HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-13-13 Parking Commission Agenda and Materials BOZEMAN PARKING COMMISSION
November 13, 2013, 7:30 — 9:00 a.m.
Madison Room, Citv Hall
Agenda
I. Call to order, 7:30 a.m.
II. Approval of October 2013 minutes
III. Public Comment—State name and address. Please limit comments to 3 minutes.
IV. Disclosures
V. Manager's Report (info)— Including finance report
a. Monthly Financials- October 2013
b. Parking Garage Usage Graphs and table
c. Other
VI. Presentation of Future of Downtown Parking Rankings—(Discussion)
VII. Capital Improvements Program (ACTION)
VIII. Parking Garage Structural Assessment—(Info)
IX. Stipend for Parking Manager(ACTION)
X. New business
XI. Adjournment
NOTE:The next Bozeman Parking Commission meeting will be held December 11, 2013,
at 7:30 a.m. at City Hall.
Bozeman Parking Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. lfyou have a disability that requires
assistance,please contact our ADA Coordinator,James Goehrung, at 582-3232(TDD 582-2301).
Bozeman Parking Commission Meeting
October 9, 2013 7:30 a.m.
City Hall Commission Room
Parking Commissioners in Attendance:
Ben Lloyd
Chris Naumann
Kelly Wiseman
Ben Bennett
Ryan Olson
City Staff in Attendance:
Scott Lee, Parking Manager
Laurae Clark, Treasurer
Ashlie Portnell, Parking Clerk
Daniel Tolar, Parking Department
Guests in Attendance:
Rick Noonan
Chris Kukulski
Anna Rosenberry
Action Items:
None.
1. Call to order, 7:30 a.m.
Chris called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m.
II. Approval of September 2013 minutes
Chris asked for a motion to approve the August 2013 minutes. Kelly motioned to approve
the August 2013 minutes. Ben B seconded. The motion was carried unanimously.
II1. Pin blic Comment — State name and address. Please limit comments to 3
minutes.
Rich Noonan of 113 W Cleveland St came in to talk about the parking issue on his street. He
lives on the edge of the MSU parking district. He lives on a block that is not in the district. The
people, who live nearby in the district, do not want to get parking permits for their vehicles, so
they park on the other streets/blocks, because permits are not required. Rich and the other
neighbors on his side of the street have now lost all parking available in front of their homes.
Rich is requesting that they be allowed to purchase parking permits without actually being added
into the parking district.
Chris stated that the BPC will have a discussion about the issue and put it on the BPC agenda for
next month. Chris asked Scott if he would get in touch with Rich when a resolution has been
reached. Scott agreed.
IV. Disclosures (new item)
Barbara Prowse attended the BPC meeting in August 2013 to talk about the ADA citation that
was issued to her. Her appeal of her ticket was denied. The executive committee had a meeting
and decided that her citation would be reduced to a warning. Last week Barbara called Chris N.
stating that she received a letter in the mail from the City of Bozeman saying that her ticket had
increased. The letter had been sent to her stating it was changed to a warning, but the system was
not changed, and that is why she received a notice.
Chris spoke to Ashlie in the Finance office and explained that the citation should be changed in
the system. Barbara was contacted again and told it was taken care of.
V. Manager's Report (info) — Including finance report
Scott presented the August and September financials to the BPC. Currently we are running over
budget in expenses as there were a lot of expenses at the beginning of the year. Scott went over
what has been spent so far this year, what was budgeted and what we actually spent.
Transient revenue for the parking garage is ahead of budget. December and January permit
payments will substantially increase the garage permit revenue numbers.
VI. Surface Lot & Parking Garage Rate increases (ACTION)
Scott and Chris N. presented a 2013 Comparative and Lot Lease Rates from our sister cities.
Chris spoke to Anne Guest who runs the parking facilities in Missoula. She explained that she
has tried over the years to do a percentage increase, and eventually switched to doing a set dollar
amount increase every other year.
Ryan, Ben Band Kelly all like the $5.00 increase every other year. The $5.00 amount is just a
recommendation, as the BPC reviews and decides on the rates annually. This recommended
information should be available to the public, but will not be in a chart format which may make
the public thinks that is for sure what they will be paying for their permits in the future.
Chris motioned to increase the parking garage permits to $45.00 for general permits and
$55.00 for basement permits effective January 1,2014. Kelly seconded the motion. The
motion was carried unanimously.
VI1. Presentation of Future of Downtown Parking — Chris (Discussion)
Chris presented the Strategic parking report to the BPC. A group organized by Chris (including
business owners and others with an interest in downtown parking)met once and came up with
these three objectives and several solutions to each.
Objective#1: Increase parking use and efficiency of existing parking inventory-on street,
public lots, private lots and structured parking.
Objective #2: Expand overall inventory of on-street, surface lots and structured parking.
Objective#3: Develop a more robust parking revenue system to finance parking capital
projects in addition to on-going and future maintenance needs
The BPC needs to review and decide what the best solutions are. Chris wanted the BPC to be
thinking about these objectives and the possible solutions as this will be an agenda item in the
future.
Discussion ensued on how to come up with revenue for future garage maintenance needs.
Chris Kukulski suggested another option of creating a parking special improvement district
(SID) or doing a general assessment of tax revenue for parking.
It was suggested that the surface lots could become pay lots. People could still purchase permits
to park in the lots, but everyone would pay to park in the lot.
Chris N likes the idea of creating an SID. Maybe the BPC could come up with a five year plan
of the financial needs of the parking garage and surface lots. Ben B likes the idea of an SID as
well.
Chris N likes the option to turn the surface lots into pay lots (no two free hours), which would
allow people to park longer than 2 hours without receiving a citation.
This will be an agenda item for the next two or three BPC meetings. Scott will create some
reports and documents and present it to the BPC at the next meeting.
Chris asked Anna Rosenberry what she thinks. She stated that the BPC should do a cost of
service study. The study would look at a couple different levels of service options for the future.
The BPC should come up with an accumulation of cost and revenue requirements.
Anna offered to help Scott with this.
VIII. Capital Improvements Program (ACTION)
Scott met with Anna Rosenberry, Chris Kukulski and Chuck Winn to talk about the Capital
Improvements Program for FY15-19 (CIP). This is the second year that the BPC has been
involved in the program. Anna Rosenberry helped Scott create the Parking Fund Capital
Improvement Plan which was presented to the BPC.
Scott put in items that he thought should be on the list. Anna explained that the BPC needs to
review the list and move to un-scheduled the items that they do not have the funds to complete at
this time. The Parking CIP cannot have a deficit in the final year of the plan.
Scott asked Anna to explain to the BPC how the Improvement plan works. Anna stated that it is
based on a 5 year projection, starting 2015. The Enterprise fund needs to pay for its own capital
for the projects. Anna explained that there isn't a portion of operating revenue currently
budgeted to help fund any future projects at this time. Until you have enough annual revenues to
meet all operating expenses and have a reserve, you don't have money to fund anything else.
Ryan suggested adding handhelds that would also take pictures be scheduled on the plan.
Scott asked for permission from the BPC to remove and un-schedule some of the items on the
list. It will be presented again in November. Ben L asked what the time frame is for it to be
completed. Anna said it needs to be completed by December 15th, once it's blessed from the
BPC then it goes to the City Commission as part of the citywide CIP.
Scott will remove and un-schedule some items and present it to the BPC at the November 2013
meeting for approval.
IX. Appeals Process
Ryan asked Scott how the appeals process currently works. Scott explained in detail the appeals
process to the BPC. There has been an average of 200 appeals per month the last few months.
Scott explained that more tickets are being issued per month due to having a fourth officer on
staff, and expanding the officer routes throughout the entire city limits.
Scott mentioned that MSU has a committee that meets about twice a month and goes through
each appeal--one at a time, and the committee as a whole makes the decision.
Chris asked if the officer that issued the ticket gets the appeal. Scott said yes they do, and that he
also reviews the appeal and makes the final decision. It was suggested that the appeals should
go to two officers for review and a final decision, but that the officer who wrote the ticket be in
on discussion. Scott likes that idea.
Scott will come up with a new appeals process and present it at the November 2013 meeting.
X. New business
Scott mentioned to the BPC that Madison Engineering has inquired about putting a hotel on the
east side of the American Legion Building(currently vacant lot). They enquired about leasing
spaces in the garage on a long term basis. They have already contacted the City Engineering
Department. They asked to buy spaces on Main Street in front of the building and have been
told they cannot.
XI. Adjournment
Chris adjourned the meeting at 9:30a.m.
Respectfully Submitted
Ashlie Portnell, Parking Clerk
0 oiama n Plarking Commission
Mnance Mcm-part as of October 31, 2013
Oct-11 Oct-12 Oct-13 FY2014 Remaining
FYTD FYTD FYTD (Fiscal Year 2014) Full Yr
Actuals Actuals Actuals Budget VARIANCE Budget Balance 0/0
Revenue
Downtown surface lot permits 2,342 2,054 1,693 5,333 (3,640) 16,000 14,307 89%
Garage permits 12,669 15,510 17,339 28 333 10 994 85,000 1 67,661 80%
Garage transient 18,664 19,512 20,762 20,000 762 60,000 39,238 65%
Gara e validation 452 285 300 333 33 1,000 700 70%
MSU resident permits 9,455 9,535 10,070 3,667 6,403 11,000 930 8%
High school permits 1,900 1 895 1,415 833 582 2,500 1,085 43%
MSU visitor permits 7,110 7,545 8,210 2 667 5 543 8,000 (210) -3%
Municipal fee - - 15 15 - 15 #DIV/0!
Boot fee 975 600 1 200 1,000 200 3,000 1,800 60%
Citations 57,040 66,535 112 435 101,667 10,768 305,000 192,565 63%
Refunds& Reimbursement 5,000 2,290 3,295 3,333 38 10,000 6,705 67%
Garage indoor advertising - 1,462 889 667 222 2,000 1,111 56%
Other Revenue/ Loan Interest - 616 504 - 504 504) #DIV/0!
Total Revenue 115,607 127,839 178,097 167,833 10,264 503 500 325,403 65%
O eratin Expenses
Wages and salaries 65,311 58,974 87,901 88,212 311 264,636 (176,735) -67%
Supplies/Materials 4,469 8,590 14,819 5,942 (8,877) 17,825 3,006 -17%
Maintenance-vehicle software 3,404 19,366 7,077 2,667 (4,410) 8,000 (923) -12%
Utilities- hone elect as 8,682 7,642 8,440 10,800 2,360 32,400 (23,960) -74%
Contracted Services 19,333 12,235 9,152 18 500 9,348 55,500 (46,348) -84%
Travel[Training 1809 - - 1167 1167 3,500 (3,500) -100%
Other-pstq, adv, rents taxes 18,348 16,865 23,365 12,317 (11,048) 36,950 (13,585) -37%
Capital &Reserve - 2,784 19,652 8 333 (11,319) 25,000 (5,348) -21%
Transfers to General Fund 17,488 18,955 20,000 20,000 - 60,000 (40,0100) 67%
Total Operating Expenses 138,844 145 410 190,406 167 938 (22,4681 503,811 1 (313,405) -62%
Net Profit Loss (23,237) (17,571) 105 (12,204) 311
Badger Park Downtown Parking Garage Stats
Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13
Average Daily Revenue $187.06 $206.03 $133.53 $119.97 $193.00 $189.06 $138.63 S151.39
Average Daily entries(all) 383 415 323 326 1 447 423 363 381
Bridger Park Downtown Permits
Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 77-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13
Regular' 160 163 163 159 161 161 175
Basement) 33 38 37 37 38 41 42
Total permitsi 193 201 200 196 199 202 217
Top 5 Events at Bridger Park
ENTRIES REVENUE
Amount Date Event Amount Date Event
1 824 6/27/2013 MOM $738 7/1/2010 Hall/MOM
2 802 8/1/2013 MOM $601 12/3/2011 Xmas StroJ
3 788 7/18/2013 MOM $581 12/1/2012 Xmas Stroll
4 758 6/28/2012 MOM $541 3/16/2013 Run 2 the Pub
5 743 7/11/2013 MOM $534 7/30/2011 3-on-3 Bbal;
NOTE:8 months(67%)remaining in Fiscal Year(July-June)
Prepared by Scott Lee Finance report FY2014-Oct 2013 11/11/2013
Bridger Park Downtown
Average Daily Revenue
220 - -
200 -04
180 - -
v 160
Cr
140
M
v
120
ho
v 100 -
>
c 80
60
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
--dr-2010-11Avg.Rev 112.13 133.99 94.39 97.93 113.45 131.93 95.65 135.77 176.94 169.40 118.63 120.29
t 2011-12 Avg, Rev 119.50 151.48 104.55 113.38 114.13 119.80 124.55 169.53 187.06 206.03 133.53 119.97
t 2012-13 Avg. Rev 127.60 169.39 136.39 118.96 144.74 163.13 128.00 162.93 193.00 189.06 138.63 151.39
--d-2010-11 Avg. Rev+2011-12 Avg.Rev-6-2012-13 Avg.Rev
Bridger Park Downtown
Avg Daily Entries
500 -
v
450
400 -
w
> 350
v
300
nA
2 250
a
200
150
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
t 2010-11 Avg. Entries 235 278 217 240 265 268 252 291 311 327 265 275
t 2011-12 Avg. Entries 282 332 276 292 285 295 301 352 383 415 323 326
-f-2012-13 Avg. Entries 323 348 314 314 331 354 349 392 447 423 363 381
2010-11 Avg.Entries t-2011-12 Avg. Entries --W-2012-13 Avg.Entries
Downtown Bridger Park Garage - monthly
% Change from same month in prior year
2010 to 2011 2011 to 2012 2012 to 2013
% CHANGE SUMMARY DATA SUMMARY DATA SUMMARY DATA
entries rev entries rev entries rev
Jan 37% 32% 28% 11% 14% 30%
Feb 30% -1% 26% 20% 4% 1%
Mar 48% 22% 8% 1% 16% 27%
Apr 27% 22% 10% -9% 20% 36%
May 29% -6% 19% 30% 16% 3%
Jun 35% 34% 21% 25% 11% -4%
Jul 13% -1% 23% 6% 17% 3%
Aug 33% 13% 27% 22% 2% -8%
Sep 18% 3% 22% 13% 13% 4%
Oct 20% 7% 18% 0% 17% 26%
Nov 20% 7% 14% 7%
Dec 19% 13% 5%L 12%
Total 26% 11% 18% 11% 13% 12%
garage counts by day of week-graphs and tables
o
CU
u a +� >
� U U � i
Q (B Q Q C 0
�-, V) p
L' N O t1n
CDO -a C- v N C
N N + Y
O C
(u l0 Q) aJ (O r4 Ln
i O O u -C Q O
C + �+ u
r-I rH U U Q„ m aJ mX X U 0 C L- aJ Q..
Q
'a O O u Q) o �L V)
ra Q Q u a>i C n O
S1 V Q Q w -a l0 co c �
O
O -p c O E QA QJ O
0
"O 0 o E C
O u ru CL v, > v x
i c 75 c C += Q) p ry tin O c
Q O c p c M =p CU x ` ,N +
ra > E U
Ln
C
O C C t O ° d > OX v (n L1
cu a1 Q) + ro W C Q 4- L U c 4-
O i +- Q1 O U Q X n
(U �- O ° 0 C *� aJ +, N Q Q C
Ln
> u E > V) N C (D > in L i o
Q + O Q1 U Ql V c -00 O w
r0 L QJ C L O -a L +-' C
v o. L Q 4+ Q a O O s tB N o
QJ w - fD O bq (u bA C Gal _ -0 ° -p 'Q > Q Ln
cn 0
C Y O u U- CO i V 7 >• Q N QcUc
'n c J° p O aJ
+� Q C Gn O a > +� Q
O C O O o E n Y Q o vU O L `� ,- 0 u
tB v i U Q O �-N L +� O a) O p
O u rD
O c CL
w p E > tinNLO U o > U w O C vn
U
U Q O u +, > ,� C JQ (J +
Q) E rpo m c \
nn U Q) C c c Q + \ m O U =
> X C v T O
c u N O c u ra >' QJ q- O c t U 3 N
Y > 0 N +--� 0 c ++ .- VI
+-' a. +-- �'' •� +0 C ++ Ln U '4.1 +--� ° N +N- � `�
Q o ° c Q c Y _v a, c .� ra C a�
on v u a) 3 > o ai O o a -a a �' v E v
�C c c rn Q1 W c c- n «• Q 0- c ° O E hA o N
CL
Ali v c c C o °Q • cn c � Q GJ 4- 0 t c
x U Uam •- a > _0Q)C �o ro M .3 c Mv, tin 0 a Q) v -0 m v
3 Q) on o > V) 0) c0 6' u -> aJ 4- N 0 u
3 >v o O c u 4- c c a _0 O a o 0 L vc 0
O O ° r � > +OQJ 4 aJ c E . E � 4
L +- 0 (U o m CL 0
w 4- u Y -QoO cJ
Q Yra -Q ` p � Q S vCQ O
N Q N Ln a Yc -c O ° t Q -p Q) +� hn
C) OJ vi > O
c N OL on °cA tin l °cA on ro a
ao p > pi >- L O Ov v `u a O E a E n u aJ O.
c � n ti u C + .
m o o
'O
�C QJ do Q i Ql +1 Q) Q) O L O C) wY c
i
L Q p QJ Q C @ > '_' n a C C Q C C: O
O bA > aJ o Q c 4- C •� O Q Y
C w u m w a s U = U C .� p Q 0
+N+ Y v 4! Cl y > y U N - 3 C Q N
blo x c rB
Q a o m m w co M Ln O Ln m rm r•n Lr) m Q p c �
. L L c-i rV O rV L lD rl � on ° L m 1
V ; tI1 ; M M Ct M*t j i i N N N c •U N +'n vi
O Q1 Q c Q ; Q J N rd lB c-
bz
V p V Y U Y V c f CL �D
+- �.
Q m w c . I N M w r-i N m m w -1 N M ® O a1 c c a-' V)
O v .0 a' .0 = H c O a1 0 > U o `n o
H Q 0 O 0 F- = u w = U S u
0 0 0 0 0 0 O o
u „ o . . o o ' o 0 0 o u o
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o
m Ln 1n u) In In o0 00
rm .1 -1 00 O 00
C) o O O 0 0 O 00 00
cr) O O O O tD O O lD
1-4 O Ln Lr O M O O rn
N C } M I
LL
I
O O O O O O
V 1 00 O 00 lz (:: O O tD
1-1 Lr� u - r) U')i C) Lr) r'r)
O
® N >. N i--I M
LL
Ln CD 0 0 B
O LU ^ tDD 0 0 0 �
•1 O u'7 i!i ci rM u) O 111 M
® O w >- Ln N
� LL
O
O_
O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O
LD O O O O O O O �D O O O I-D
o O O ui ui O } fn Vl CD Ln rn
0) Ln
(V LL ri
O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O
Ln O O O I I I O' O O Ln Lr O O I-D
,- o 1 �n O to O O r-r �D 1\ O O rn
^' 0 -1 Ln U*) Ln 1-1 -1 to m
6}L N
OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
C 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I'D O Ln 0 0ZT
.-
0 0 0 u1 Ln 0 0 0 0 Ln Lr Lf N O O O O O O Lr L O to Lr Y -4 tD N 1� O O tD
0 N M iH -1 M z .:T -Zil ICT Ln Ln to �--1 Ln Ln 111 r-1 c
E Mr-1 �-i c N Q) L.L. -1 c-1 -1 r 1 M N
7
� U
lD m In Co r, Ln lD r, LnlD r, 00 Ln Ln lD C) lD m
` c-1 r-1 r-I r1 r1 -C e--1 r-i r1 -1 -q -1 r1 r-i � � ri -C � r1 r1 � -Cc-1 r1
Ld 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N O N N O O u N O O
es >, N (V rV fV rV C N N N lV fV fV N N C C N C C rV [V C C N N
CL
V .a N N m m m m zr -cT zr art un Ln In lD e-1 .-•4 N m rn ul Lo O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � .-+ --i .-1 0 rH r i--1 r 1 N N d
a maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamam CL U
c
o a- 0 a
•� v J UO
Y Y o Y
Q) QJ Q) V Y Y
L L L _0 Q) C Y
3 3 3 Q) 0 m
Q! Q)
Q)
U
to OA nA tiA 4- — �- Q) ^ Y Y Cl) N
ro OA M M rQ r0 O O O Y C C U a) Q) Q)
" m L L L L IN In 0 N N N Q) Q) C 0) L y1 0
ry r0 M M r0 r0 -0 -0 -0 3 �' �' �' rn Yv,
� c c c Y c c �, — o E E —
°� t
Vl V7 Vl V1 Y )_ Q) Q) Y Q) V.Q = - /Q Ln
QD Y Y Y Y O o 2 QJ U L L Q) V U m � V
c c c c c c v 0 a) - - ,c E E v c - - U ry m w c L.L. o v
> U
cLo @ E E E E 3 3 3 L L L L > o o a,
a 0 u u QU' v -o -c -a a w (, w v O a n 'o 'o V)
oA 0a r0 rn ro ro r0 ra m -C CL E E n 3 c c a —QU) E 'ao 0 an o
L f Y Y Y Y Q) r0 w E C Tr
C C Q) Q) Q) Q) Y Y Y L L L L C Y Y E -O t 0 L L O m N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r0 0 0 • L, O Q Q) Q) V) - o -C a
Q@) a) Q_' G_' CL J J J O_ Q 1L IZ L o J J Y Y - - = Q) > > — Q) J d U Q)
V) In �A OA OA tq0 tin OA W (L) (1) Q) Q) Q) J C >• 0 O M @ QD w r0 Y C O to Y
U Y C C C C c c C U U U U U Q) 0 ` J — Q O_ OD •C C C -) V Q) to Q)
U U L L �C Y Y rD fO r0 r9 rD v1 N O U U Y Y (p U ,C ,C Q C N
O M ro L L L D_ O_ C1 Q Q O — E U U L L L L m O Cr O
L L L 0D tin 00 0n r0 r0 m 0 § Q m m 0 0 a a m 0 jl a` U d d -j aL
d U U J J J J D_ D_ a v " Q"1
= D C I
encsi nee R5
Seattle
v Portland
T' Spokane
San Diego
Austin
Irvine September 25, 2013
Eugene
San Francisco
Mr. Chuck Winn
Assistant City Manager
City of Bozeman
P O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
Re: Bozeman Parking Structure
Follow-up to 9/11/13 Meeting in Bozeman
Dear Chuck:
Thank you for facilitating the meeting of all parties in Bozeman two weeks ago, I believe that we each gained a
better understanding of the competing opinions related to the cracking in the north bay of the ground level slab.
It also gave me a chance to inspect the garage again. talk with those concerned, and to evaluate the condition of
both the epoxy repairs as well as the ongoing simple caulking repairs. This inspection and discussion has
confirmed my opinion that we are pursuing the proper repair and maintenance program, and that there should be
no concern about the structural integrity of the structure at this point in time. And I would emphasize again that
the vertical cracking in the basement walls is normal, expected, and of no concern whatsoever.
As we discussed, it is important to understand why the structure requires ongoing crack maintenance, and why
that was to be expected (although not quite to the level we have experienced in this one location). Virtually all
concrete experiences a certain amount of drying shrinkage within three to four months of placement. This drying
shrinkage is then magnified by the thermal expansion and contraction associated with the seasonal change in
temperatures as well as the long-term creep due to the prestressing load applied to the slab, to create a total
volume change. Bozeman obviously has a very wide swing between summer and winter temperatures, which
makes this seasonal dimensional change even greater than for most areas of the country.
We allow for this movement by ensuring the concrete is free to shrink without restraint, or by planning for the
cracking. The regular grooving in a sidewalk, for example. is placed there to encourage the concrete to crack on
regular and predictable lines since we have no way of allowing a sidewalk to move freely over its length. The
ideal solution for a parking structure is to isolate it from perimeter walls such that it can move freely both for the
original shrinkage and for the subsequent thermal movement This particular parking structure. however, had a
number of unique design aspects that made this type of freedom of movement nearly impossible to achieve:
• The retail component wrapping the parking structure required a fire separation wall, introducing a rigid
wall element around the parking structure
• The retail element intruded into the parking structure at the first floor, with some slab steps and other
details that would have complicated a separation
• There were more stair and elevator elements than would have been required for most simple parking
structures, and they also had fire separation requirements
• The basement level required a first floor structure surrounded and supported by rigid concrete walls
It would have been theoretically possible for the parking structure to have been structurally isolated from the fire
separation walls, basement walls, and stair and elevator cores, and we generally take that approach. However,
601 W. Riverside.Suite 600 Spokane,Washington,99201 Phone(509)455-4448
S e r v i c e I n n o v a t i o n V a I u e
in this particular situation, the cost for the additional structural beams and columns, expansion joints, and other
detailing associated with the connection to the retail component would have cost much more than any potential
long-term cracking maintenance, so we elected to provide the lowest-cost initial solution and accept that there
would likely be some crack maintenance over the early years of the project.
The cracking that has been experienced to date, and the required repairs, was more extensive than we expected
in the north bay on the ground level, but was almost non-existent elsewhere in the structure. And the one very
unfortunate surprise was that several cracks in this area opened up beyond the normal expected size. Once
these cracks opened early in the process. they absorbed most of the movement at this level and became a
structural concern because they were wide enough to lose the aggregate interlock necessary to transfer loading
across the crack. As such,they were repaired with epoxy injection to restore the structural integrity of the slab.
This is the most common solution for this type of situation, and it has worked well for this project with no further
significant problems at this location. All the repaired joints look tight and solid.
The remaining hairline cracking that has occurred each year should be treated with routing and caulking as has
been done, and this maintenance will gradually reduce in scope each year as the structure begins to adapt to its
final configuration and dimensional variations. In fact. I would be surprised if there were any new full-thickness
cracks of any length from this point forward Any implication that this normal and expected hairline cracking
represents a structural hazard or public safety concern is not true, although they should be monitored regularly
through the years to be sure that they do not open further and reach that point. And though this amount of
cracking poses the risk of chloride intrusion, the post-tensioning tendons are fully encapsulated and the
reinforcing steel is epoxy-coated, so corrosion should not be a risk.
Please call me at any time if a visual inspection reveals an area of concern, and we will be happy to inspect the
project again.
Sincerely,
DCI Engineers
Mark D. Aden, P.E., S.E.
Principal
L'IF
MARTEL CONSTRUCTION, INC.
MAIN OFFICE 81GFORK OFFICE
1203 South Church Avenue 305 Highway 83 RECIPIENT OF 1"0 NATIONAL euioiwaacAAwwo
Bozeman.MT 59715-5801 Bigfork,MT 59911 +M SBA EMREPREBEDRIAL SUCCESS AWARD
406 586-8585 Fax 406 586 8646 BBB MONTANA FAMR.V BUSINESS OF THE YEARAWARD
( ) ( ) (406)837-1063 Fax(406)837-1068 201H MCA CONCRETE EXCELLENCE AWARD
October 9,2013
City of Bozeman
26 East Mendenhall
Bozeman,MT 59715
Attn:Chuck Winn
Re: Bozeman Intermodel Facility
Follow up to the 9/11/13 Meeting in Bozeman
Dear Chuck:
As our follow up to our meeting on 9/11/13 with the Design Team,City of Bozeman team,Bob Chase and his
representative and Walker Consultants regarding the Bozeman Intermodel Facility,we offer the following
observations and opinions.
First, 1 reviewed the relevant content of my letter to the City of Bozeman dated March 10,2009
From the Letter:
Our review of DC/'.c entail dated March 5. 2009 Jronr A4ark Aden and Carl{Walkers email dated March a, 2009 fi-onr
Rob McConnell A as follows.
1. DC/is the Structural Engineer of Record and his recommendations shotdd be followed
2. We agree with DCl(second paragraph of entail)that DCI is fine with epa.q grouting the crack and
watching it fi r one year.
3. We agree frith Carl iValker that stitching the slab together at the crack would move the crack to a new
location.
-1 We disagree with Carl 61'a/ker'vstatement that the rebar has vielded.
5. kVe agree frith Carl Walker that Y'a repair is required, it should he a slip joint design. But we agree with
DC1 that it should he ivatched for a one pear life cycle of the garage.
Two and a half years later I still agree with my observations in 2009 and agree that the course of action taken was
correct. Regarding note 5,[do not believe a slip joint is required after observing the performance of the garage
since 2009.The epoxy grouting and traditional caulking that has been done to date has resolved any relevant issues.
Second,I have read and reviewed Mark Aden's letter and agree with the content of it. In summary, I would not
recommend expending any additional time or money with consultants on a third party review of this issue.
I would recommend that we all continue to monitor and watch the garage deck as mentioned in the last paragraph of
Mark Aden's letter. This is no more involved than looking at it as we walk through it.
Sincerely,
el )list[' it
l�on -Ic
cc:file
COMMERCIAL ♦ RESIDENTIAL ♦ INSTITUTIONAL ♦ INDUSTRIAL
S'at�6liar(rcd /960