HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-07_Madill Impact Fee Credit Request IFCR-0701, opened_20
Report compiled on August 29, 2007
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: Loyal Garden impact fee credit request IFCR-0701
MEETING DATE: Tuesday, September 4, 2007
RECOMMENDATION: Not grant requested impact fee credit due to procedural irregularities.
BACKGROUND:
The City has adopted an impact fee program to fund necessary infrastructure. The Capital
Improvements Program (CIP) allocates funds to individual projects. Per Chapter 3.24, Impact
Fees, BMC those elements of work required for minimum compliance with locally adopted
standards are not eligible for funding with impact fees. Impact fees can be combined with other
funding sources to complete a project.
A request has been received for Water, Wastewater, and Street impact fee credits (See
application materials). The request is related to over sizing of pipes to meet facility plan
standards and upgrades to an existing traffic signal. The specific section addressing credit for
capacity expanding work is Section 3.24.100, BMC. There are several specific criteria required
for compliance with the impact fee program and state statute. In order for the City to award an
impact fee credit the request must conform both with the substance (intent and purpose) of the
impact fee program as well as the required procedural components of the program. The
following table summarizes the procedural compliance status of the request. Relevant citations to
the requirements listed in the table follow the table.
Requested Item Name Project
Related
Capacity
Expanding
CIP
Listed
CIP
Funded
Timely
Request
Wastewater Main Oversizing Portion Yes No No No
Water Main Oversizing 10” Portion Yes No No No
Water Main Oversizing 12” Portion Yes No No No
Traffic Signal Upgrade Portion Yes No No No
Definitions – State and Local
3.24.040, BMC – Impact Fee Capital Improvement Program, Improvement, Initiation of
Construction, Project Related Improvement
7-6-1601, MCA – Impact Fee (excludes requirements needed to meet standards, on or off-
site[5iv])
Review Criteria – Must meet all criteria to be eligible for credit consideration.
7-6-1603 (4), MCA – Credits permitted if
(a) – Documented need
289
Report compiled on August 29, 2007
Commission Memorandum
(b) – Property is appropriate
(c) – Procedures established to determine worth (Bozeman established in 3.24.100, BMC)
(d) – Procedures established to establish credits (Bozeman established in 3.24.100, BMC)
City carries out 7-6-1603(4) through Section 3.24.100.A, BMC – Credits allowed to be
considered if:
(1) Project is listed on the impact fee CIP
(2) Project is not a project related improvement as defined in 3.24.040.K, BMC
(3) Voluntary and accepted by City of Bozeman (Not Applicable in this case)
(4) Approved in writing by City in timely manner
3.24.040.H, BMC – Improvements must expand capacity
3.24.100.B, BMC
(a) Request on City form with adequate documentation
(b) Timely submittal before initiation of construction
The Engineering Division has reviewed the request and considers the dollar amount of the
request reasonable for the work performed. They also verified that the work is in conformance
with the facility plan standards. Plans and specifications were reviewed and approved prior to
work beginning.
There are two items of concern with this credit request. First, the individual work items are not
listed on their respective Capital Improvement Programs. A request for inclusion of the work on
the respective CIPs was provided by applicant to the City on June 29, 2006 with a follow up
correcting estimated costs on August 18, 2006. Initially there was some question as to whether
the proposed work could qualify for impact fee funding or whether it was solely a project related
improvement. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee considered the street and wastewater impact
fee CIP packages on January 11th and 25th, 2007. The water impact fee CIP was considered on
January 25th and February 15th, 2007.
The recommended CIP provided to the City Commission for consideration did not include the
requested work. The City Commission acted to approve the CIP for Streets on 1/29/2007 and for
Water and Wastewater on 2/20/2007. Given estimated expenditures and revenues the projected
fund balances for 2012 show adequate funds to cover the work. The Impact Fee Advisory
Committee has not given a recommendation on the specific work for which credit is requested.
Second, the request for the credits did not occur prior to the commencement of the work. The
standard for timeliness is whether the request has been submitted prior to the pre-construction
meeting with the Engineering Division, Section 3.24.040.J and 3.24.100.B. Engineering Division
indicates the preconstruction conferences took place on 7/19/06 for on-site work and 11/29/06
for off-site work. At these times the City had not yet acted on the development of the updated
capital improvements program. Applicant asserts that formal request was not made as there had
not at that time been a response to the request for CIP listing. Procedural review to identify
means to avoid future misunderstanding of process is being undertaken.
290
Report compiled on August 29, 2007
Commission Memorandum
Listing on the CIP and timely application are both required for a credit request to be accepted. As
noted above the Impact Fee Advisory Committee and City Commission had not completed their
review of the impact fee CIPs by the time the preconstruction conferences took place. Therefore,
the request does not meet procedural requirements. After further discussion this spring with
engineering and planning staff and the applicant the formal credit request was submitted on June
5, 2007 so that the City Commission could take final action to approve or not approve a request.
As explained in detail above, the work for which credit is requested does meet the requirement
for capacity expansion, excludes direct project requirements, but has not satisfied all of the
procedural requirements.
The time limit on credit applications is in place to protect the integrity of the impact fee program
from after the fact claims and ensure that information is provided in a timely manner. This helps
ensure good fiscal stewardship of the program by the City. Although the credit request is barred
from being claimed directly as a matter of right, legal staff has previously concluded that the
Commission could chose to make an offer of credit. Staff has concerns that making an offer may
give a misunderstanding of the process to other parties. Had the application been timely received
and the work listed on the CIP staff would have been supportive of the request.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Does the Commission wish to offer the requested credit?
FISCAL EFFECTS: Award of the credit will reduce funds available for other work but will not
place the fund balances in jeopardy. Giving credit after the fact may affect other requests which
may negatively impact the operation of the impact fee program.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
CONTACT: Please feel free to email Chris Saunders at csaunders@bozeman.net if you have
questions prior to September 4th.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
Attachments: Application materials
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299