As applied to this site the property is largely unconstrained with exception to the existing water course being modestly sloped and with good proximity to infrastructure. See also Items F and J. 196 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 8 of 11 H. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. Yes. Further assessment of the impacts to infrastructure, public services, schools, park land, and other community requirements will be evaluated during subdivision and/or site plan review. A 60’ wide public street easement across the west parcel (Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision) of the site will allow the local street Pond Row to turn westward and tie into the extension of Ravailli Street. Any negative impacts identified with development of the property will be mitigated with recommended conditions of approval by the DRC with a determination made by the approval authority on adequate provisions. For this application, the DRC has determined that municipal infrastructure is located in proximity to the subject property and may be extended into the property by the landowner/developer for further development of the site. Emergency services are currently serving this area, and municipal police and fire are within adequate response times of the site. Public schools are in close proximity and can readily be accessed by non-motorized and motorized vehicles. Park land will be required at the time of development and will be proportionate to the number of homes to be constructed. The City will have the opportunity to further evaluate the development of the property during the above-described review procedures. I. Conserving the value of buildings. Yes. There are no existing buildings on the property. Adjacent properties to the south consist of public parklands as the Bozeman Ponds with the Gallatin Valley Mall to the southeast. Adjacent properties to the north, east and west are developed as a mix of detached single family dwellings, two-household dwellings and multi-family dwellings with apartments and condominiums to the southwest. See Item “J” for further discussion. J. Character of the district. Neutral. The most important factor in determining the suitability of a proposed zoning designation is the potential for compatibility with existing adjacent land uses. While the site in question is vacant, the surrounding area has a broad diversity of existing land uses. The area also contains pockets of unanexed lands as part of County Zoning District #1 under the jurisdiction of the Gallatin County that continues to diminish as annexation and infill occur in the area. As envisioned by the Future Land Use Plan of the Bozeman Community Plan, this area is designated to continue to develop as “Residential”. The adjacent uses to the north, east and west consist of residential land uses that range from R-2 (Residential, Two-Household Medium Density District), to R-3 (Residential Medium Density) and R-4 (Residential High Density). The majority of the adjacent lands are zoned R-3 or R-4 with exception of the unannexed lands to the east along Wilda Lane in Cahill Subdivision. These lots range from 0.5 to 1.1 acres in size with five of the ten lots under Gallatin County jurisdiction (i.e., County Zoning District #1). The remaining five lots are within the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman and zoned R-2 and R-3. The minimum lot size, lot width and yard setbacks for R-3 and R-4 are generally the same. The maximum building height varies from 42 feet in the R-3 to 44 feet in the R-4, while the R-2 maximum building height is 36 feet. The R-2 district also prohibits lodging houses and offices in addition to those land use controlled by the R-3 and R-4 districts. See Attachment “A” – Residential Regulatory Dimensional Standards”. While Valley Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 and 2 to the west, is zoned R-4 the land use inventory indicates that it is predominately developed as a mix of R-3 lands uses consisting of single family, two- household and multi-family dwellings. The only R-4 development in the area is located to the southwest in Parkway Plaza Subdivision situated immediately west of the Bozeman Ponds. 197 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 9 of 11 To the south is the Bozeman Ponds zoned PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District) and to the southeast is the Gallatin Valley Mall zoned B-2 (Community Business District). The R-4 allows a broader range of residential uses than the R-3 that includes apartments, offices, medical offices, clinics and centers, and townhouses of more than five attached dwelling units. A shallow watercourse that originates from the south at the Bozeman Ponds bisects the site and splits it almost perfectly in half. The Unified Development Code (UDC) has a minimum 50 foot watercourse setback. This will restrict the area available for development on the site and assist with additional open space and parkland that may be added to the current features of the Bozeman Ponds. Future planning and review requirements will also allow the City the ability to control how the uses on site would function and relate to the surrounding developed and undeveloped properties. After considering the various components of zoning character, current land use inventory and the diversity of uses in the area one could advocate that the R-4 and associated uses would be less in keeping with the existing and future character of adjacent lands along the east portions of the site than the adjacent properties to the west and south. K. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. No, as proposed. Yes, as recommended. The majority of the land uses to the north and west are zoned R-3 and R-4, but developed as R-3 with a mix of detached single family dwellings, two-household and multi-family dwellings along with public parklands and elementary school. The lands to the east are zoned R-2 and R-3, but developed as single family dwellings on larger suburban lots. The land use inventory for the R-4 property to the west (i.e., Valley Creek Subdivision, Phase 1 and 2) points to development as single family dwellings, two-household dwellings and multi-family dwellings as permitted with R-3 zoning. The only lands in proximity to this application that are developed as high density R-4 residential are the Westpark condominiums and apartments to the southwest across from the Bozeman Ponds (see attached vicinity map). While the regulatory standards (i.e., lot coverage, lot area, setbacks and building heights) are generally the same for R-3 and R-4 the range of permitted uses in the R-4 (i.e., apartments, offices, clinics and centers) does not limit the control of building massing and scale that is typical to that found in the immediate area. The R-3 zoning is generally more in keeping with the footprint of buildings seen within the context of this neighborhood and controls the massing and scale of structures through density limitations (i.e., multi-family structures or smaller) and physical separation of buildings. Based on these findings, the proposed zone map amendment does not provide a reasonable consideration to the character of the district by maintaining the current land use patterns and types in the immediate area. L. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. No, as proposed. Yes, as recommended. The R-4 zoning designation for this application is supportive of the overall intent of the growth policy in regards to encouraging infill development and the establishment of urban density. While this zoning will also allow this property to develop at a density that takes advantage of the existing infrastructure available, it does not take into consideration its proximity to single family dwellings and larger suburban lots along its eastern boundary (i.e., Cahill Subdivision) and to the north. The “Residential” land use designation of the Bozeman Community Plan indicates that all residential housing should be arranged with consideration of compatibility with adjacent development, natural constraints such as watercourses or steep slopes, and in a fashion which advances the overall goals of the Bozeman growth policy. The existing watercourse offers a physical demarcation boundary between land uses that promotes development on the east half of the site to remain R-3 (i.e., Lot 2 and Lot 3, Minor Subdivision 198 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 10 of 11 No.223), but allow for higher density R-4 development (i.e., Track C of the VanHorn Subdivision) on the west regions of the subject property. Implementation of the existing watercourse as an amenity between a transition of land uses, in concert with provisions for open space and residential parkland to the south along the Bozeman Ponds would encourage the most appropriate use of land within the context of this neighborhood. M. Promotion of Compatible Urban Growth. Yes. The adopted growth policy is the means by which land use patterns are evaluated and locations for appropriate uses assigned in a broad fashion. To guide this evaluation the Bozeman Community Plan provides several guiding ideas and principles for the physical development of the City as discussed above in Item “A”. Development consistent with these ideals and principles are more likely to be compatible with adjacent development both within and outside of the City limits. PUBLIC COMMENT As of the writing of this staff report, the City of Bozeman Department of Planning and Community Development has not received any public testimony on the matter. Any written comments received by the Planning Office following completion of the respective review packets will be forwarded to the Zoning Commission and City Commission during the public hearings. SUMMARY & CONCLUSION The Department of Planning and Community Development and the Development Review Committee, have reviewed the proposed Zone Map Amendment application and have provided summary review comments as outlined above in the staff report; and as a result, recommends approval of Tract C of the Van Horn Subdivision (west half of application) with contingencies and denial of Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233. The recommendation of the Bozeman Zoning Commission will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission for consideration at its public hearing scheduled for Monday, November 19, 2012. The City Commission will make the final decision on the application. IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 20% OR MORE OF THE LOTS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO OR WITHIN 150 FEET FROM THE STREET FRONTAGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. REPORT SENT TO First Baptist Church of Bozeman, 120 South Grand Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59718 Madison Engineering, LLC, 895 Technology Blvd., Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 ATTACHMENTS Attachment “A” - Table 38.08.020, Table 38.08.040-1, Table 38.08.040-2 and Table 38.08.06, BMC (Table of Residential Uses) Exhibit “A” – Vicinity Area Map Exhibit “B” – Vicinity Site Map Applicant’s submittal materials 199 First Baptist Church ZMA Staff Report #Z-12219 Page 11 of 11 200 ATTACHMENT “A” RESIDENTIAL REGULATORY DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS Table 38.08.020 Table of Residential Uses Authorized Uses R-S R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-O RMH Accessory dwelling units8, 9 C C P P P P — Agricultural uses on 2.5 acres or more2 P — — — — — — Agricultural uses on less than 2.5 acres2 C — — — — — — Apartments/apartment building, as defined in article 42 of this chapter — — — — P P — Assisted living/elderly care facilities — — — C C P — Bed and breakfast C C C C P P — Commercial stable C — — — — — — Community centers C C C C C P C Community residential facilities (with more than four residents) C C C P P P C Cooperative housing C C C P P P C Day care centers C C C P P P C Essential services (Type I) P P P P P P P Essential services (Type II) C — — — — — C Extended stay lodgings C C C P P P — Family day care home P P P P P P P Fences A A A A A A A Fraternity and sorority houses — — — C P P — Golf courses C C C — — — C Greenhouses A A A A A A — Group day care home P P P P P P P Guesthouses A A A A A A — Home-based businesses5 A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C Lodginghouses — — — C P P — Offices — — — — C3 P — Other buildings and structures typically accessory to authorized uses A A A A A A A Private garages A A A A A A A Private or jointly owned recreational facilities A A A A A A A Private stormwater control facilities A A A A A A A Private vehicle and boat storage A A A A A A A/C4 Public and private parks P P P P P P P Manufactured homes on permanent foundations1 P P P P P P P 201 Manufactured home communities — — — — — — P Medical offices, clinics, and centers — — — — C P — Recreational vehicle parks C — — — — — P Signs, subject to article 28 of this chapter A A A A A A A Single-household dwelling P P P P P P P Temporary buildings and yards incidental to construction work A A A A A A A Temporary sales and office buildings A A A A A A A Three- or four-household dwelling — — — P P P — Two-household dwelling — — P P P P — Townhouses (two attached units) P7 P7 P P P P P7 Townhouses (five attached units or less) — — — P6 P P — Townhouses (more than five attached units) — — — — P P — Tool sheds for storage of domestic supplies A A A A A A A Uses approved as part of a PUD per article 20 of this chapter C C C C C C C Veterinary uses C — — — — — — Table 38.08.040-1 Lot Area Table Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet1 R-S R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-O RMH Single-household dwelling See subsection C of this section 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 Single-household dwelling (only for dwellings to satisfy minimum requirements of chapter 10, article 8)7 2,7008 2,7008 2,7008 2,7008 2,7008 2,7008 2,7008 Two-household dwelling - - 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 - Two-household dwelling (only for dwellings to satisfy minimum requirements of chapter 10, article 8)7 - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 - Lot area per dwelling in three- or four-household dwelling configurations - - - 3,000 3,000 3,000 - Lot area per dwelling in three- or four-household dwelling configurations (only for dwellings to satisfy minimum requirements of chapter 10, article 8)7 - - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 - Townhouses - - 3,0006 3,0002 3,0002 3,0002 - Townhouses (only for dwellings to satisfy minimum requirements of chapter 10, article 8)7 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 Apartments - first dwelling - - - - 5,000 5,000 - 202 Apartments - each dwelling after the first - - - - 1,200 1,200 - Apartments - each dwelling after the first (only for dwellings to satisfy minimum requirements of chapter 10, article 8)7 - - - - 900 900 - Additional area required for an accessory dwelling unit3 1,0004 1,000 1,0005 1,0005 1,0005 1,0005 - All other uses 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 5,0001 Table 38.08.040-2 Lot Width Table Minimum Lot Width in Feet R-S R- 1 R- 2 R-3 R-4 R-O RMH Single-household dwelling See subsection C of this section 50 50 50 50 50 50 Single-household dwelling (only for dwellings to satisfy requirements of chapter 10, article 8) See subsection C of this section 30 30 30 30 30 30 Two household dwelling - - 60 60 50 50 - Accessory dwelling unit1 50 50 60 60 60 60 - Dwellings in three- or four-household dwelling configurations - - - 60 60 60 - Townhouses 30 30 30 Width of interior units Width of interior units Width of interior units - All other uses See subsection C of this section 50 50 50 50 50 50 Table 38.08.060 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch in Feet Maximum Building Height in Feet R-S R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-O RMH Less than 3:12 24 24 24 32 34 34 24 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 30 28 28 38 38 38 28 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 34 32 32 40 42 42 32 Equal to or greater than 9:12 38 36 36 42 44 44 36 203 Page 1 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes – October 16, 2012 ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2012 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Garberg called the meeting to order at 6:14 p.m. and ordered the Recording Secretary to take attendance. Members Present: Randy Wall, Vice Chairperson Trever McSpadden Erik Garberg, Chairperson City Commission Liaison: Members Absent: David Peck Guests Present: Cheryl Smith Bud Smith Paul G. Newby Al MacSween Virginia MacSween Staff Present: David Skelton, Senior Planner Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Commission and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} Seeing there was no general public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Garberg closed this portion of the meeting. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2012 MOTION: Mr. McSpadden moved, Vice Chairperson Wall seconded, to approve the minutes of September 18, 2012 as presented. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Garberg, Mr. McSpadden, and Vice Chairperson Wall. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-12219 – (First Baptist Church) A Zone Map Amendment requested by the owner First Baptist Church of Bozeman, 120 S. Grand Ave., Bozeman, MT 59715 and representative Madison Engineering, Chris Budeski, 895 205 Page 2 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes – October 16, 2012 Technology Boulevard, Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 to change the urban zoning designation on 12.3 acres from R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) to R-4 (Residential High Density District). The property is generally located southeast of the intersection of Fowler Avenue and Ravalli Street and is legally described as Tract C, Van Horn Subdivision, Lots 3 & 4, MiSub #223, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Skelton) Senior Planner David Skelton presented the Staff Report noting the proposal was to allow a change in urban zoning designation on 12.3 acres from R-3 to R-4 and noted the location of the property. He noted the Community Plan Land Use designation had also been adhered to with regard to what the proposal was requesting. He noted the site was located in proximity to two major transportation corridors as well as a local street designation to the east of the subject property. He noted Pond Row would be tied into the extension of Ravalli Street eastward from where the street currently ceased. He noted that when the property was under the jurisdiction of the City/County Planning jurisdiction as part of County Zoning District #1 they had always been slated for residential development. He noted the property had been annexed under three separate annexations which had been commenced in the mid to late 1990’s. He noted the adjacent properties and their zoning designations. He stated there was a mix of annexed and un-annexed lands to the east which included County jurisdictional areas. He identified the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts located immediately to the west, as well as the parklands in the area; while also noting the diversity and eclectic collection of land use patterns. Senior Planner Skelton directed the Zoning Commission to the Land Use map which indicated adjacent duplex and single family uses as well as some multi-family uses that existed. He noted the majority of existing development in the R-4 district to the west was generally developed as single family development with some two-household dwellings. He stated Staff could not historically identify an existing farm stead relative to the site, but noted the property included native grasses with a watercourse that essentially bisected the property. He noted the stream was somewhat intermittent and there was substantial vegetation on the south end of the site. He noted it was questionable what would happen to the mature Cottonwood Trees on Fowler Avenue as it developed to a full minor arterial standard and it would remain to be seen with future development. He stated the primary uses in the area were a mix of single family, duplexes and multi-family uses and he had noted the Staff Report contained a comparison between the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts standards (setback, lot area, lot coverage, etc.,) including only a minimal difference in allowable building heights (a two foot difference). He noted the differences were two fold; the R-4 uses that included apartments and apartment complexes as well as offices, medical clinics and centers, and lodging houses that would not be allowed within the R-3 zoning district. He stated the allowable density per building would offer variations in building mass and scale with regard to those allowed within the R-3 zoning district because of the limited density of four dwelling units per structure; unlike the R-4 that allows 12-unit and 18-unit structures or larger. He stated Staff had visited the site on three occasions and had identified the watercourse as an opportunity to establish a physical demarcation between the proposed land uses. He noted there were enough physical features and design possibilities that the site would lend itself to a more effective development as a Planned Unit Development in-lieu of relying regulatory standards of the R-4 designation. 206 Page 3 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes – October 16, 2012 Planner Skelton stated there were large suburban residential lots adjacent to the site and noted Staff felt the R-3 zoning district was appropriate for the east half of the property while the west half was appropriate for the R-4 zoning district. He noted there had been no written public comment and only one phone call expressing concern with regard to the density of the proposed zoning. He noted Staff was supportive with the Staff contingencies as outlined in the Staff Report of a partial approval and noted a recommended motion had been included in the report. He noted the applicant’s request for consideration of waiver to an SID for Fowler Avenue versus having to build the minor arterial had been submitted but it would be considered with a specific development of the subject property in the future. Vice Chairperson Wall asked if a trail was included through the site. Planner Skelton responded there was a couple of footpaths traversing the property but no public easements in place for use by the general public. He also noted that GVLT has recently installed a puble trail at the northeast corner of the Bozeman Ponds that continues around the north side of the mall. He noted that the current footpath generally follows the existing watercourse. Vice Chairperson Wall asked if there would be restrictions placed on the watercourse. Planner Skelton responded there was a 50 foot setback required on either side of the watercourse; but noted the applicant could always request a variance to those requirements. Vice Chairperson Wall clarified that the west parcel would be approved for R-4 and the east two parcels would be approved for R-3 zoning designations. Planner Skelton responded Vice Chairperson Wall was correct. Chris Budeski, Madison Engineering, addressed the Zoning Commission. He stated Planner Skelton had done a good job of laying everything out and noted the applicant was amenable to the contingencies and conditions of approval as outlined by Staff. He noted Fowler Lane would require major improvements (35 feet with a raised median and tapers on both ends) and noted the R-4 zoning district on a portion of the land would allow funding for those required improvements. He noted the irrigation ditch would fall under the jurisdiction of the ditch company and could be piped; he noted the stream corridor would likely become an amenity on the site and would enhance the site. He stated the location would be great for multi-family development. Vice Chairperson Wall asked if there was any discussion of changing the zoning designation on the teardrop shaped parcel to public parkland. Mr. Budeski responded it would not be dedicated, but it would potentially be available to the public for use; he added they would need to discuss it with the City Parks Department and added it would be a great location for a north south trail corridor. Vice Chairperson Wall asked why the applicant was not holding a harder line for the R- 4 zoning district. Mr. Budeski responded it was a simple response; there was adjacent single household development. Vice Chairperson Wall suggested the teardrop shaped parcel being dedicated as parkland while the stream corridor contained a trail should be considered as it was a logical piece as a connection. Mr. Budeski responded that in reality an R-3 zoning was four- plexes while an R-4 was as many units as could be possibly fit on the site; the difference being three stories or less with regard to number of units. He noted the stream would provide a corridor down the middle and the site plan would include a parking lot down the center of the site with buildings on each side. He noted the east side of the site abutted single family homes while the west half could be higher density and fill both needs. Planner Skelton added that it is 207 Page 4 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes – October 16, 2012 important to consider the potential development of any of the uses allowed in the R-4 zoning district not just the possibility of apartment buildings; he noted Staff’s recommendation was trying to respect the current land uses that were currently there as called for under the Residential land use designation in the Bozeman Community Plan which had prompted their recommendations. Vice Chairperson Wall stated he would like to see the infill parcels used to their best and highest use and suggested the easternmost portion of the parcel could be zoned R- 4. Chairperson Garberg opened the item for public comment. Virginia MacSween, 342 Wilda Lane, stated she had no problem with the existing single family units, but they had problems with the density of the condo units adjacent to them due to loud parties. She suggested there should be consideration for the neighbors and adequate space with parking for the newly constructed properties. Vice Chairperson Wall asked if Ms. MacSween was familiar with the “unruly party” ordinance for the City of Bozeman and recommended she look into the enforcement that would get progressively worse for the offenders; he suggested calling the police. Ms. MacSween responded she had already attempted that method but there was a constant change in tenancy in those units. She added she would like to see the occupants have adequate space inside and out. Cheryl Smith stated she had property on Wilda Lane directly to the east of the subject property. She stated she had a problem with the number of units that could be allowed on the property; she noted she had a duplex but everyone else had a single family house. She stated she would hate to see a three story building with up to 32 units per acres when right behind them was a duplex on an acre; she suggested a more gradual zoning change and noted she supported maintaining the R- 3 zoning on the eastern portion of the lot. Mr. MacSween, 314 Wilda Lane, stated he had lived on Wilda Lane for 35 years. He stated if you looked in the paper there were a lot of places for rent including houses and apartments. He stated the high density was the wrong thing to do and R-3 should be the maximum for the area. Seeing no further public comment forthcoming, the public comment period was closed. Chairperson Garberg called for Zoning Commission discussion on the item. MOTION: Mr. McSpadden moved, Vice Chairperson Wall seconded, that having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment, and considered all of the information presented, to hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application #Z-12219 and to recommend approval of the requested Zone Map Amendment to the City Commission of R-4 for Tract C of Van Horn Subdivision with contingencies listed in the staff report; and denial of the R-4 request for Lot 3 and Lot 4 of Minor Subdivision No. 233, with recommendation for approval of alternative R-3 zoning. Mr. McSpadden stated that though there were density considerations and allowable use considerations, he was supportive of the R-3 on the eastern portion of the lot and given that the 208 Page 5 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes – October 16, 2012 applicant was amendable to the recommended conditions of approval. He suggested the concerned public keep their eye on the development of the subject property and he agreed with Staff with regard to the land use trend and transition in that location. He stated he agreed with Staff and found the application to be in keeping with the review criteria as set forth in the U.D.C. Chairperson Garberg stated he appreciated the applicant being amenable to Staff’s recommendation to provide transition with regard to the proposed zoning district and the R-3 zoning on the eastern portion of the sitet. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Garberg, Mr. McSpadden, and Vice Chairperson Wall. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS No items were forthcoming. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT The Zoning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m. Erik Garberg, Chairperson David Skelton, Senior Planner Zoning Commission Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman 209 Ditton ZMA 1 RESOLUTION #Z-12056 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING MAP TO ESTABLISH AN INITIAL ZONING DESIGNATION OF RS (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN DISTRICT) ON 20.0 ACRES CONTINGENT UPON ANNEXATION OF SAID PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS TRACT B-1 OF CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY NO. 2392-B, LOCATED IN THE SE ¼ OF SECTION 32, T1S, R6E, PMM, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted zoning regulations and a zoning map pursuant to Sections 76-2-301 and 76-2-302, M.C.A.; and WHEREAS, Section 76-2-305, M.C.A. allows local governments to amend zoning maps if a public hearing is held and official notice is provided; and WHEREAS, Section 76-2-307, M.C.A. states that the Zoning Commission must conduct a public hearing and submit a report to the City Commission for all zoning map amendment requests; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission has been created by Resolution of the Bozeman City Commission as provided for in Section 76-2-307, M.C.A.; and WHEREAS, Chapter 38, Article 37 of the Bozeman Unified Development Code sets forth the procedures and review criteria for zoning map amendments; and WHEREAS, Clara O. Ditton Living Trust, c/o Randy Ditton, represented by David M. Albert, PLS applied for a zoning map amendment, pursuant to Chapter 38, Article 37 of the Bozeman Unified Development Code, to amend the Bozeman zoning map to establish an initial zoning designation of RS (Residential Suburban District) for 20.0± acres; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment request has been properly submitted, reviewed and advertised in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 38, Article 17 of the Bozeman Unified Development Code and Title 76, Chapter 2, Part 3, M.C.A.; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 15, 2012, to formally receive and review all written and oral testimony on the proposed zoning map amendment; and WHEREAS, two members of the general public provided public testimony that was not in opposition to the proposed annexation and zone map amendment, but instead expressed concern with flooding in the area due to the lack of maintenance, upkeep and repair of the Bridger Creek diversion dam situated along Highway 86/Bridger Drive; and 210 Ditton ZMA 2 WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission offered the opportunity for the applicant or Planning Department to respond on the status of the Bridger Creek diversion dam and the Planning Department noted they would forward any available information onto the City Attorney and City Commission; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission finds that the proposed zoning map amendment generally complies with the thirteen criteria for consideration established in Chapter 38, Article 17 of the Bozeman Unified Development Code; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission, on a vote of 3-0, officially recommends to the Bozeman City Commission approval of zoning application #Z-12056 to amend the Bozeman zoning map to establish an initial zoning designation of RS (Residential Suburban District) on 20.0± acres contingent upon annexation of said property which is described as Tract B-1, COS No. 2392-B, located in the SE¼ of Section 32, T1S, R6E, PMM, Gallatin County, Montana subject to the following contingencies: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation shall be identified as the “Ditton Zone Map Amendment”. 2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be approved until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application shall be null and void. 3. That the applicant submit a zone amendment map, titled “Ditton Zone Map Amendment”, on a 24” by 36” mylar, 8 ½” by 11”, or 8 ½” by 14” paper exhibit, and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, acceptable to the Director of Public Service, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property and zoning districts, and total acreage of the property. 4. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides a metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor and map of the area to be rezoned, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the zone map. DATED THIS DAY OF , 2012, Resolution #Z-12056 _____________________________ ____________________________ Tim McHarg, Planning Director Ed Sypinski, Chairperson Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman Zoning Commission 211 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Tim Cooper, Assistant City Attorney Greg Sullivan, City Attorney SUBJECT: Request for issuance of Disclaimer of Interest or Quitclaim Deed to property located at or adjacent to 323 South Wallace. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: Consider request from residents Jeffrey & Katherine Ball and make a formal determination on direction to staff with respect to the property at issue. A favorable motion may read, “I move to direct staff to initiate the steps necessary to disclaim interest in the 25’x 150’ strip of land on the westerly portion of property described as 323 South Wallace Ave.” BACKGROUND: Jeffrey and Katherine Ball reside at 323 South Wallace, property that was formerly described as Lots 31 through 35 in Block E, Rouse’s 2nd Addition. [See attachments 1, 2] Rouse’s 2nd Addition was filed for record on October 3, 1881, and depicts an alleyway between the 300 and 400 blocks of South Wallace and South Church. There is no known record of the alley right-of-way being dedicated to the City. The plat also was recorded by Daniel Rouse six years after he had deeded the subject property to a third party. There exists, therefore, a defect in the City’s title to the alley right-of-way. The Commission’s authority over streets generally provides the authority to vacate those streets. Ordinarily, however, petition is required to be made to the Commission who may by ordinance or resolution order a street vacated. In certain circumstances a court may order a street vacated if, for example, a street has not been accepted by public authority, in which instance a resolution by the City authorizing vacation is not required. The City has vacated right-of-way in certain circumstances, and also denied such requests. In this instance there was once a physical alley. However, the deed chain shows that prior to the filing of that plat map the parcel that the Balls would eventually acquire was set out and established and each subsequent deed description through the years encompassed the portion of land that was platted as a 25’ wide alley. The Balls acquired their property in 1993, and in 1996 applied to the City for a minor site plan and certificate of appropriateness to build a garage with a two- bedroom apartment. During a hearing on the matter a former City planner ‘acknowledged’ that the alley did not exist. The alley was subsequently blocked with the construction of a fence, which precludes access to or from the south of Ball’s property. There is no record of any discussion or complaint about the blocked alley again until late 2003. It was at that time the City was making plans to improve the parking area at Peet’s Hill. A concern was expressed that the alley would be blocked at its southern terminus, effectively closing off access to all homes south of Balls. In June, 2004, the Commission reviewed a sketch plan application for the construction of the parking lot and related site improvements at the base of Peet’s Hill. The Commission delayed action in order to explore additional options for the property. In August 2005, an appropriation of $1.125 million from the federal transportation bill was awarded for parking facilities, bicycle and pedestrian enhancements and landscaping on the new Library site. The Peet’s Hill parking lot design was incorporated into the Library site enhancement and Milwaukee Road Rail Trail CTEP project. The parking lot design was approved by the library board in June, 2006, and by the Commission on November 20, 2006. In March, 2007, the City granted an access easement for the properties on South Church through the Peet’s Hill parking lot to the alley in Block E of Rouses 2nd Addition. [Attachment 3] During the Commission deliberations on the parking lot some of the adjacent owners asked that the closed portion of the alley be addressed. At that meeting the Commission, aware of the legal shortcomings associated with the plat, specifically declined to direct staff to devote time to that issue. Last year Mr. Brian Gallik, representing the Balls, wrote to me requesting a recommendation on a request to put the issue of the existence of the alley to some sort of resolution. We discussed the alternatives – a formal vacation process, a quitclaim, or some other City action stating concurrence with the notion that there currently is no record of an alley right-of-way. Based on those discussions the Balls now formally request that, following a public hearing, the City prepare a disclaimer of interest. Given the defects in title, a formal vacation is not recommended. The Balls have agreed to provide proper notice to all persons whose property abuts upon the alley affected by the proposed action, of the time and place to appear and object if they wish to do so. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The City had made improvements to the portion of the alley beginning near the boundary of 323 South Wallace extending south to its terminus at the Peet’s Hill parking area. The physical access exists; however, it does not meet all standards for fire access. The City recently reviewed and approved redevelopment of property abutting the alley right of way in question (property south of 323 South Wallace.) In that application the landowner added a garage with guest quarters requiring access from the alley. Due to the limited access the applicant was required to address fire code requirements separately. ALTERNATIVES: 1. No action. If the Commission declines to act favorably the landowners may determine to initiate a quiet title action of their own. 2. Direct staff to prepare S CHURCH AVE E OLIVE ST S WALLACE AVE E CURTISS ST BUTTONWOOD AVE 200 0 200100 Feet ¯1 inch = 150 feet Legend Parcels 323 S. Wallace Ave. 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development SUBJECT: Resolution 4414 adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan. MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 4414 adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution 4414 adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan. BACKGROUND: As part of the process required to create a technology district, defined in MCA 7-15-4295, a technology district must, prior to its creation, have in place a formally adopted comprehensive development plan that ensures that the district can host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants. Resolution 4414 (Attachment 1), if approved by the City Commission, formally adopts the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan (the “Plan”) thus fulfilling part of the aforementioned statutory requirement. Additionally, by approving Resolution 4414 and adopting the Plan the Commission finds that the plan ensures that the district can host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants. Please note that the Plan is not a regulatory document like a growth policy, but rather is a comprehensive development plan required by the enabling statute. As such, review of the Plan by the Planning Board is not required, nor does the Plan establish a basis for future land use regulatory implementation, such as zone map amendments. South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan The Plan sets forth the rationale for establishing the South Bozeman Technology District (the “District”), addressing the importance of economic diversification and job creation and establishing the commitment to diversity of a tenant base. Additionally, the Plan acknowledges the relationship between the proposed technology district and the City’s Economic Development 228 2 and Community Plans and sets forth cost estimates for the development of the District. Creation of the District is part of the City’s larger economic development strategy outlined in the City of Bozeman’s 2009 Economic Development Plan addressing infrastructure deficiencies to achieve the goals set forth in both the District Plan and the City’s Economic Development Plan. Since the adoption of the City’s 2009 Economic Development Plan, the City has prioritized support for the following high growth potential sectors including: • Photonics; • Bio-sciences; • Manufacturing; • High-tech; and • the outdoor industry. Many of the sectors identified above are also supported by the mission and vision of the Montana State University Innovation Campus and are identified in the District Plan. Technology districts were authorized in the 2005 Montana legislature. The statute, MCA 7-15- 4295, states that the purpose of a technology district is the development of infrastructure to encourage the location and retention of technology infrastructure development projects in the state, and to address infrastructure deficiencies which are an impediment to development. Currently, the City of Bozeman supports four TIF districts. Three are urban renewal districts, the Downtown, Northeast and North 7th districts, and the fourth, Mandeville Farm, is an industrial district. Home to more than 100 technology-based firms, Bozeman has become the high-tech center of Montana; and it is one of the largest technology communities in the northern Rocky Mountains. Bozeman’s technology sector has grown significantly since the early 1990’s. Bozeman’s technology sector includes firms engaged in advanced manufacturing (an estimated 26 firms) and laser optics (an estimated 20 firms); information technology—application development, information technology services, software, internet applications, telecom, etc. (an estimated 50 firms); biotech or bioscience (an estimated 33 firms); and agricultural, environmental, or miscellaneous activities (an estimated 14 firms). These firms, for the most part, are selling their goods and services entirely to customers located outside of Montana and many located outside of the United States. It is estimated that these firms directly employ more than 3,000 people whose earnings are significantly higher than the county’s annual average wage. Additionally, the concentration of research activity at Montana State University has fueled the development of technology-based companies clustered in Bozeman and it has been a significant contributor to Bozeman’s vibrant entrepreneurial technology economy. University technology transfer and commercialization activities have been driving economic development nationwide since the early 1980’s when changes in federal legislation accelerated the process and increased incentives for collaboration between universities and industry. Montana State University is no exception. According to the MSU Technology Transfer Office, technology developed at MSU has resulted in the spin-off of 30 companies and licensing by 37 companies in the Bozeman area and nearly 300 companies statewide. The university holds 163 licenses for patents for innovations such as biological, chemical, and engineering processes and compounds, including coatings for the space shuttle and pharmaceutical drugs. Of those 163 licenses, 60% are with 229 3 Montana companies, many located in Bozeman. The Innovation Campus plays a significant role in the expansion of these high growth potential sectors. MSU has grown to become a regional leader in research and creative projects with nearly $100 million in research expenditures in Montana each year. MSU was recognized by Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching as one of 96 research universities nationally with “very high research activity.” MSU has strong ties to industry in the Bozeman area, particularly in the life science, aerospace, and information technology sectors. MSU lists relationships with over 150 companies which include research support, licensing agreements, and consulting services. The strength of Bozeman’s technology economy has also translated into private companies receiving research and development and investment funding. During the 2000-2004 time period, Montana ranked 10th in the nation in the average annual number of federal Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) awards made, with nearly half going to Bozeman companies. Job creation and industry diversification are the cornerstones of the City’s economic development strategy. The approval and implementation of the Plan and creation and stewardship of a technology district is consistent with theses priorities. Based on 2008-2009 data, MSU adds 13,511 public and private jobs to the state’s economy. This generates more than $1 billion in personal income from the four campuses and other affiliations, which equates to $897.7 million in after-tax income and $253 million in state tax revenue. Additionally, MSU’s research innovation has led to the creation and growth of diverse businesses in Bozeman and throughout the state, providing employment opportunities in industries such as agriculture, energy, construction, healthcare, technology, photonics, manufacturing and biosciences. As part of the technology district creation process, City and Innovation Campus staff have engaged City, County and School District7 officials over several months of conversations about the Plan, the District and the corresponding mission and goals of Innovation Campus in requesting the establishment of the proposed technology district. If approved, Resolution 4414, adopting the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan, shall be in full force upon passage. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None identified at this time. ALTERNATIVES: As recommended by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: None identified at this time. Attachments: 1) Resolution 4414 (with Exhibits A through C); a. Exhibit A, South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan; b. Exhibit B, legal description of the proposed South Bozeman Technology District; and 230 4 c. Exhibit C, map of the proposed South Bozeman Technology District. 2) Property Owners List; and 3) Public Notification. Report compiled on: October 24, 2012 231 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4414 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ADOPTING THE SOUTH BOZEMAN TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 7-15-4295 (2) (e) MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (MCA). WHEREAS, job creation and industry diversification are critical to the long-term economic vitality of Bozeman; and, WHEREAS, the City wishes to stimulate, encourage and support the attraction, retention and growth of jobs and industry in a variety of technology sectors; and, WHEREAS, the number and diversity of jobs created in a variety of technology sectors have high growth potential and support moderate to high income employment; and, WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman supports the creation of a Technology District (the “District”) at the location identified as the South Bozeman Technology District and for the use of tax increment financing to support the activities of the District; and, WHEREAS, 7-15-4295 (2) (e), MCA, requires that the District, must, prior to its creation, have in place a formally adopted comprehensive development plan (CDP) that ensures the District can host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants; and, WHEREAS, the District CDP known as the “South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan” (the “Plan”) ensures the District can host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants; and, WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that the area proposed for District has not been designed to serve the needs of a single district tenant or group of non-independent tenants; and, WHEREAS, as part of the certification of the base year, Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 42.19.1405 requires submittal of a copy of the CDP as required by 7-15-4295, 232 2 MCA, the plan adopted by the local government prior to the creation of the District to the Montana Department of Revenue; and, WHEREAS, the Plan is in conformance with the Bozeman Community Plan (adopted June 1, 2009), the adopted growth policy for the Bozeman planning area; and, WHEREAS, the Plan is in conformance with the intent and purpose of the underlying B- 2 Community Business and B-P Business Park zoning pursuant to the Unified Development Code, Bozeman Municipal Code Chapter 38; and, WHEREAS, the Bozeman City Commission did on the 5th day of November 2012 conduct a public hearing to consider the proposed Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, that: Section 1 That the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby adopted. Section 2 That the Plan encompasses the area(s) described in the legal description shown on Exhibit B. The physical boundaries included in the CDP are shown on Exhibit C. Both exhibits are hereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof. This resolution shall be in full force upon passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana at a regular session thereof on the ___ of ____________________, 2012. _________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor 233 3 ATTEST: _______________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 South Bozeman Technology District Property owners in the proposed district: 1) Advanced Technology INC 910 Technology Blvd. Suite A Bozeman MT, 59718 S14, T02 S, R05 E MINOR SUB 195A NW4 41.97 AC TRACT C-1A 351 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE CREATION OF THE SOUTH BOZEMAN TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT AND USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Notice is hereby given that the City Commission for the City of Bozeman, Montana, at its regular meeting on November 5, 2012, at 6 pm in Bozeman City Hall (121 N. Rouse Ave), will hold two public hearings on the creation of the South Bozeman Technology District (the “District”) pursuant to 7-15-4295, MCA. The Commission will first hold a public hearing on Resolution 4414 adopting the Comprehensive Development Plan for the District. The Commission will then hold a public hearing on Ordinance 1844 creating the District and authorizing the use of tax increment financing for the District pursuant to 7-15-4282, MCA. Copies of the proposed Resolution 4144, the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan, and Ordinance 1844, which includes a tax increment financing provision, a map showing the boundaries of the proposed District, a legal description of the proposed District, and a list of all properties subject to the proposed District, are on file in the office of the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT. Questions concerning the Resolution, Ordinance, the creation of the District, or the use of tax increment financing may be directed to Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development, City of Bozeman, 121 N. Rouse Ave. Bozeman, Montana, by email at bfontenot@bozeman.net, or by telephone to 406-582-2258. Publish: October 21, 2012 and November 4, 2012 352 1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development SUBJECT: Provisional Adoption of Ordinance 1844 Creating the South Bozeman Technology District and authorizing the Use of Tax Increment Financing MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing and provisionally adopt Ordinance 1844. Second reading of Ordinance 1844 will occur on November 19, 2012. If adopted, Ordinance 1844 will be effective thirty days later on December 19, 2012. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1844 creating the South Bozeman Technology District and authorizing the use of tax increment financing. BACKGROUND: Why a technology district? The desire to create the South Bozeman Technology District (the “District”) is an effort at addressing existing infrastructure deficiencies on property adjacent to Montana State University (“MSU”) and the Innovation Campus to achieve the goals set out in the City of Bozeman’s 2009 Economic Development Plan (“EDP”) and the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan (“CDP”). Goals of the EDP are synchronized with those of the District’s CDP and the Innovation Campus in the context of the establishment of a technology district to enhance the local and regional economies through job creation and industry diversification. Creation and stewardship of a technology district is consistent with these priorities. Technology districts were authorized in the 2005 Montana legislature. Section 7-15-4295, MCA, states that the purpose of a technology district is the development of infrastructure to encourage the location and retention of technology infrastructure development projects in the state, and to address infrastructure deficiencies which are an impediment to development (emphasis added). 353 2 Currently, the area of the proposed technology district lacks the infrastructure necessary to facilitate the development identified in the CDP; see p17 – 21. Ordinance 1844 includes a finding to this effect; see Section 1, 9 of Ordinance 1844. Since the adoption of the EDP in 2009, the City has prioritized support for the following high growth potential sectors including: • Photonics; • Bio-sciences; • Manufacturing; • High-tech; and • the outdoor industry. Most of the sectors identified above are also supported by the mission and vision of the District’s CDP and the Innovation Campus. MSU plays a significant role in the growth and development of Bozeman’s technology industry, and is the reason the Bozeman area is considered the technology center of the state. Additionally, MSU’s research innovation has led to the creation and growth of businesses in Bozeman and throughout the state, providing employment opportunities in industries such as agriculture, energy, construction, healthcare, technology, photonics, manufacturing and biosciences. Home to more than 100 technology-based firms, Bozeman has become the high-tech center of Montana; and it is one of the largest technology communities in the northern Rocky Mountains. Bozeman’s technology sector has grown significantly since the early 1990s. Bozeman’s technology sector includes firms engaged in advanced manufacturing and laser optics; information technology—application development, information technology services, software, internet applications, telecom, etc.; biotech or bioscience; and agricultural, environmental, or miscellaneous activities. These firms are, for the most part, selling their goods and services entirely to customers located outside of Montana and many located outside of the United States. It is estimated that these firms directly employ more than 3,000 people whose earnings are significantly higher than the county’s annual average wage. MSU has grown to become a regional leader in research and creative projects with nearly $100 million in research expenditures in Montana each year. MSU was recognized by Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching as one of 96 research universities nationally with “very high research activity.” MSU has strong ties to industry in the Bozeman area, particularly in the life science, aerospace, and information technology sectors. MSU lists relationships with over 150 companies which include research support, licensing agreements, and consulting services. Additionally, the concentration of research activity at MSU has fueled the development of technology-based companies clustered in and around Bozeman and is a significant contributor to Bozeman’s vibrant entrepreneurial technology economy. University technology transfer and commercialization activities have been driving economic development nationwide since the early 1980’s when changes in federal legislation accelerated the process and increased incentives for collaboration between universities and industry. MSU is no exception. According to the MSU Technology Transfer Office, technology developed at MSU has resulted in the spin-off of 30 companies and licensing by 37 companies in the Bozeman area and nearly 300 companies 354 3 statewide. The university holds 163 licenses for patents for innovations such as biological, chemical, and engineering processes and compounds, including coatings for the space shuttle and pharmaceutical drugs. Of those 163 licenses, 60% are with Montana companies, many located in Bozeman. Further development of the Innovation Campus will enhance these results. The strength of Bozeman’s technology economy has also translated into private companies receiving research and development and investment funding. During the 2000-2004 time period, Montana ranked 10th in the nation in the average annual number of federal Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) awards made, with nearly half going to Bozeman companies. Ordinance 1844. To create a technology district and authorize the use of tax increment financing, the Commission must conduct a public hearing and adopt an ordinance, Sect. 7-15-4295, MCA. Ordinance 1844 address the following: legislative findings (Section 1); creation (Section 2); requirements for tenants of the District (Section 3); annual report (Section 4); boundaries of the district (Section 5); authorizing the use of TIF (Section 6): term of the district (Section 7); costs which may be paid from the district with TIF funds (Section 8); and filing of the ordinance with the Montana Department of Revenue (Section 9). The City Attorney has reviewed the ordinance and finds it complies with the legal requirements for creation of a technology district and the use of TIF funds. What is a Tax Increment Financing District or TIF? Tax increment financing (“TIF”) is a state authorized, locally driven funding mechanism that allows cities and counties to direct property tax dollars that accrue from new development, within a specifically designated district, to community and economic development activities. In Montana, TIF districts are authorized in Montana Code Annotated (MCA) parts 7‐15‐4201 and 4301, et. Seq. Proposed TIF districts are typically characterized by blight and/or infrastructure deficiencies that have limited or prohibited new investment. A base year is established from which "incremental" increases in property values are measured. Virtually all of the resulting new property tax dollars (with the exception of the six mill state‐wide university levy) can be directed to redevelopment and economic revitalization activities within the area in which they are generated. Property owners located within a TIF district pay the same amount of property tax as they would if the property were located outside the district. Thus, TIF only affects the way that taxes, once collected, are distributed. Taxes that are derived from the base year’s taxable values continue to be distributed to the various taxing jurisdictions – local and state government entities and school districts. Taxes derived from the incremental increase in taxable value, however, are placed in a special fund for purposes set forth in establishing the TIF program. (For a more detailed explanation of TIFs in Montana see Tax Increment Financing in Montana: A Manual for Local Governments and Economic and Community Development Agencies, 2011, The Governor’s Office of Economic Development.) 355 4 Currently, the City of Bozeman supports four TIF districts. Three are urban renewal districts (Downtown, Northeast and North 7th), and the fourth, Mandeville Farm, is an industrial TIF district. What can TIF Dollars Fund? Section 7-15-4288, MCA, identifies the costs that may be paid by tax increment financing: The tax increments may be used by the municipality to pay the following costs of or incurred in connection with an urban renewal project, industrial infrastructure development project, technology infrastructure development project, or aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development project: (1) land acquisition; (2) demolition and removal of structures; (3) relocation of occupants; (4) the acquisition, construction, and improvement of infrastructure, industrial infrastructure, technology infrastructure, or aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure that includes streets, roads, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, pedestrian malls, alleys, parking lots and off-street parking facilities, sewers, sewer lines, sewage treatment facilities, storm sewers, waterlines, waterways, water treatment facilities, natural gas lines, electrical lines, telecommunications lines, rail lines, rail spurs, bridges, spaceports for reusable launch vehicles with associated runways and launch, recovery, fuel manufacturing, and cargo holding facilities, publicly owned buildings, and any public improvements authorized by Title 7, chapter 12, parts 41 through 45; Title 7, chapter 13, parts 42 and 43; and Title 7, chapter 14, part 47, and items of personal property to be used in connection with improvements for which the foregoing costs may be incurred; (5) costs incurred in connection with the redevelopment activities allowed under 7-15-4233; (6) acquisition of infrastructure-deficient areas or portions of areas; (7) administrative costs associated with the management of the urban renewal area, industrial district, technology district, or aerospace transportation and technology district; (8) assemblage of land for development or redevelopment by private enterprise or public agencies, including sale, initial leasing, or retention by the municipality itself at its fair value; (9) the compilation and analysis of pertinent information required to adequately determine the needs of an urban renewal project in an urban renewal area, the infrastructure needs of secondary, value-adding industries in the industrial district, the needs of a technology infrastructure development project in the technology district, or the needs of an aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development project in the aerospace transportation and technology district; (10) the connection of the urban renewal area, industrial district, technology district, or aerospace transportation and technology district to existing infrastructure outside the district; (11) the provision of direct assistance, through industrial infrastructure development projects, technology infrastructure development projects, or aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development projects, to secondary, value-adding industries to assist in meeting their infrastructure and land needs within the district; and (12) the acquisition, construction, or improvement of facilities or equipment for reducing, preventing, abating, or eliminating pollution. Ordinance 1844 references this statute for the range of uses for which the TIF money can be spent. 356 5 Community Engagement. As part of the technology district creation process, the City and the Innovation Campus staff consulted with Gallatin County and School District7 about the mission, vision, rationale and plan for the creation of a technology district. Meeting dates include: Gallatin County Administration • May 3, 2012 Gallatin County Commission • August 6, 2012 Bozeman School District 7 Administration • May 25, 2012 • July 30, 2012 Bozeman School District 7 Trustees • August 24, 2012 • October 8, 2012 • October 15, 2012 • October 22, 2012 Scheduled Public Hearings • November 5, 2012 • November 19, 2012 UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Once created, the City Commission has the authority to act on behalf of the District. The Commission may appoint an advisory board to make recommendations to the City on the expenditure of tax increment dollars. The implementation of the CDP will be a partnership between the City of Bozeman and the Innovation Campus. In the future, staff will bring the issue of District administration and management back to the Commission for consideration. At that time, the Commission may consider the size and make-up of an advisory board and the possibility of including School District 7 officials, or other stakeholders, in some capacity. ALTERNATIVES: As recommended by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: If Ordinance 1844 is approved, the District’s base year is created in 2012 and property taxes distributed to the City, County, and State from the defined area will be frozen at the 2012 taxable value levels for the life of the district. In future years, beginning with tax year 2013, any taxable value increases from new development or property appreciation will be taxed at the same level as other City property, with the tax revenue going to the District. If there is no increase in taxable value, the District will receive no funds. With the creation of the District, the City will establish a new special revenue fund for the purpose of segregating the revenues derived from the technology district. Funds received by the District from the increment are intended for infrastructure improvements shown on in the estimates on pages 17 – 21 of the CDP. 357 6 Attachments: 1) Ordinance 1844 creating the South Bozeman Technology District a. Exhibit A, legal description of the proposed South Bozeman Technology District; and b. Exhibit B, map of the proposed South Bozeman Technology District. 2) Property owners list; and 3) Public notification. Report compiled on: October 26, 2012 358 1 ORDINANCE NO. 1844 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ESTABLISHING AND CREATING THE SOUTH BOZEMAN TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT; AUTHORIZING THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING; DETERMINING THE COSTS TO BE PAID BY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING; ESTABLISHING A BASE TAXABLE YEAR AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana: Section 1 Findings. 1. The Commission (the “Commission”) of the City of Bozeman, Montana (the “City”) is authorized to create a technology district pursuant to §7-15-4295, MCA and use tax increment financing in furtherance of the purposes of the District pursuant to §§7-15- 4282 – 4294, MCA for the purpose of developing infrastructure to encourage the location and retention of technology infrastructure development projects in the City. 2. Job creation and industry diversification are critical to the long-term economic vitality of Bozeman. 3. Consistent with the goals of the City of Bozeman’s Economic Development Plan, the City wishes to stimulate, encourage and support the attraction, retention and growth of jobs and industry in a variety of technology sectors. 4. The number and diversity of jobs created in a variety of technology sectors have high growth potential and support moderate to high income employment. 5. The area proposed for the South Bozeman Technology District (the “District”) consists of a continuous area with an accurately described boundary that is large enough to host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants. 359 Page 2 of 6 6. With the adoption of Resolution 4414 on November 5, 2012, the Commission adopted a comprehensive development plan for the District known as the “South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan” (the “Plan”) that ensures that the District can host a diversified tenant base of multiple independent tenants. 7. The area proposed for the District is currently zoned a combination of Business Park (BP) and Community Commercial Mixed Use ( B-2), which authorize uses compatible with the Plan and are in accordance with the Bozeman Community Plan and consistent with the goals of the City of Bozeman’s Economic Development Plan. 8. The area proposed for the District does not comprise any property included within an existing urban renewal area, industrial district, or aerospace transportation and technology district created pursuant to §7-15-4295, MCA. 9. The area proposed for the District is deficient in infrastructure improvements necessary for technology development. 10. The Commission has determined that the area proposed for District has not been designed to serve the needs of a single district tenant or group of non-independent tenants. 11. The City has discussed the creation of the District and the use of tax increment financing with the Gallatin County Commission and the Trustees of Bozeman School District No. 7 and in adopting this Ordinance has taken into account the effect on Gallatin County and School District No. 7. 12. The City Commission reviewed and considered the relevant criteria established by §7-15- 4295, MCA and §§7-15-4282 – 4294, MCA, and found the proposed technology district and the costs for which tax increment financing may be used to be in compliance with these criteria; and, 13. After proper notice, the Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2012, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the proposal to create the District and use tax increment financing has determined the creation of the District is in the public interest. Section 2 Creation of the South Bozeman Technology Tax Increment Financing District. The Commission, after having conducted a public hearing duly called and noticed in accordance with the provisions of §7-15-4295, MCA, does hereby create the South Bozeman Technology Tax Increment Financing District (the “District”) for the purpose of stimulating, encouraging and supporting the attraction, retention and growth of jobs and industry in a variety of technology sectors. 360 Page 3 of 6 Section 3 Requirements of Tenants of the District. The tenants of the District must be businesses or organizations engaged in technology based operations within Montana that through the employment of knowledge or labor add value to a product, process, or export service that results in the creation of new wealth and for which at least 50% of the sales of the business or organization occur outside of Montana or the business or organization is a manufacturing company with at least 50 % of its sales to other Montana companies that have 50% of their sales occurring outside of Montana. Section 4 Annual Report. At a date determined by the Director of Administrative Services, the District shall present the Commission and file with the City Clerk a report describing: (1) the activities of the District for the previous year; (2) the activities and the proposed costs to be paid by tax increment financing in the upcoming year; and (3) whether the tenants of the District comply with Sections 1.5 and 3 of this Ordinance. Section 5 Legal Description/Boundaries. The legal description of the District is as shown on EXHIBIT A. The physical boundaries of the District are as shown on EXHIBIT B (both exhibits are hereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof). Section 6 Authorization for Use of Tax Increment Financing/Base Year. In accordance with §7-15-4282, the Commission hereby authorizes the segregation and application of tax increments as provided by §§7-15-4282 – 4294, MCA. For the purpose of calculating the incremental taxable value each year for the life of the District, the base taxable value shall be calculated as the taxable value of all property within the District as of January 1, 2012. 361 Page 4 of 6 Section 7 Term of Tax Increment Financing Technology District. The tax increment financing technology district will terminate in accordance with §7-15-4292, MCA. Section 8 Costs Which May be Paid From Tax Increment. The tax increment received by the District may be used to pay any costs incurred for an infrastructure development project (in the District), pursuant to the provisions of §7-15-4282 through §7-15-4294, MCA. Section 9 Filing with the Montana Department of Revenue. The City Clerk shall file a copy of the Plan and this Ordinance with the Montana Department of Revenue. Section 10 Repealer. All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 11 Savings Provision. This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 12 Severability. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect 362 Page 5 of 6 the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. Section 13 Codification. This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances of the City and shall be organized in a category entitled “Tax Increment Financing Districts.” Section 14 Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption. ***** End of Ordinance except for signature page and exhibits ***** 363 Page 6 of 6 PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the _____ day of ________________, 2012. ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of ____________________, 2012. The effective date of this ordinance is __________, __, 2012. _________________________________ SEAN A. BECKER Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 364 365 366 South Bozeman Technology District Property owners in the proposed district: 1) Advanced Technology INC 910 Technology Blvd. Suite A Bozeman MT, 59718 S14, T02 S, R05 E MINOR SUB 195A NW4 41.97 AC TRACT C-1A 367 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE CREATION OF THE SOUTH BOZEMAN TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT AND USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Notice is hereby given that the City Commission for the City of Bozeman, Montana, at its regular meeting on November 5, 2012, at 6 pm in Bozeman City Hall (121 N. Rouse Ave), will hold two public hearings on the creation of the South Bozeman Technology District (the “District”) pursuant to 7-15-4295, MCA. The Commission will first hold a public hearing on Resolution 4414 adopting the Comprehensive Development Plan for the District. The Commission will then hold a public hearing on Ordinance 1844 creating the District and authorizing the use of tax increment financing for the District pursuant to 7-15-4282, MCA. Copies of the proposed Resolution 4144, the South Bozeman Technology District Comprehensive Development Plan, and Ordinance 1844, which includes a tax increment financing provision, a map showing the boundaries of the proposed District, a legal description of the proposed District, and a list of all properties subject to the proposed District, are on file in the office of the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT. Questions concerning the Resolution, Ordinance, the creation of the District, or the use of tax increment financing may be directed to Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development, City of Bozeman, 121 N. Rouse Ave. Bozeman, Montana, by email at bfontenot@bozeman.net, or by telephone to 406-582-2258. Publish: October 21, 2012 and November 4, 2012 368 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Aimee Brunckhorst, Deputy City Clerk Stacy Ulmen CMC, City Clerk SUBJECT: Appointment to the Board of Appeals MEETING DATE: November 5, 2012 MEETING TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: Appoint one new member to the Board of Appeals with a term expiration of December 31, 2015. BACKGROUND: The Board of Appeals has one vacancy for a term expiring December 2012 with one new applicant. I would recommend that the Commission extend the term by one month to save time and energy re-appointing this person again next month. This board meets as needed and will likely not meet before December 31st, 2012. The Board of Appeals was established under Commission Resolution No. 2483, adopted October 3, 1983 to determine the suitability of alternate materials and methods of construction and to provide reasonable interpretation of the following codes of the City of Bozeman: Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, and Plumbing Code. The Board of Appeals shall consist of five members appointed by the City Commission and serving without compensation, which are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction. The Building Official shall be an ex officio member and shall act as Secretary of the Board. Appointments are for a period of three years. This board has one ongoing vacancy and one new applicant. New applicant: Chuck O’Brien ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. Attachment: Board Application 369 Date: 09/27/2012 Which Board or Commission are you applying for?: Building Division Board of Appeals Are you a new applicant or are you applying for another term.: New Enter your first name: Charles (Chuck) Enter your last name: O'Brien Email Address: Physical Address: Phone Numbers: Length of time in the Bozeman area: 1 year Do you live in the city limits? (Depending on the board this may or may not be required.): Yes Occupation: Const & Facilities Mgr Employer: Murdoch's Ranch & Home Supply Have you ever served on a City or County Board or Commission?: No Please explain your relevant qualifications, interests and experiences: 10 Years of Construction Management, Interest in construction Please list a reference and a contact phone or email: Rick Ungersma List a 2nd reference with contact phone or email: Kevin Kenneally What representative position are you applying for?: Building Division Board of Appeals The Bozeman City Charter voted in by the citizens of Bozeman in 2008 requires yearly ethics training. If appointed, do you understand you will be expected to take online and in person ethics trainings?: Yes Is there any other information you feel may be relevant to your application?: N/A Available if interest is generated. How did you hear about this board or vacancy?: Web site 370 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Aimee Brunckhorst, Deputy City Clerk / Advisory Board Coordinator Stacy Ulmen CMC, City Clerk SUBJECT: Appointment to the Design Review Board MEETING DATE: July 16, 2012 MEETING TYPE Action RECOMMENDATION: Appoint one new member to the Design Review Board . RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to appoint Melvin Howe as a non-professional representative to the Design Review Board. BACKGROUND: The Design Review Board has one ongoing vacancy for a non-professional and one new applicant. The Design Review Board was created under Section 18.62 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. Members are appointed to staggered two-year terms. The Board is charged with the design review of certain plans and proposals and should be comprised of six professional and two non-professional members. Professional members should be degreed in their respective disciplines and/or otherwise licensed or certified by their respective professional authorities. They shall include 4 Architects; 1 Architectural historian; 1 Landscape architect/designer; 2 Non-professional members. At least one of the professional members shall have a demonstrated expertise in urban design. The non-professional members shall have an interest in, or knowledge of, architecture, urban design, or historic preservation. No member shall serve as a member of the City Planning Board or the Zoning Commission concurrently. The Board is generally advisory to the City Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, and the City Commission, although it does make the final decisions on some minor applications. There is one vacancy and one new applicant. New Applicant: Melvin Howe (non-professional position) 371 ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. Attachment: Board Application 372 Date: 09/28/12 Which Board or Commission are you applying for?: Design Review Board Are you a new applicant or are you applying for another term.: New Enter your first name: Melvin Enter your last name: Howe Email Address: Physical Address Mailing Address: Bozeman MT 59715 Phone Numbers: Length of time in the Bozeman area: 45 years Do you live in the city limits? (Depending on the board this may or may not be required.): Yes Occupation: Retired Drafter Employer: Self Have you ever served on a City or County Board or Commission?: Yes If so, where and how long?: Design Review Board - about 16 years Currently serving on the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board Please explain your relevant qualifications, interests and experiences: 40 yrs as design drafter, 4+ years in School of Arch Please list a reference and a contact phone or email: Richard Shanahan List a 2nd reference with contact phone or email: Doug Morley What representative position are you applying for?: Non professional The Bozeman City Charter voted in by the citizens of Bozeman in 2008 requires yearly ethics training. If appointed, do you understand you will be expected to take online and in person ethics trainings?: Yes Is there any other information you feel may be relevant to your application?: Wish to apply my skills to serve my city. How did you hear about this board or vacancy?: Referenced City home page 373