HomeMy WebLinkAboutA5. Ordinance 1936,1
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Chris Saunders, Planning and Policy Manager Wendy Thomas, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Provisional adoption of Ordinance 1936, Revising Chapter 2, Article 6, Division
9, Impact Fees, to revise definitions, authorize reimbursement districts, and
establish procedures for reimbursement district. MEETING DATE: March 7, 2016
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action
RECOMMENDATION: Provisional adoption of Ordinance 1936 Revising Chapter 2, Article 6,
Division 9, Impact Fees to revise definitions, authorize reimbursement districts, and establish procedures
for reimbursement district.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1936.
BACKGROUND: Ordinance 1936 amends Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Impact Fees to clearly
establish revised definitions and procedures. The ordinance is consistent with the requirements of state
law and does not alter the calculation of fee amounts, triggers for payment, supporting documentation of
fees, or types of infrastructure for which fees are collected. The ordinance does not require that the more
proactive approach discussed below be used for a specific project or at all. The ordinance amendments to allow the proactive installation of infrastructure are placed in all four of the fee types. This provides
the option to complete advance infrastructure when deemed beneficial and keeps the program consistent.
The Impact Fee Advisory Committee considered the ordinance on February 11, 2016 and recommends
approval.
The City recently adopted a new arterial and collector levy (A&C) to fund improvements to the transportation system for costs that did not qualify as capacity expansion. The A&C is new funds
invested in the transportation system and addresses work that does not qualify for impact fee funding.
Lack of non-growth share funds has inhibited completion of elements of the transportation system.
There are several missing links or unfinished sections which inhibit maximum functioning of the
transportation system. Strategic investments to expand capacity in these areas in advance of local development will have a very beneficial impact on the overall ability of the transportation system to
serve users.
The A&C makes possible a more proactive approach to the coordination between impact fees, project
related improvements, and non-impact fee funding sources which was incorporated in this year’s edition
of the CIP. This approach addresses situations where the City needs to take a leadership role in installing
Commission Memorandum
328
2
infrastructure in advance of adjacent development in order to close gaps or otherwise expand the overall
capacity and improve performance of the infrastructure systems. This approach includes reimbursement
to the City when construction of infrastructure includes elements which could be project related
improvements if a private development were constructing the project. Reimbursement to the City for project related improvements could be required from later adjacent development.
The City Commission determined that the more proactive approach would improve the capacity,
function, and cost effectiveness of infrastructure systems. In order to fully implement the approach
revisions to the municipal code are desirable. These are local procedures which fill in details for
consistent application of the impact fee program. The authorizing state law for impact fees sets broad parameters and relies on local ordinances to fill in locally relevant details. Given the very diverse communities, infrastructure needs, and community preferences in Montana this approach is appropriate.
The purpose of each section of the ordinance is:
1) Legislative findings document the reasons the ordinance is being adopted at this time. This is not part
of the permanent code, but is part of the ordinance.
2) These findings give the reasoning to why the impact fee program was adopted initially. The amended section describes how the new proactive approach fits into the larger program.
3) Creates specific authority and describes the scope of reimbursement districts.
4) This section continues the general guidance established in the legislative findings. This makes clear
that a reimbursement for a project related improvement is not an offset for impact fees due for system improvements.
5) Create specific definition for what is a capacity expanding improvement.
6) Revise the definition of transportation system. The change removes components which are now
included more broadly in the definition of capacity expanding improvement. The change removes
regulatory standards which are repeated elsewhere in the municipal code.
7) Revise the requirements for street impact fees to:
a) Retitle the section so the title is consistent with the terms used throughout the balance of the
ordinance.
b) direct that the transportation impact fee fund may receive and hold reimbursements.
c) make terms consistent with new definitions by replacing capacity adding with capacity expanding.
d) add a paragraph addressing the process to create, impose, and administer impact fee reimbursement areas.
e) renumber as necessary.
8) Revise the requirements for fire/EMS impact fees to:
a) direct that the fire/EMS impact fee fund may receive and hold reimbursements.
b) make restrictions of use of impact fees terms consistent with new definitions by specifically limiting use to capacity expanding projects.
c) add a paragraph addressing the process to create, impose, and administer impact fee
reimbursement areas.
d) renumber as necessary.
329
3
9) Revise the requirements for water impact fees to:
a) direct that the water impact fee fund may receive and hold reimbursements.
b) make restrictions of use of impact fees terms consistent with new definitions by specifically
limiting use to capacity expanding projects.
c) add a paragraph addressing the process to create, impose, and administer impact fee reimbursement areas.
d) renumber as necessary.
10) Revise the requirements for wastewater impact fees to:
a) direct that the wastewater impact fee fund may receive and hold reimbursements.
b) make restrictions of use of impact fees terms consistent with new definitions by specifically limiting use to capacity expanding projects.
c) add a paragraph addressing the process to create, impose, and administer impact fee
reimbursement areas.
d) renumber as necessary.
11-14) These sections are part of the technical ordinance adoption process and do not amend the municipal code.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None determined at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Provisionally adopt Ordinance 1936 as presented and recommended. 2) Do not adopt the ordinance.
3) Direct revisions to the ordinance prior to final adoption.
4) Continue the public hearing
FISCAL EFFECTS: None
Attachments: Ordinance 1936
Impact Fee Advisory Committee minutes
Report compiled on February 17, 2016
330
Page 1 of 15
ORDINANCE NO. 1936
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6, DIVISION 9 IMPACT FEES.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Legislative Findings:
1. The City of Bozeman continues to experience continued growth resulting in an increasing
in demand for infrastructure improvements.
2. Private development does not always occur in a predictable and most efficient location
and timeliness.
3. Over-reliance on private development to determine where to expand infrastructure
systems has resulted in water, wastewater, and transportation improvements with service
gaps and inefficiencies.
4. The City’s long range facility plans identify certain transportation, water, sewer, and
fire/EMS improvements that are necessary to complete the infrastructure systems. Doing
so when determined to be necessary by the City rather than relying on timing of private
development will improve service to residents as well as expand the capacity of the
infrastructure system.
5. Completion of public infrastructure projects which close gaps in infrastructure networks
will provide substantially improved service capacity benefits.
6. The City considers that in some circumstances it is more cost effective for all users of
public infrastructure, including payers of impact fees, if the City installs certain public
infrastructure in advance of development.
331
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 2 of 15
7. The City has a leadership role in closing service gaps to maximize the cost and service
efficiency of the water system, wastewater system, fire protection and emergency
medical service system, and the transportation network.
8. In 2015, the City adopted an arterial and collector district to fund work on the
transportation system for construction of transportation projects which are not impact fee
eligible.
9. In December of 2016, the City Commission adopted a capital improvement program to
coordinate impact fees and other transportation funds to maximize benefit and efficiency
in providing services.
10. The City’s water and sewer utilities, general fund, or other revenues may be coordinated
with impact fees to maximize benefit and efficiency in providing services.
11. When the City, in advance of development, installs work that meets the definition of
project related improvements it is appropriate that the adjacent development, if it occurs
within a certain timeframe, reimburse the City for project related work
Section 2
Section 2.06.1600 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section 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.
332
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 3 of 15
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.
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 adopted impact fee studies 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 the entire city and all properties connected to the city water system
333
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 4 of 15
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. To meet the needs of new development the City may construct capacity expanding capital improvements prior to development of adjacent properties. This may include the
construction of capacity expanding infrastructure of a nature and in a location that may
require such improvements to be deemed project related improvements at the time of
the development of such adjacent properties. The City Commission finds that under certain conditions it is fair and reasonable that the costs of a project related improvement that have been paid by the city prior to development of certain properties
should be reimbursed at the time of development of those properties.
17 18. 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 19. 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.
Section 3
Section 2.06.1610 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
Sec. 2.06.1610. - Authority and applicability.
334
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 5 of 15
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.
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.
F. The provisions of this division related to the establishment of transportation, fire/EMS,
water, and sewer reimbursement districts applies to properties located outside the city that are deemed to benefit from capacity expansion.
Section 4
Section 2.06.1620.F of the Bozeman Municipal Code be added to read:
Sec. 2.06.1620. - Intent.
F. Any funds paid pursuant to a reimbursement district established in this division do not
replace or reduce any impact fees imposed upon development.
Section 5
Section 2.06.1630 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that the following paragraph
is inserted in alphabetical order with the remaining sections to be renumbered accordingly:
2. “Capacity expanding capital improvements” means improvements that increase the
functional capacity of the City’s water system, wastewater system, fire protection and
emergency medical service system, or transportation system. This term may include capital
improvements that if constructed in advance of development may meet the definition of
“project related improvements” when development of adjacent property occurs.
335
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 6 of 15
Section 6
Section 2.06.1630 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows with all other sections remaining unchanged:
16 15. "Transportation system" means existing or planned capacity-adding improvements to
collectors or arterial roads of three lanes or more and, which are either included [on the]
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 appurtenant
to such roads. 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.
Section 7
Retitle Section 2.06.1640 and paragraphs D through G of the Bozeman Municipal Code be
amended so that such section shall read as follows:
Sec. 2.06.1640. - Street Transportation impact fees.
D. Transportation impact fee funds.
1. A single transportation impact fee fund is created and such fund shall must be
maintained in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall may contain only those transportation impact fees collected pursuant to
this division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts.
3. Such fund may also contain reimbursements collected pursuant to 2.06.1640.F.
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 expanding 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
336
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 7 of 15
4. May not be used for:
a. Operations or maintenance purposes;
b. To correct existing deficiencies; or
c. For bicycle or pedestrian facilities unless built in conjunction with and included in
a capacity-adding transportation system facility, otherwise eligible for impact fee
funding.
F. When the commission determines to fund capacity expanding capital improvements to the transportation system and the commission determines prior to expenditure of funds for such improvements that, upon future development, such improvements may be considered project
related improvements the commission may by resolution create a transportation impact fee
reimbursement district. The resolution creating the district must:
1. identify the specific transportation system improvements that will be subject to reimbursement if determined at a later date to be a project related improvement;
2. identify the real property to be included in such district wherein future development
may be required to provide reimbursement;
3. identify the rationale for the commission’s determination that such improvements
may be considered in the future to be project related improvements;
4. identify the estimated amount of repayment that will be due from each property, the methodology for adjusting the estimated amount to the actual costs of construction,
and the methodology for determining such amount;
5. identify whether the amount of repayment will account for the time value of the
initial expenditure, and if so, describe the calculation methodology;
6. identify the period of time the reimbursement district will exist; and
7. identify the required timing of payment of the reimbursement which may be upon
annexation or prior to final subdivision or site plan approval, and in no case later
than issuance of a building permit.
Prior to adoption of a resolution creating the reimbursement district, the city must provide written notice to owners of real property within the proposed district.
FG. 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;
337
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 8 of 15
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 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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria
set forth in subsection F.1 G.1 and G.2 of this section.
Section 8
Section 2.06.1650.D through G of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section
shall read as follows:
Sec. 2.06.1650. - Fire protection and emergency medical service impact fees.
D. Fire protection/EMS impact fee funds.
1. A single fire protection/EMS impact fee fund is created and such fund shall must be maintained in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall may 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.
3. Such fund may also contain reimbursements collected pursuant to 2.06.1650.F.
E. Use of fire protection/EMS impact fee funds. The moneys in the fire protection/EMS impact
fee fund shall be used only:
338
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 9 of 15
1. To acquire or construct capacity expanding 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. When the commission determines to fund capacity expanding capital improvements to the fire protection/EMS system and the commission determines prior to expenditure of funds for such improvements that, upon future development, such improvements may be considered
project related improvements the commission may by resolution create a fire
protection/EMS impact fee reimbursement district. The resolution creating the district must:
1. identify the specific fire protection/EMS improvements that will be subject to reimbursement if determined at a later date to be a project related improvement;
2. identify the real property to be included in such district wherein future development
may be required to provide reimbursement;
3. identify the rationale for the commission’s determination that such improvements
may be considered in the future to be project related improvements;
4. identify the estimated amount of repayment that will be due from each property, the methodology for adjusting the estimated amount to the actual costs of construction,
and the methodology for determining such amount;
5. identify whether the amount of repayment will account for the time value of the
initial expenditure, and if so, describe the calculation methodology;
6. identify the period of time the reimbursement district will exist; and
7. identify the required timing of payment of the reimbursement which may be upon
annexation or prior to final subdivision or site plan approval, and in no case later
than issuance of a building permit.
Prior to adoption of a resolution creating the reimbursement district, the city must provide written notice to owners of real property within the proposed district.
FG. Exemptions from fire protection/EMS impact fee.
1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the fire
protection/EMS impact fee:
a. Reconstruction 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.
339
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 10 of 15
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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection F.1 G.1 and G.2 of this section.
Section 9
Section 2.06.1660.D through G of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section
shall read as follows:
Sec. 2.06.1660. - Water impact fees.
D. Water impact fee funds.
1. A single water impact fee fund is created and such fund shall must be maintained in an
interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall may contain only those water impact fees collected pursuant to this
division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts.
3. Such fund may also contain reimbursements collected pursuant to 2.06.1660.F.
E. Use of water impact fee funds. The moneys in the water impact fee fund shall be used only:
1. To acquire or construct capacity expanding 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. When the commission determines to fund capacity expanding capital improvements to the
water system and the commission determines prior to expenditure of funds for such
improvements that, upon future development, such improvements may be considered project
related improvements the commission may by resolution create a water impact fee reimbursement district. The resolution creating the district must:
1. identify the specific water improvements that will be subject to reimbursement if
determined at a later date to be a project related improvement;
2. identify the real property to be included in such district wherein future development
may be required to provide reimbursement;
340
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 11 of 15
3. identify the rationale for the commission’s determination that such improvements
may be considered in the future to be project related improvements;
4. identify the estimated amount of repayment that will be due from each property, the methodology for adjusting the estimated amount to the actual costs of construction,
and the methodology for determining such amount;
5. identify whether the amount of repayment will account for the time value of the
initial expenditure, and if so, describe the calculation methodology;
6. identify the period of time the reimbursement district will exist; and
7. identify the required timing of payment of the reimbursement which may be upon
annexation or prior to final subdivision or site plan approval, and in no case later
than issuance of a building permit.
Prior to adoption of a resolution creating the reimbursement district, the city must provide written notice to owners of real property within the proposed district.
FG. 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;
b. Replacement of a nonresidential building or structure of the same size that does
not require an additional or larger water meter;
c. 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 shall determine the validity of any claims for exemption pursuant to the criteria
set forth in subsections F.1 G.1 and G.2 of this section.
Section 10
Section 2.06.1670.D through G of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section
shall read as follows:
Sec. 2.06.1670. - Wastewater impact fees.
D. Wastewater impact fee funds.
341
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 12 of 15
1. A single wastewater impact fee fund is created and such fund shall must be maintained
in an interest bearing account.
2. Such fund shall may contain only those wastewater impact fees collected pursuant to this division and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts.
3. Such fund may also contain reimbursements collected pursuant to 2.06.1670.F.
E. Use of wastewater impact fee funds. The moneys in the wastewater impact fee fund shall be used only:
1. To acquire or construct capacity expanding 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. When the commission determines to fund capacity expanding capital improvements to the
wastewater system and the commission determines prior to expenditure of funds for such
improvements that, upon future development, such improvements may be considered project
related improvements the commission may by resolution create a wastewater impact fee reimbursement district. The resolution creating the district must:
1. identify the specific wastewater improvements that will be subject to reimbursement if
determined at a later date to be a project related improvement;
2. identify the real property to be included in such district wherein future development may
be required to provide reimbursement;
3. identify the rationale for the commission’s determination that such improvements may be considered in the future to be project related improvements;
4. identify the estimated amount of repayment that will be due from each property, the
methodology for adjusting the estimated amount to the actual costs of construction, and
the methodology for determining such amount;
5. identify whether the amount of repayment will account for the time value of the initial
expenditure, and if so, describe the calculation methodology;
6. identify the period of time the reimbursement district will exist; and
7. identify the required timing of payment of the reimbursement which may be upon
annexation or prior to final subdivision or site plan approval, and in no case later than issuance of a building permit.
Prior to adoption of a resolution creating the reimbursement district, the city must provide
written notice to owners of real property within the proposed district.
FG. Exemptions from wastewater impact fees.
342
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 13 of 15
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;
c. The 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 shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria
set forth in subsection F.1 G.1 and G.2 of this section.
Section 11
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 12
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.
343
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 14 of 15
Section 13
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 14
Codification.
This Ordinance shall be codified as set forth in Section 2-10.
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 held on the________ day of __________2016.
____________________________________ CARSON TAYLOR Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk
344
Ordinance No. 1936, Amendment to Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9 Impact Fees - DRAFT
Page 15 of 15
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 ___________ 2016. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 2016.
_________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
STACY ULMEN, CMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney
345
Impact Fee Advisory Committee
Thursday, February 11, 2016 6:00pm, City Commission chambers, City
Hall– 121 N. Rouse Ave.
A.
06:05:50 PM Call meeting to order
Chris Saunders - Present
Anna Rosenberry - Present
George Thompson – Present
James Nicholson - Present
Rob Evans - Present
Rick Hixson - Present
Chris Mehl – Present
B. 06:06:24 PM Changes to the Agenda
C. 06:06:31 PM Approve minutes from 12/3/2015 – Minutes unanimously
approved
D. 06:07:05 PM Public Comment – No public comment
E. 06:07:09 PM Action Items
1. 06:07:12 PM Ordinance 1936
Review and recommendation to the City Commission on Ordinance 1936 amending Chapter 2, Article 6,
Division 9, Impact Fees to revise definitions, authorize reimbursement districts, and establish
procedures for reimbursement district.
Chris Saunders begins discussion on the ordinance.
06:12:42 PM Chris Saunders finishes presentation and opens up for questions from the board.
06:12:51 PM Mr. Nicholson questions the section regarding creating reimbursement districts and the
ability for the commission to create a district to fill in missing pieces. Mr. Saunders responds to his
346
question in detail. Board questions what an example of this would be. Mr. Saunders responds with an
example. Board discusses examples of when the City may develop these districts and that many of these
districts would be evaluated on a case by case basis.
06:16:10 PM Rick Hixson comments that infill is a priority and he feels this program would be beneficial
to encouraging developers to develop with regards to infill instead of extending out to the west.
06:18:12 PM Rob Evans states that he feels this is implied equity for a property – that by installing the
infrastructure in advance, and guaranteeing that the City will be reimbursed in the future, it is incentive
for the home owner because the cost is fixed and the work has been done.
06:19:28 PM Rob Evans states that he does not like that some property owners may not have to pay it
back eventually. He said it may be hard for the public to accept.
06:20:08 PM Anna Rosenberry clarifies that it is her understanding that there will always be a local
share, the ordinance was just leaving flexibility for the local share to come from another source.
Discussion between Anna Rosenberry and Rob Evans regarding the requirement for the funds to be
reimbursed in the future.
06:21:15 PM Chris Saunders agrees that yes, there will be a collection, but the means for collecting may
be different on a case by case basis.
06:21:37 PM Mr. Nicholson states that perhaps that language should be adjusted. Mr. Hixson notes that
“may” is not a bad word and just means that we won’t have to adjust it in the future. Mr. Saunders
states that if the board agrees, they can add wording to make it clear that it is mandatory to collect the
funds. Mr. Evans makes a suggestion.
06:22:53 PM Mr. Nicholson questions if City staff could offer insight on to why it was worded as it is –
assuming that the City attorney likely was involved.
06:23:03 PM Mrs. Rosenberry responds with some insight as to why the word may be as it is. She states
that when the improvements are happening, there is no project, so these districts will allow an Impact
Fee construction project in the future be responsible for repayment.
06:24:21 PM Mr. Thompson expresses concerns regarding payback from adjacent project owners – but
appreciates that we will be getting infrastructure in place for others to use while we are waiting on
development to occur. He is concerned with the cost increase for projects over time.
06:26:06 PM Rob Evans questions if for those areas that pay back at a later date, if they will charge rate
at the time the improvements were made, the rate plus interest, or current costs. Board discusses what
is legal and what is in the community’s interest.
06:27:20 PM Chris Saunders discusses the various methods that repayment could be recalculated.
06:28:28 PM Rob Evans indicates that this is designed to be an incentive to connect areas within the
city, not to spread to the west of town and this should be an incentive for people to develop infill.
347
06:28:52 PM Chris Saunders states that with an ordinance like this, they try to set the framework up
front and leave it flexible enough to evaluate each project on a case by case basis.
06:29:45 PM George Thompson questions what will happen for the county parcels that are within city
limits. Mr. Saunders responds that for individual home lots, they will likely make the improvements at
the time of annexation, but with larger tracts of land, they will likely wait for a site plan. But it will be
determined on a case by case basis. They want to encourage people to come into the city and reduce
the cost burden up front.
06:31:15 PM Mr. Thompson questions how this is different from an SID. Mr. Saunders states that this
does not allow for protest or negotiation. Whereas, with an SID, the community can vote against it.
Anna Rosenberry indicates that with an SID, there is immediate payback of costs. With this program,
there is no money flowing until whatever trigger is made to require repayment.
06:32:36 PM Mr. Nicholson states that he would be comfortable moving this forward as presented, but
including comments regarding getting the impact fee fund reimbursed through projects that were not
typically impact fee projects.
06:33:30 PM Richard Hixson states he does not agree with the local share portion, because there will be
roads that do not provide local access to homes – and he cites examples. He thinks there are plenty of
places were arterials provide no local access. He supports maximum flexibility. He will support moving
this ordinance forward and sees their point of view, but argues that there are cases where there is no
local share.
06:35:34 PM George Thompson comments that there may be a better way of wording it, not using “local
share” – that there should be a community development fund since the community benefits as a whole
from providing streets and sidewalks.
06:36:20 PM Rob Evans states that George Thompson brings up a good point, as currently it applies to
adjacency, not use. If the use will be absorbed by the community at large, then the funding should be
absorbed by some other mechanism than impact fees. He feels funding through impact fees is just the
easy answer and the only answer we have right now.
06:37:35 PM Mr. Thompson stated that he thinks there may be a way to blend a community
development fund, local shares fund, etc. to allow for flexibility. Mr. Evans provides an example where it
is a disadvantage to the adjacent property owners to put a major road behind their home, but that
doesn’t increase access to their property and would ultimately hurt their property value. Mr. Saunders
indicates that is why it is important to look at such on a case by case basis, because there are so many
variables.
06:39:28 PM Mr. Thompson discusses further Mr. Evan’s point about decreasing property value.
06:40:29 PM Mr. Hixson recommends that the city commission adopts ordinance 1936
Second by George Thompson
348
Board unanimously approves.
F. 06:40:59 PM FYI/Discussion
06:41:10 PM Mr. Thompson states that he was appreciative of early notice for the meeting.
G. 06:41:45 PM Adjournment
For more information please contact Alicia Kennedy at akennedy@bozeman.net
This Committee generally meets the 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month as needed at 6:00pm.
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Chuck Winn at 582-3207 (TDD 582-2301).
349