HomeMy WebLinkAboutFiscal Years 2011-2015 Capital Improvements Program, City of Bozeman
City of Bozeman, Montana
Adopted
Capital Improvements
Program
Fiscal Years 2011-2015
City of Bozeman Vehicle Maintenance Shop—Streamline Bus Storage — Joint Facility, 2009
2
3
City of Bozeman, Montana
Adopted
Capital Improvements Program
For Fiscal Years 2011-2015
Adopted during Public Meetings held
March—June 2010
City Commission
Jeff Krauss, Mayor
Sean Becker, Deputy Mayor
Cynthia Andrus, Commissioner
Chris Mehl, Commissioner
Carson Taylor, Commissioner
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director
Stacy Ulmen, City Clerk
4
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION PAGE
City Mission, Vision & Goals 5
2008-2009 Adopted Work Plan 6
Why Adopt a Capital Improvement Plan? 8
CIP Process 8
SUMMARIES
Financial Summary—ALL FUNDS 12
FUND PLANS—Summaries and Project Descriptions
General Fund 13
Street Maintenance 164
Building Inspection 180
Tree Maintenance (Forestry) 185
Fire Equipment & Capital Replacement Fund 192
Water 198
Wastewater 216
Vehicle Maintenance 233
Street Impact Fee 237
Fire Impact Fee 254
Water Impact Fee 262
Wastewater Impact Fee 273
Solid Waste—Collection 282
5
CITY OF BOZEMAN
Vision, Mission, and Goals
_____________________________________________________________________
Vision: Bozeman, Montana:
The most livable place.
Mission: To enhance the quality of life through excellence in public service.
Goals:
1. Encourage and promote opportunities for citizenship.
2. Provide and communicate quality customer service.
3. Build a strong team of staff, elected officials and citizens.
4. Anticipate future service demands and resource
deficiencies and be proactive in addressing them.
5. Develop a visually appealing and culturally rich
community.
6. Commit to a strong financial position.
7. Provide excellent and equitable public services which are
responsive to the community within available resources.
6
CITY OF BOZEMAN
2008-2009 Adopted Work Plan—Ongoing Priorities
___________________________________________________________________________
1. Reconstruct College Street from 11th west to Main Street
2. Reconstruct Kagy Boulevard from Wilson west to 19th
3. Complete the first phase of the Story Mansion’s interior restoration
4. Adopt updated 20/20 Plan
5. Break ground on Phase I of the Water Reclamation Plant (Wastewater Treatment Plant)
expansion ($43 – $54 million)
6. Complete City Hall relocation on time and within budget and finalize sale of the current site
7. Adopt updated Transportation Plan in summer 2009
8. Complete testing and select the engineering team to design the new Water Treatment
Plant
9. Select design team for Mystic Dam
10. Watershed management – improve safety and access to Hyalite Canyon to include guard
rails and public restrooms
11. Coordinate planning and infrastructure needs with City, County, School District and MSU.
12. Improve our town-gown relationship by encouraging interaction between appropriate city
and university personnel to prevent neighborhood conflicts between students and home-
owners.
13. Adopt a Climate Action Plan consistent with the principles outlined in the Mayor’s Climate
Protection Agreement. Implement the recommendations reaching 20% of the carbon re-
duction goal by December 2009.
14. Improve Bozeman as a bike friendly environment, stripe all possible bike lanes and in-
crease street sweeping.
15. Explore sources of funding for Park Maintenance and operation.
7
CITY OF BOZEMAN
2008-2009 Adopted Work Plan—New Initiatives
__________________________________________________________
1. Build a new police and municipal court facility: Select and purchase a site; Select architect
and complete design; Educate the community on the need for bond approval; Award bids for
the construction.
2. 2009 legislative session - expand the ability for local elected officials and citizens to make
decisions regarding:
• Tax reform - lead the discussion on meaningful tax reforms resulting in lower
property taxes (local option tourist tax; or general sales tax; or local option ac-
commodations tax)
• Increasing the ½ inflation adjustment to be equal to inflation
3. Amend Gaming Ordinance
4. Adopt, implement and coordinate with the USFS, a Forestry Management Plan for the City’s
sections of land consistent with the Gallatin NFS Watershed Management Plan protecting the
health of Bozeman’s watershed
5. Develop a long term plan for the Streamline bus system
8
Why Adopt a Capital Improvements Program (CIP)?
One of the primary responsibilities of local government is to properly preserve,
maintain, and improve a community’s stock of buildings, roads, parks, water and sewer
lines, and equipment. Planning for these capital improvements is a matter of prudent fi-
nancial management, as well as sound development practice. In a rapidly growing com-
munity, such as ours, the need for expanded public facilities and services is at its peak. A
carefully developed CIP can plan for these expansions and communicate our intent to citi-
zens and the development community.
The Charter’s CIP Requirements
In Section 5.06 of the recently adopted City Charter, the City Manager is responsi-
ble for preparing and submitting a multi-year capital program to the City Commission no
later than December 15 for the ensuing fiscal year. The plan must be revised and ex-
tended each year with regard to projects not yet completed. This plan is required to in-
clude:
1. A clear general summary of contents;
2. Identification of the long-term goals of the community;
3. A list of all capital improvements and other capital expenditures which are pro-
posed to be undertaken during the fiscal years next ensuing, with appropriate supporting
information as to the necessity for each;
4. Cost estimates and recommended time schedules for each improvement or other
capital expenditure;
5. Method of financing upon which each capital expenditure is to be reliant;
6. The estimated annual cost of operating and maintaining the facilities to be con-
structed or acquired;
7. A commentary on how the plan addresses the sustainability of the community or
region of which it is a part; and
8. Methods to measure outcomes and performance of the capital plan related to
the long-term goals of the community.
City’s CIP Process—Calendar
September: Departments make requests for new CIP items.
Staff reviews existing CIP projects and makes note of any changes.
9
October: City Manager and staff meet to review new and existing projects;
modify any timing, cost or revenue estimates.
Impact Fee Advisory Committee receives and reviews proposed
Impact Fee CIP schedules and forwards comments to City Com
mission.
December: City Manager presents Draft CIP to City Commission prior to
December 15th.
January: City Commission holds public hearings, takes public comment
and adopts CIP Plan for ensuing fiscal year.
May: Adopted CIP is integrated into City Manager’s Recommended
Budget for ensuing fiscal year.
August: Commission, via adopting a final budget, appropriates dollars for
CIP projects for the fiscal year.
Definition of Capital Improvement:
The CIP Plan covers any expenditure $10,000 or greater, that results in the acquisition
of an asset with a useful life of 1 year or more.
Our Current Facilities and their Condition:
The City has recently completed a number of long-range (20 year) facility plans:
• Water Treatment & Distribution Facilities,
• Wastewater Collection & Treatment Facilities, and
• Fire Station, Equipment & Staffing.
• Police Station & Staffing
Over the course of the next year, the Transportation Plan is expected to be completed.
These studies examine the condition and placement of existing facilities, area growth pro-
jections and pattern, regulatory changes, and possible funding mechanisms. The plans
analyze various alternatives and make recommendations for implementation.
Level of Service (LOS) Standards
Most of the City’s long range plans establish level of service standards. These standards
are critical to planning for the needs of future residents of the city. In some cases, such as
water quality or wastewater discharge, these standards are often established or guided by
outside regulating bodies. The CIP does not frequently reference specific LOS, but the un-
10
derlying facility and staffing plans will contain detailed discussions of levels of service, and
how the city should address increasing or decreasing levels of service through infrastruc-
ture and staffing recommendations.
Policies for the Physical Development of our Community
The City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) is a combination of both Subdivision and
Zoning regulations for development within the City. The Ordinance is subject to amend-
ment by the Commission, after public notices and hearings are held. The UDO applies to
both private and city-owned projects, and is available online at http://www.bozeman.net/
planning/unified_development_ordinance.aspx.
Our Community’s Ability to Pay for Planned Improvements
In a community with relatively high cost of living, the ability of citizens to afford the
needed utility rate, fee, and assessment levels is of concern. At the same time, the City
strives to keep existing facilities properly maintained — and not pass deferred maintenance
costs and problems on to future generations.
The City has recently adopted on Utility Rate Studies for Water, and Wastewater ser-
vices. These studies give us an indication of how and when utility rates must be increased
to pay for the needed water and wastewater system improvements.
In conjunction with the Utility Rate Studies, we are also undergoing/have completed
review of our existing Water, Wastewater, Street and Fire Impact Fee levels. This review
is required by state law and has not been done since the City implemented impact fees in
1995. This review will indicate what changes, if any, in the fee levels are necessary to
fund future system capacity expansion. The Water, Wastewater and Street studies are
complete, while the Fire study is still underway.
For General Fund (Administration, Parks, Recreation, Library, Police and Fire) facilities
and Street construction, the City does not have the ability to easily increase tax levels for
funding. Any tax levy increase must be approved by the City’s voters, and maximum debt
levels are established by state law.
In November 2007, the city of Bozeman voters approved a 4 mill perpetual levy to es-
tablish a Fire Equipment and Capital Replacement fund. This fund has been added to the
CIP plan, and will address our need to plan for and replace fire engines, our ladder truck,
and other capital improvements to fire stations. At the same time, the voters also ap-
proved a perpetual levy for staffing and equipping additional police officers. In that levy,
$74,560 in vehicle replacements per year were approved; it is intended to purchase one
patrol vehicle and one detective vehicle, although as needs change, a different mix vehicle
mix may be warranted.
It is anticipated that levy increases for the police station, as well as an aquatics center,
11
will be proposed in the future, with their adoption critical to our plans to expand our facili-
ties.
The City does have a couple outside sources of funding available for street construction;
State Urban Funds and Special Improvement District Assessments. State Urban Funds are
available for use on Urban Routes within the City. Special Improvement District Assess-
ments can be levied on property owners within an area whose property directly benefits
from the improvements being built.
~~~~~~~~~
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
L
A
N
ALL
F
U
N
D
S
-
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
FY
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
FY
1
4
F
Y
1
5
TO
T
A
LUNSCHEDULED
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
84
0
,
5
0
0
$
1,
5
0
9
,
2
4
0
$
1,
4
2
1
,
6
1
0
$
1,
1
0
0
,
6
0
0
$
18
,
7
9
7
,
6
9
4
$
23
,
6
6
9
,
6
4
4
$
24,169,197
ST
R
E
E
T
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
40
5
,
9
5
6
19
0
,
0
0
0
45
2
,
7
2
3
34
0
,
3
8
3
20
0
,
0
0
0
1,
5
8
9
,
0
6
2
$
2,308,000
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
‐
‐
32
,
6
2
1
67
,
8
5
2
35
,
2
8
3
135,756
$
146,777
TR
E
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
(
F
O
R
E
S
T
R
Y
)
‐
67
,
4
9
2
‐
26
,
0
0
0
‐
93,492
$
‐
FI
R
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
&
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
51
0
,
0
0
0
‐
72
0
,
0
0
0
‐
46
2
,
0
9
4
1,
6
9
2
,
0
9
4
$
‐
WA
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
6,
5
4
8
,
2
4
7
10
,
1
4
0
,
0
7
2
10
,
9
0
0
,
8
5
4
90
,
0
0
0
1,
2
1
0
,
0
0
0
28
,
8
8
9
,
1
7
3
$
100,000
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
14
,
2
5
1
,
6
8
0
1,
2
0
8
,
2
1
8
34
3
,
0
9
4
1,
0
4
5
,
0
0
0
35
2
,
0
0
0
17
,
1
9
9
,
9
9
3
$
112,000
VE
H
I
C
L
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
$
‐
ST
R
E
E
T
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
35
0
,
0
0
0
85
0
,
0
0
0
6,
2
6
0
,
0
0
0
60
0
,
0
0
0
5,
6
0
0
,
0
0
0
13
,
6
6
0
,
0
0
0
$
27,740,000
FI
R
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
6
,
8
5
0
18
8
,
7
1
9
19
2
,
4
9
3
938,061
$
3,568,753
WA
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
70
0
,
0
0
0
5,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
31
8
,
5
6
7
32
4
,
9
3
5
9,
1
4
3
,
5
0
2
$
46,880,000
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
30
0
,
0
0
0
30
3
,
0
0
0
30
6
,
0
3
0
31
2
,
1
5
1
31
8
,
3
9
4
1,
5
3
9
,
5
7
4
$
8,140,368
SO
L
I
D
W
A
S
T
E
-
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N
13
8
,
5
0
0
37
7
,
4
7
8
40
4
,
9
5
1
41
7
,
6
4
0
13
8
,
0
4
3
1,
4
7
6
,
6
1
2
$
TO
T
A
L
A
L
L
F
U
N
D
S
24
,
2
2
9
,
8
8
3
19
,
8
3
0
,
5
0
0
23
,
8
2
8
,
7
3
3
4,
5
0
6
,
9
1
2
27
,
6
3
0
,
9
3
5
10
0
,
0
2
6
,
9
6
3
113,165,095
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
C
a
s
h
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
$
-
$
6
0
2
,
4
9
6
$
25
3
,
6
1
9
$
15
,
5
8
1
$
122,223$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
58
6
,
3
6
0
1,
4
4
2
,
9
9
6
1,
1
6
0
,
3
6
4
1,
1
8
3
,
5
7
1
1,
2
0
7
,
2
4
2
19,223,387
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
58
6
,
3
6
0
84
0
,
5
0
0
1,
5
0
9
,
2
4
0
1,
4
2
1
,
6
1
0
1,
1
0
0
,
6
0
0
18,797,694
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
C
a
s
h
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
$
6
0
2
,
4
9
6
$
25
3
,
6
1
9
$
15
,
5
8
1
$
12
2
,
2
2
3
$
547,916$ Page 1
13
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
CI
P
R
A
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
Fr
o
m
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
Y
e
a
r
(
s
)
3%
5%
5%
5%5%
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
3%
2%
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
3%
5%
5%
5%
5%5%Page 2
14
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
CI
P
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
58
6
,
3
6
0
$
1,
0
5
1
,
7
7
4
$
1,
1
6
0
,
3
6
4
$
1,
1
8
3
,
5
7
1
$
1,
2
0
7
,
2
4
2
$
1,231,387
$
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
B
o
n
d
I
s
s
u
e
-
P
o
l
i
c
e
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
17,992,000
S
a
l
e
o
f
O
l
d
C
i
t
y
H
a
l
l
R
e
i
m
b
u
r
s
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
S
t
o
r
y
M
a
n
s
i
o
n
C
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
39
1
,
2
2
2
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
58
6
,
3
6
0
$
1
,
4
4
2
,
9
9
6
$
1
,
1
6
0
,
3
6
4
$
1
,
1
8
3
,
5
7
1
$
1
,
2
0
7
,
2
4
2
$
1
9
,
2
2
3
,
3
8
7
$
Page 3
15
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
Re
f
#
Not
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
S
C
O
R
E
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY
1
5
TotalScheduled
GF
-
0
5
3
P
O
L
I
C
E
C
A
R
S
PO
L
I
C
E
63
1
5
6
,
0
0
0
16
2
,
2
4
0
16
8
,
7
3
0
17
5
,
4
7
9
18
2
,
4
9
8
844,946
GF
-
1
1
8
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
55
2
0
4
,
0
0
0
204,000
GF
-
1
2
1
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
2
&
3
F
L
O
O
R
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
5
5
2
5
,
0
0
0
25,000
GF
-
1
2
0
B
O
G
E
R
T
P
O
O
L
F
I
L
T
E
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
51
7
8
,
0
0
0
78,000
GF
-
1
0
6
E
X
C
H
A
N
G
E
C
L
U
S
T
E
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
IT
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
50
5
0
,
0
0
0
50,000
GF
-
0
8
0
R
E
M
O
T
E
C
L
O
S
E
T
S
W
I
T
C
H
A
N
D
R
O
U
T
E
R
R
E
P
L
C
M
T
I
T
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
50
4
0
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
200,000
GF
-
1
1
5
P
A
R
K
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
S
PA
R
K
S
48
2
5
,
0
0
0
26
,
0
0
0
27
,
0
4
0
28
,
1
2
2
60
,
0
0
0
166,162 58,493
GF
-
0
9
9
I
B
M
I
5
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
FI
N
A
N
C
E
47
2
2
,
5
0
0
22,500
GF
-
1
2
2
B
O
G
E
R
T
P
O
O
L
W
H
E
E
L
C
H
A
I
R
L
I
F
T
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
46
1
2
,
0
0
0
12,000
GF
-
0
6
2
S
E
R
V
E
R
A
N
D
P
C
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
IT
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
45
9
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
490,000
GF
-
1
0
3
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
4
2
1
5
,
0
0
0
15
,
0
0
0
15
,
0
0
0
15
,
0
0
0
15
,
0
0
0
75,000
GF
-
0
3
1
P
A
R
K
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
G
R
A
N
T
S
PA
R
K
S
37
7
5
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
375,000
GF
-
0
1
0
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
Y
M
O
W
E
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
35
1
3
,
0
0
0
13
,
0
0
0
13
,
0
0
0
14
,
0
0
0
14
,
0
0
0
67,000
GF
-
0
9
8
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
PA
R
K
S
33
3
5
,
0
0
0
35,000
GF
-
0
5
2
I
N
V
E
S
T
I
G
A
T
I
V
E
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
S
PO
L
I
C
E
63
28
,
0
0
0
29
,
1
2
0
31
,
4
9
6
88,616
GF
-
0
5
5
B
O
G
E
R
T
P
O
O
L
R
E
P
A
I
R
S
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
57
38
2
,
0
0
0
382,000
GF
-
1
0
2
L
I
N
D
L
E
Y
C
E
N
T
E
R
D
E
C
K
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
51
34
,
0
0
0
34,000
GF
-
1
2
9
L
I
N
D
L
E
Y
C
E
N
T
E
R
B
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
51
21
,
0
0
0
21,000
GF
-
1
3
0
C
I
T
Y
H
A
L
L
P
H
2
S
I
T
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
4
5
35
,
0
0
0
35,000
GF
-
0
3
0
A
R
T
I
C
U
L
A
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
PA
R
K
S
43
11
0
,
0
0
0
110,000
Ne
w
S
E
N
I
O
R
C
E
N
T
E
R
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
4
2
30
,
0
0
0
30,000
GF
-
0
6
5
A
E
R
I
A
L
P
H
O
T
O
G
R
A
P
H
Y
IT
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
37
95
,
0
0
0
95,000
GF
-
0
9
2
P
L
A
Y
G
R
O
U
N
D
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
S
PA
R
K
S
37
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
150,000
Ne
w
S
H
O
P
S
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
R
E
R
O
O
F
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
5
34
,
0
0
0
34,000
GF
-
1
1
6
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
Y
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
S
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
34
42
,
5
0
0
26
,
0
0
0
68,500
GF
-
1
0
0
4
x
4
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
W
I
T
H
B
U
C
K
E
T
PA
R
K
S
33
75
,
0
0
0
75,000
GF
-
0
3
4
L
A
R
G
E
D
E
C
K
L
A
W
N
M
O
W
E
R
PA
R
K
S
33
48
,
0
0
0
-
48
,
0
0
0
96,000
Ne
w
C
O
L
U
M
B
A
R
I
U
M
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
32
40
,
0
0
0
40,000
Ne
w
4
X
4
4
W
H
E
E
L
E
R
W
I
T
H
P
L
O
W
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
32
10
,
5
0
0
10,500
GF
-
0
6
7
P
R
O
F
E
S
S
I
O
N
A
L
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
L
I
G
H
T
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
0
28
,
0
0
0
28,000 Page 4
16
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
Re
f
#
Not
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
S
C
O
R
E
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY
1
5
TotalScheduled
Ne
w
S
E
N
I
O
R
C
E
N
T
E
R
F
L
O
O
R
I
N
G
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
0
15
,
0
0
0
15,000
GF
-
0
5
0
P
O
L
I
C
E
A
N
D
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
C
O
U
R
T
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
PO
L
I
C
E
/
C
O
U
R
T
65
50
0
,
0
0
0
50
0
,
0
0
0
17
,
9
9
2
,
0
0
0
18,992,000
Ne
w
S
H
O
P
S
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
5
2
32
,
7
2
0
32,720
GF
-
0
7
9
N
E
T
W
O
R
K
C
O
R
E
S
W
I
T
C
H
E
S
IT
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
50
15
0
,
0
0
0
150,000
NE
W
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
A
Q
U
A
T
I
C
A
N
D
R
E
C
C
E
N
T
E
R
F
E
A
S
.
S
T
U
D
Y
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
43
65
,
0
0
0
65,000
GF
-
0
8
3
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
Y
B
A
C
K
H
O
E
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
42
11
0
,
0
0
0
110,000
GF
-
0
6
4
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
35
20
,
0
0
0
20,000
GF
-
1
0
4
E
N
E
R
G
Y
U
P
G
R
A
D
E
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
4
7
30
,
0
0
0
30
,
0
0
0
60,000
GF
-
0
4
8
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G
C
O
P
Y
M
A
C
H
I
N
E
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
37
25
,
0
0
0
25,000
GF
-
0
5
1
A
N
I
M
A
L
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
PO
L
I
C
E
60
27
,
7
0
0
27,700
NE
W
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
P
O
O
L
F
I
L
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
45
18
5
,
0
0
0
185,000
Ne
w
C
I
T
Y
H
A
L
L
P
H
3
S
I
T
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
8
45
,
0
0
0
45,000
GF
-
0
0
8
E
X
P
A
N
D
CU
R
R
E
N
T
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
Y
O
F
F
I
C
E
CE
M
E
T
E
R
Y
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
25
- 63,600
Ne
w
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
R
E
R
O
O
F
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
4
9
- 141,508
Ne
w
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
8
- 69,200
Ne
w
P
R
O
F
E
S
S
I
O
N
A
L
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
R
E
R
O
O
F
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
4
- 44,000
GF
-
0
0
1
P
R
O
F
E
S
S
I
O
N
A
L
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
E
L
E
V
A
T
O
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
3
3
- 65,600
Ne
w
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
S
T
A
I
R
A
N
D
E
L
E
V
A
T
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
2
5
- 602,616
Ne
w
S
T
O
R
Y
M
A
N
S
I
O
N
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
R
E
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
2
&
3
F
L
R
S
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
1
5
- 128,680
GF
-
0
7
4
P
U
B
L
I
C
A
D
D
R
E
S
S
S
Y
S
T
E
M
LIB
R
A
R
Y
27
- 31,000
GF
-
1
0
9
F
I
L
M
A
N
D
F
I
C
H
E
S
C
A
N
N
E
R
LIB
R
A
R
Y
20
- 15,500
Ne
w
P
A
R
K
S
B
A
R
N
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
PA
R
K
S
39
- UNKNOWN
GF
-
0
8
4
P
A
R
K
S
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
U
P
G
R
A
D
E
S
PA
R
K
S
37
- 675,000
GF
-
1
1
1
E
A
S
T
G
A
L
L
A
T
I
N
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
R
E
P
A
I
R
S
PA
R
K
S
28
- 25,000
Ne
w
L
I
N
D
L
E
Y
P
A
R
K
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
PA
R
K
S
28
- 100,000
Ne
w
S
O
F
T
B
A
L
L
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
PA
R
K
S
28
- 110,000
GF
-
1
0
8
P
A
R
K
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
S
PA
R
K
S
27
- 182,000
GF
-1
1
2
R
O
S
E
P
A
R
K
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
PA
R
K
S
25
- 85,000
Ne
w
B
M
X
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
PA
R
K
S
25
- 85,000 Page 5
17
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
GE
N
E
R
A
L
F
U
N
D
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
Re
f
#
Not
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
S
C
O
R
E
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY
1
5
TotalScheduled
Ne
w
E
A
S
T
G
A
L
L
A
T
I
N
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
PA
R
K
S
25
- 60,000
Ne
w
B
E
A
L
L
P
A
R
K
B
A
S
K
E
T
B
A
L
L
C
O
U
R
T
S
PA
R
K
S
23
- 18,000
PW
-
0
1
S
H
O
P
S
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
PA
R
K
S
- UNKNOWN
NE
W
B
E
A
L
L
P
A
R
K
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
55
- UNKNOWN
GF
-
1
1
9
B
O
G
E
R
T
P
O
O
L
A
U
T
O
M
A
T
E
D
C
H
E
M
I
C
A
L
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
L
E
R
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
55
- 12,000
GF
-
1
1
7
B
O
G
E
R
T
P
O
O
L
H
E
A
T
E
R
&
H
O
T
W
A
T
E
R
H
E
A
T
E
R
S
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
55
- 197,000
GF
-
0
5
6
D
E
S
I
G
N
&
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
C
E
N
T
E
R
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
44
- 21,000,000
NE
W
L
I
N
D
L
E
Y
C
E
N
T
E
R
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
R
E
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
50
- 42,000
GF
-
1
2
3
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
H
E
A
T
E
X
C
H
A
N
G
E
R
S
(
2
)
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
46
- 80,000
GF
-
1
2
5
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
P
A
I
N
T
I
N
G
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
30
- 35,000
GF
-
1
2
4
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
M
E
N
S
L
O
C
K
E
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
47
- 10,000
NE
W
S
W
I
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
P
O
O
L
G
U
T
T
E
R
T
I
L
E
S
A
N
D
E
D
G
E
T
I
L
E
S
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
47
- 210,000
GF
-
1
2
6
T
R
U
C
K
W
I
T
H
P
L
O
W
RE
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
36
- 23,000
84
0
,
5
0
0
$
1,
5
0
9
,
2
4
0
$
1,
4
2
1
,
6
1
0
$
1,1
0
0
,
6
0
0
$
18
,
7
9
7
,
6
9
4
$
23,669,644$ 24,169,197$ Page 6
18
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Elevator Replacement – Professional Building
Estimated Cost: $65,600
Project Number: General Fund-01 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
The elevator in the Professional Building is a three stop Otis elevator. The
elevator was installed when the second floor was added in 1972. Since
the City purchased the building re-modeling has occurred on both the
main floor and second floor.
The elevator is to the point where many technological improvements have
been made in elevator technology and a change out would yield both
improved service and some reductions in energy savings.
While the elevator is still a safe system, there are some inherent problems
with the operation of the elevator. Of the four elevators owned by the City,
this system experiences the most downtime. One big problem is the
leveling systems and the way the rails and tracks are mounted in the
building. If someone loads the elevator heavy to one side or another the
balance alarm will engage and the elevator has to be reset. A new car
and track system would solve the nuisance trips associated with this
elevator.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to maintain and adjust the elevator operating systems throughout
the year. The current electronics for the building are also a source of
increased vigilance on the system and the electrical components on the
system had to be traced back this year on two occasions to determine the
problems of uneven voltages associated with the system.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
A new car, rail system and control package would add to the reliability of
the elevator operation and the address the accessibility requirements for a
municipal building.
Building energy demands would also benefit as the newer elevator
systems have more energy saving features built into them.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
A new system would reduce some of the maintenance costs currently
associated with this elevator. A new system would also include a number
of technological improvements such as a solid state slow start motor
yielding reduced energy costs associated with the high demand motors
used in elevator systems.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund and Building Inspection Fund
19
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
33
20
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Cemetery- BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS
Estimated Cost:
Unknown at this time.
Project Number: GF08 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
We believe there is a need to expand the current office space at the
cemetery to accommodate staff and the public. The scale and price are
yet to be determined.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue using the current space.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Promote a professional environment for the public
Increased workspace for staff
More energy efficient
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual heating and electrical costs
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 25
21
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
5
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
20
22
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Cemetery- Mower Replacement
Estimated
Cost:
$13,000 FY11-13; $14,000 in FY14-15
Project
Number:
GF10 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
Each Year, FY11-
15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facili
ty
■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Ongoing mower replacement program developed to keep the cemetery
mowers up to date.
Alternatives
Considered:
Keep older mowers for extended periods of time.
Advantages
of Approving
this Project:
Less down time
Decreased repair /maintenance costs
High trade –in value
Increased productivity
Less emissions
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Routine maintenance, oil changes, fuel
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project
Rating:
35
23
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70 35
24
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Parks- MT Articulating Tractor
Estimated
Cost:
$100,000
Project
Number:
GF30 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: New ■ Replacement Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
The replacement of the 1992 MT articulating tractor, which does the bulk of the
sidewalk snow removal for the Parks division.
Alternatives
Considered:
Repair and maintain the 1992 MT as warranted.
Advantages
of Approving
this Project:
Less down time and maintenance/repair costs
A new MT tractor will be able to support more implements
Less emissions and better fuel economy.
Faster more efficient use of time
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Better fuel economy and less emissions= less maintenance costs and operating
costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project
Rating:
43
25
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
35
26
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Parks –Park Improvement Grants
Estimated
Cost:
$75,000 each year
Project
Number:
GF31 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY11-FY15
Purpose: ■ New Replacement Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This request is to contribute each year from the general fund towards improving
park infrastructure through implementation of park master plans. This grant
program is a matching funds program in which the City receives a 1 to 1 match
from the recipient
Alternatives
Considered:
Allocate more money to the PIG program.
Allocate less money to the PIG program.
Allocate no money to the PIG program.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
This matching funds program provides critical infrastructure to the park system
by utilizing the talents of our community members through matching funds,
donations, labor in lieu of and numerous specialized services. All of the above
can be used as a match in this program
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
New infrastructure and facilities bring on increased maintenance and labor
costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project
Rating:
37
27
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
PROST
10.3.2
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
PROST
3.5.1
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
7
PROST
11.3.7
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
37
28
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks – LARGE DECK LAWN MOWER
Estimated Cost: $48,000 each year in FY12 and FY14
Project Number: General Fund – GF34 Date
Scheduled:
FY12 & FY14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Begin the process of replacing the 1998 and 1999 Toro 455 series
mowers, which are difficult to repair due to lack of parts (these mowers are
not manufactured anymore).
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to repair as break downs occur
Replace mowers as they breakdown.
Lease mowers on a 3 - year program.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Proper mowing of sports fields is imperative to safety.
Regular replacement will reduce maintenance costs and decrease the
number of breakdowns we have been experiencing.
Well mowed parks are an important reflection on our City and how it is
perceived by visitors and citizens. Having the right mower to do the job
will ensure well mowed parks.
New mowers will be more reliable, safer, productive, and will reduce the
workload on the vehicle maintenance shop personnel
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Improve scheduling of mowing
and increase crew efficiency because of reliable equipment.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
29
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70 43
30
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: COPY MACHINE REPLACEMENT
Estimated Cost:
$25,000
Project Number: GF48 Date
Scheduled:
FY 14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The existing copy machine is expected to have a life of less
than 5 years given its intensive use. The machine produces in
excess of 250,000 copies per year. Repair and maintenance
costs show a steady increase as wear continues. This request
is for a replacement copier to meet the ongoing operational
needs of the department. Incorporation of advanced scanning
capability facilitates records management and customer
service.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue using current copier with an increasing frequency of
down time and cost of repairs.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The new copier will help contain operational costs due to
maintenance. The copier is also utilized as a high capacity
network printer and scanner for the department which brings
some additional efficiencies in utilization of staff time in the
preparation of reports, commission packets, and other
materials.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: None, operating costs are
already incurred with the current copier. Anticipated costs are expected to
remain in line with current charges. Maintenance costs will increase
annually without replacement.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 35
31
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
23
32
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Police and Municipal Court Facility
Estimated Cost:
$18,992,000 Total
Project Number: General Fund – GF50 Date
Scheduled:
FY13-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The 2007 Police Facility report by Carter Goble Lee (CGL) outlines
the anticipated space needs for the City’s Police Department,
Municipal Court and Prosecution function for the next 20 years. The
report calls for a 5 acre site and 52,000 square foot facility.
Actual costs estimates will be developed based upon architectural
drawings and research into materials and labor costs after facility
design. The estimate includes $1 Million for Design and $2 Million
for the purchase of land, and assumes that some areas would be
completed in future phases.
Alternatives
Considered:
The existing building was not built to meet code and is not
adequate for remodel or additions. The CGL report discusses the
operational needs of the departments and the lack of the existing
Law & Justice Center (L&J) space. They analyzed site locations for
this facility: to include 5 dedicated acres at the current L&J site and
approximately 6 acres at the current BMX Park located at 5th and
Tamarack. These dedicate sites would provide for projected
expansion capabilities, adequate parking and public
space needs.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Police Department would have adequate room for existing staff –
and projected staff for 20 years. Sufficient Municipal Court space
would available. This facility would be programmed and built with
the PD, Court, and Prosecution needs in mind from the beginning.
Public areas, secured areas, office locations, and space
adjacencies could be maximized for the best and safest utilization
(as opposed to a retro-fit of an existing building).
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Not estimated at this
time. Currently, the City pays facility costs to the County for our
square footage at the L& J. We anticipate asking voters to approve
an operating levy, if necessary, when approving the construction
levy.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund: Design would be paid from General Fund Cash.
Land and Construction would be funded through a voter-approved
levy. 20 year General Obligation Bonds would be issued.
FY13 & 14: $500,000 each year for Design.
FY15: $17,992,000 Land Purchase and Construction.
Project Rating: Level of Service: 65
33
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
5
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
65
34
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Animal Control Vehicle – Flex Fuel 4x4
Estimated Cost: $27,700
Project Number: General Fund – GF51 Date
Scheduled:
FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
FY11 - $0
FY12 - $0
FY13 - $0
FY14 - $0
FY15 - $27,700 will replace asset # 2696, (77,000 miles*); 1999 Dodge
Dakota.
*Mileage as of 11/18/09
Purchase a new extend cab, 4wd pickup to replace one of the Animal
Control pickups.
This particular replacement request pertains to the 1999 Dodge Dakota 2
wheel drive pickup. During the winter months, it is very difficult to navigate
the city streets and transport animals to the Heart of the Valley Animal
Shelter with a 2 wheel drive pickup. It is anticipated that this vehicle will
begin accumulating repairs and increasing maintenance costs.
The anticipated purchase date for a new truck would be FY15 so this
request is being submitted for planning purposes. Purchase of a new
truck would ensure many years of service without incurring high
maintenance costs. The current truck could be used by another city
department, be sold at auction, or used as a trade in.
Alternatives
Considered:
The purchase of a newer lease return vehicle is a viable option and one
that should be looked at before a final decision to purchase is made.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
• 4wd important for 12 month access in difficult weather.
• 4wd vehicles are often used for evidence retrieval and transport
• Flex fuel for better gas mileage
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Reduction in costs expected.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 60
35
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
17
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
1
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
60
36
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Police Investigation (Detective) Vehicles
Estimated Cost:
$28,000 annually, with inflation.
Project Number: General Fund – GF52 Date Scheduled: FY12, FY13,
FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Investigation
Vehicle Asset #
Current Mileage
Estimated
Replacement Year
2618 78,000 FY12
3138 79,000 FY13
2617 63,000 FY15
*Mileage as of 11/18/09
Purchase one mid-size passenger vehicle per year to replace high
mileage cars currently driven by detectives and to provide safe and
reliable emergency response vehicles. Also, as the number of detectives
assigned to the division increases, additional vehicles will be necessary.
These vehicles must be mechanically safe to drive as an emergency
response vehicle. The purchase of vehicles utilizing the State Bid system
would allow us to add different makes, models and colors to our fleet,
reduce vehicle maintenance costs, and provide detectives with reliable
and mechanically sound vehicles that should last at least 7 to 10 years.
Cost is for complete vehicle, with all emergency response vehicle
installed.
Old detective cars are rotated into the police department parking program
generally after at least 100,000 miles of use and are used as travel cars
for officers attending training, traded in, sold at auction or transferred to
other divisions within the city.
Alternatives
Considered:
No safe and reliable alternatives have been identified.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Would drastically reduce maintenance costs, mechanical concerns
and provide many years of reliable service. Increased public safety
and officer safety in providing mechanically sound emergency
response vehicles, reduced risk and liability related to use of
unreliable cars.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Reduction in
maintenance costs and possible reduction in fuel costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 63
37
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes
This Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
63
38
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Police Patrol Car & Equipment Replacement
Estimated Cost: $156,000 per year, increasing with inflation, ($52,000 per car including
electronic equipment).
Project Number: General Fund – GF53 Date
Scheduled:
FY11-15, each
year
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Police Patrol Car Pool Replacement Plan *Mileage as of 11/18/09
This plan allows for 3 patrol cars to be replaced each year, including all of
the necessary vehicle equipment (top lights, sirens, mobile data terminals,
video cameras, electronic reporting / ticketing systems, etc.) It replaces
older, higher mileage patrol cars that become less reliable and more costly
to repair. Equipment inside the car can sometimes be transferred from the
old car to the new car, depending on its condition.
Patrol vehicles are an essential item in the operation of the Department.
Vehicles must be available for police patrol use 24 hours a day, 365 days
a year, to respond to both emergency and non-emergency calls for
service, investigate accidents, conduct traffic enforcement and for general
patrol duties. These patrol vehicles average approximately 20,000 miles
annually.
Patrol Car Asset #
Current Mileage*
Estimated
Replacement Year
3279 89,162 FY11
3142 88,767 FY11
3143 86,103 FY11
3221 84,264 FY12
3220 83,573 FY12
3278 74,825 FY12
3280 71,939 FY13
3311 64,872 FY13
3352 59,488 FY13
3350 56,352 FY14
3351 53,562 FY14
3374 33,869 FY14
3370 27,007 FY15
3439 24,027 FY15
3440 20,865 FY15
Alternatives
Considered:
None.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This insures safe and reliable emergency response vehicles for patrol use,
as well as lower annual maintenance costs due to lower annual miles
driven per vehicle and a lower number of miles driven per year per unit.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: These are replacements;
recurring costs frequently decline as newer cars replace older ones.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
39
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20 pts 20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard or
prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic level of
service as identified in an adopted city
wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10 pts 10 - Provides a significant decrease in city
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in city
operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10 pts 10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city or
indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the city
or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10 pts 10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission Work
Plan
Up to 10 pts 10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified project in
the Adopted Commission Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and will
accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
63
40
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bogert Pool Renovation
Estimated Cost:
$382,000 Total
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF055 Date
Scheduled
FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The pool gutter system around the edge of the Bogert Pool is
in disrepair. The gutter system is vital to the filtration system
as it skims water from the pool and sends it to filtration. The
pool shell is in need of replacement also. It is most efficient
and economical to complete the gutter and shell projects
together since they are connected and one project affects the
other.
This will replace the current concrete gutter system with a
stainless steel gutter system and install a new plaster pool
shell with a ceramic tiled whale logo to replace the 30 year old
shell.
Alternatives
Considered:
Build new outdoor leisure pool
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The USAquatics report stated that the above renovations will
increase the life of the facility by an additional 30 plus years.
This will benefit the community by keeping a historical icon in
service, allowing community swim lessons and recreational
swimming in an outdoor environment.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Reduced water use
Reduce Chemicals use
Reduce annual painting bill
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating 57
41
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
9
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
9
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
9
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
1
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
57
42
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY09-13
Project Name:
Multipurpose Community Aquatic and Recreation Center
Estimated Cost:
$21,000,000 (not including land)
Project Number: General Fund - 056 Date
Scheduled:
FY13 – Needs
Assessment (GF136)
Design &Construction
- Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New Replacement ■ Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Build a community center designed to create a visual connection between
spaces and an openness that promotes community for all users.
Aquatic Elements: Therapy pool, water slides, zero entry teaching area,
river run, deep diving well, 25 yd lap pool.
Fitness Elements: Indoor track, strength and cardio equipment, free
weights, climbing wall.
Gym Elements: Two multipurpose gym facilities and an indoor tennis court
Multipurpose/Play Elements: Indoor playground and multipurpose rooms
(one with a kitchen).
This item was identified as a “Top Ten Capital Facility Recommendation” in
the PROST plan, adopted October 2007.
Alternatives
Considered:
Implement plan in phases
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Economic Benefits of a Community Center
• Revenue generator
• Economic stimulant
• Reduced healthcare costs
• Reduced vandalism and crime
• Enhanced land values
Individual Benefits of a Community Center
• Improved quality of life
• Personal development and growth
• Physical health and well being
• Psychological well being
• Offers a sense of adventure
• Socialization
• Lifelong skills
Community Benefits of a Community Center
• A safe and healthy place for families to play
• Connected families
• Strong, vital, involved community
• Support for youth at risk
• Increased community programs
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs to include additional Recreation
Department staff: Cost undetermined at this time.
Funding
Sources:
Possibilities: Impact fees, foundation/donations, Bond
43
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY09-13
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
0
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
8
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
8
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
44
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY09-13
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
44
45
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
PC/Laptop/Server Replacement
Estimated Cost: $90,000 FY11, $100,000 FY12, FY13, FY14, FY15
Project Number: General Fund – GF62 Date Scheduled: FY11-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a general item for replacement of personal computers
and Servers for General Fund related jobs and services.
(Enterprise and Special Revenue fund services pay for their own
pc’s and servers)
PC’s will move to a 4 year rotation, servers will continue to be
minimal of a 5 year asset.
Recent PC Replacements: FY 08 we replaced 49 PC’s/laptops
and have 10 PC’s and 1 Laptop in stock.
Alternatives
Considered:
Not replace computer/server hardware as frequently.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
City technology needs will be better met and the IT department
will be able to more efficiently support employees and citizens.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Funding Sources: 100% General Fund
Project Rating: 45
46
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15-
replacment
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
7 provides a
significant
decrease in
city
operation
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
8 Direct
benefit to
entire city
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10 critical to
departments
mission
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5 year round
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
45 points
total
47
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Planning Department Vehicle Replacement
Estimated Cost:
$20,000
Project Number: GF 64 Date
Scheduled:
FY 13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the current vehicle, a 1998 Nissan Sentra.
This is a small car which works well for single or two person
activities but does not have much cargo or personnel
capacity. Replacement would be with a fuel efficient small
vehicle, possibly a hybrid.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to operate the existing vehicles with increasing
maintenance costs.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provide functional transportation with reduced maintenance
costs.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No new costs are
expected as maintenance is already performed on the existing
vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund.
Project Rating: Level of Service: 35
48
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
35
49
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Aerial Photography
Estimated Cost:
$95,000
Project Number:
General Fund – GF65 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Acquire aerial photography for the Bozeman Growth Policy
Planning Area.
Alternatives
Considered:
Use map sales to subsidize total cost. Partnerships with
public and private industries for alternative funding sources.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
- Aerial photography benefits both the organization and the community
by supplying a clear and accurate representation of current conditions.
This information is used on a daily basis in all levels of various
projects. We are currently experiencing unprecedented demand for
digital imagery (i.e., staff reports, Commission presentations,
water/sewer utilities, public requests, etc.).
- Contributes to on-going acquisition of aerial photos at regular
intervals for historical archives and modeling growth over time. Since
1987 we have not gone more than four years without an update.
- Measurements and land use determinations are made on a local or
regional basis without requiring extensive field time.
- Management decisions are made more efficiently and effectively by
visualizing areas surrounding the project site.
- Aerial photographs are used extensively in several on-line and in-
house mapping applications.
- Visual background for existing and future GIS & CAD data and Facility
Plans.
- Meet public demand for current and accurate aerial photography.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
There are no annual operating or maintenance costs
associated with this project.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund, other sources listed above are to be fully explored.
Project Rating: 37
.
50
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20 pts 20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard or
prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic level of
service as identified in an adopted city
wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City service.
0 – Other.
12
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10 pts 10 - Provides a significant decrease in city
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in city
operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10 pts 10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city or
indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the city
or indirect benefit to several areas.
6
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10 pts 10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
8
5. Commission Work
Plan
Up to 10 pts 10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified project in
the Adopted Commission Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and will
accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
1
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
37
51
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Professional Building Parking Lot Lighting
Estimated Cost: $28,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF67 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is to improve the illumination of the parking lot at the
Professional Building. Many employees and citizens meet at this building
after dark and the existing parking lot is poorly lit.
This item was listed for funding in FY 10. The fact that staff was told we
were in a tight budget year this item was rolled over to FY 12. There were
some changes pending with building use that reduced the need for the
parking lot lighting.
The regular Planning Board evening meeting is now taking place at the
new City Hall. Other Planning meetings do take place, but not as many
members of the public are attending who might not be familiar with the
parking area.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue with existing lighting.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Safety will likely be improved.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: There are two farm style
lights mounted on utility poles in the parking lot. These current fixtures do
not meet the dark skies ordinance because the lamps are not shaded.
The new lights should be more energy efficient so no addition operating
costs are anticipated.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund.
52
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
0
53
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Commission Work Plan.
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
30
54
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Library Public Address System
Estimated Cost:
$31,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF74 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
A public address system is needed for paging and general
announcements in the event of a non-fire related emergency.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing and continue to use the emergency fire system to make
announcements.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The emergency fire announcement system currently used to broadcast
announcements was never designed to be used for any other purpose
than a fire emergency and does not provide adequate control for zonal
broadcasting. Events have occurred at the Library during the past year
which required police intervention; having the capability to make
emergency announcements to specific rooms would be an added
benefit. A system designed specifically for the purpose of public
address allowing general announcements which are made on a daily
basis such as closing of the Library, the start of events, and dog issues
would improve the communication to public patrons at the library.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund.
55
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
5
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
27
56
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Network Core Switches (2 Locations: City Hall & Prof-Building)
Estimated Cost: $150,000 Total
Project Number: General Fund – GF79 Date Scheduled: FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a scheduled end of life (April 2012) switch that provides
the backbone of the entire network. These provide the
technology platform for the entire organization.
Alternatives
Considered:
Maintain current switches without critical support or
maintenance.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Continued maintaining network stability and ensure phone
services and data without interruption.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Funding Sources: General Fund – with costs shared with Enterprise, as location
warrants.
Project Rating: 50
57
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15-
replacment
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10 provides
a significant
decrease in
city
opreration
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10 Direct
benefit to
entire city
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10 critical to
departments
mission
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5 year round
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
50 points
total
58
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Remote Closet Switch and Router Replacement
Estimated Cost: $40,000 Annually
Project Number: General Fund – GF80 Date Scheduled: FY11-FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Wan Site end of life for switches and router replacements
throughout City to include City Hall, Professional Building, City
Shops, Landfill, L&J, Library, WWTP, WTP, Swim Center, Beall
Park, Cemetery.
Smaller sites will be consolidated in one year.
FY 11 - Library, WTP
FY 12 – Shops, WRF
FY 13 - City Hall, Beall
FY 14 – Swim, PD, FS 1,2,&3 Cemetery
FY 15 - Prof-Building, Vehicle Maint
Alternatives
Considered:
Maintain current switches without critical support or
maintenance.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Maintain uptime for all WAN locations throughout the City to
include phone services as well as data.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Funding Sources:
General Fund – with costs shared with Enterprise, as location
warrants.
Project Rating: 50
59
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15-
replacment
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10 provides
a significant
decrease in
city
opreration
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10 Direct
benefit to
entire city
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10 critical to
departments
mission
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5 year round
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
50 points
total
60
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Cemetery Backhoe
Estimated Cost:
$110,000
Project Number:
General Fund – GF83
Date
Scheduled: FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This vehicle replaces the current cemetery backhoe that is used for
burials an average of 3 times per week. This is the main piece of
equipment utilized for cemetery burials.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which is becoming unreliable and
costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and the families relying on
cemetery services.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than the existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
61
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
42
62
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks – Restroom Replacements & Upgrades
Estimated Cost: Total $675,000, as listed below.
Project Number:
General Fund – GF84
Date
Scheduled: Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is the general replacement and upgrading of the City
Park’s public restroom facilities. In order of priority:
1. Lindley Park Restrooms - $175,000
2. Bogert Park Restrooms - $150,000
3. Rose Park (new) – $175,000
4. BMX Park (new) - $175,000
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to try to maintain existing facilities.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Ease of maintaining new restrooms, increased cleanliness of public
facilities.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than the existing facilities.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
63
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
PROST
9.1
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
PROST
3.5.1
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
37
64
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Replacement of Playground Equipment
Estimated Cost: $50,000 each year
Project Number: General Fund – GF92 Date
Scheduled:
FY12-FY14
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The following playground equipment needs to be replaced due to its age
and condition:
FY12 – Jarrett Park: This structure is one of the oldest playgrounds in the
City. Replacement will bring fully compliant ADA equipment and reduce
liability concerns.
FY13 – Christie Park
FY14 – Beall Park
Alternatives
Considered:
Numerous.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased safety for community members.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: no estimate at this time.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund.
65
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
PROST
10.11
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
37
66
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks- Story Mansion irrigation system
Estimated Cost:
$35,000
Project Number: GF98 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: X New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Install an automated irrigation system at the Story Mansion.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to manually irrigate the Mansion with hoses and sprinklers.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Minimize labor of hauling hoses around.
Efficient use of the water (water conservation)
Shorten the time it takes to irrigate the Mansion
Irrigate at night-minimize evaporation and transpiration
Healthier turf
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs would rise slightly, due to the
nature of valves, rotor heads and electrical wire in the ground. These
identified costs potentially could be offset by fuel, vehicle and manpower
savings.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating:
33
67
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
33
68
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
IBM i5 Replacement
Estimated Cost:
$45,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF99 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the mainframe computer that runs the City’s Enterprise-
wide Financial software. This hardware needs to be replaced
approximately every 5 years and was last replaced in FY2006.
This item is critical to our ability to:
• Bill and collect Water/Sewer/Garbage/Parking charges.
• Bill and collect Street & Tree Assessments.
• Receipt and track all other money owed/paid to the City.
• Make payments to vendor’s doing business with the City.
• Process payroll for City employees.
• Create financial statements and reports.
• Web-enables payments.
Alternatives
Considered:
• Replace existing Enterprise-wide software with PC-based
software. Brendan spoke with the County IT Director and
received this info related to the County’s system: 1st year cost =
$250,000 (installation, training, hardware). Thereafter,
approximately $30,000 in annual maintenance costs, with a
replacement $10,000 server being required every 5th year.
• Continue to use current hardware for as long as possible.
However, in addition to Financial Applications, the IBM server also
hosts SunGard HTE applications for Building Permits, Code
Enforcement, and Planning & Zoning. All these additional users
and all this additional data are going to increasingly tax the
servers resources to the point where system performance and
customer service response time will probably be affected.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Unnecessary system down-time is avoided when critical hardware is
replaced in a timely fashion.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No significant changes in
system operations or maintenance costs are anticipated.
Funding
Sources:
Water Fund: $7,500
Sewer Fund: $7,500
Solid Waste Fund: $7,500
General Fund: $22,500
Project Rating:
47
69
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
7
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
70
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks- 4X4 Tractor with bucket
Estimated Cost:
$75,000
Project Number: GF100 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: New X Replacement Facility X Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace the aging 1986 Ford tractor with a new tractor. This tractor will be
used to broom ice rinks, move material, assist in fertilization and will be
used extensively with the deep tine aerator.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to repair and patch up the Ford tractor as breakdowns occur.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Less down time and maintenance/repair costs
A new tractor will be able to support more implements
Less emissions and better fuel economy.
Faster more efficient use of time
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Better fuel economy and less emissions= less maintenance costs and
operating costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 33
71
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
33
72
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Lindley Center Deck
Estimated Cost: $34,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF102 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: New ■ Replacement ■ Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace the painted wood entrance ramp and steps on the east side of the
Lindley Center building with a 60’X14’ deck that will bring the facility up to
current ADA code requirements and create a visually appealing outdoor
seating area that will accommodate up to 6 tables. The deck will be
constructed of environmentally friendly, recycled plastic material that will
not need to be sanded, painted and repaired each year, which will
considerably lower our annual maintenance costs.
This project aligns with section 10.5.1 of the PROST plan (adopted
October 2007) that recommends maintaining existing recreational
facilities to ensure they remain operational as long possible.
Alternatives
Considered:
• Leaving the existing ramp and steps and continuing to sand, paint
and repair damaged boards as needed.
• Building a two tiered 60’X40’ deck to create an outdoor seating
area that would accommodate 10 + tables.
•
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
• Brings the facility entrance up to current ADA code requirements
so that is accessible to all users.
• Lowers annual maintenance costs because the decking material
does not rot or warp and will not need to be sanded and painted.
• Creates a safe, visually appealing entrance into the Lindley
Center.
• Provides a space that encourages socialization and builds
community.
• Creates a new outdoor space for city recreation programs.
• Increases rentals and use options for the Lindley Center
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Reduced maintenance costs associated with annual sanding/painting of
existing stairs and ramp.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 51
73
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
18
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
7
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
8
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
51
74
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Americans With Disabilities Act Upgrades to City
Buildings
Estimated Cost:
$15,000 each year
Project Number: GF103 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY11-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace or install ADA upgrades in various city-owned buildings. Work
examples include:
• Replacement of old style door knobs with ADA approved hook
handle knobs.
• Modify or install handrails and grab bars at various buildings
throughout the city.
• Compliance Upgrades to existing handicapped parking stalls.
• Electric Door Assists.
Alternatives
Considered:
When remodels are initiated on buildings they are brought up to current
ADA requirements as per regulations. There are changes to the ADA
that will take effect in 2009. We will continue to make upgrades as
changes are made to buildings but this budget item would accelerate the
compliance for city buildings.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
It has been the policy of the city to meet the full spirit of the law as
outlined in the ADA regulations. By taking the initiative to bring all our
buildings up to current standards we can provide a positive example to
the community in meeting the needs of people with restricted or limited
mobility.
Plans are in place to reestablish an ADA advisory committee to provide
recommendations to the city on priority order for any upgrades or
improvements that we might make in order to make our facilities or
programs more accessible.
Having this money available to begin improvements will show our
priorities have already been in place to address special needs concerns
for the City of Bozeman.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No real costs foreseen with
these improvements. Future costs could be reduced if the upgrades are
made prior to any remodeling of the building
Funding
Sources:
100% General fund.
75
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70 42
76
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Energy Upgrades for Public Buildings
Estimated Cost:
$30,000.00 each year
Project Number: GF104 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY14-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Energy Upgrades to Public Buildings are being made in FY10 & FY11
with EECBG Grant monies, out of the ARRA Project Fund. The General
Fund will fund will begin funding additional improvements in FY14.
Install occupancy sensors in areas that are occupied at irregular times;
install programmable thermostats; replace plumbing fixtures with low-
water fixtures; replace single glaze windows with double glazed units.
Work would occur on all city owned buildings after an analysis of the work
that would have the best payback and energy savings.
Some consultation with an electrical engineer would be needed to
develop some energy modeling to determine which improvements would
have the best payback.
Alternatives
Considered:
Currently upgrades are made as equipment reaches its useful life. This
approach would be more proactive, replacing
Items that have a reasonable pay-back on energy savings.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This work would be in line with the Mayor’s energy initiative. Some
rebates are currently available through NorthWestern Energy which
would help offset the cost of the change-outs.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Improvements that would result in the shortest payback would receive
priority. Changes that would improve the work environment for
employees and the public would also be given a priority.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
77
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
78
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Exchange Cluster Replacement
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Project Number: GF106 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the Email Exchange software and hardware. End of life is
2009, but we will support in-house until FY11.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue with current solution without mainstream support.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Exchange is the primary communication tool for both staff and the citizens.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
General Fund
Project Rating: 50
79
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
50
80
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Replacement of Parks Sidewalks
Estimated Cost: $182,000 Total
Project Number: General Fund – GF108 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Identified for replacement due to deteriorating cement, missing sections
and heaving from weather and roots from trees. Approx $7/ square foot
for rip and replace.
• Southside: Replace 730’ of sidewalk along South 5th Ave. and
along West Alderson St. with new 6’ (six foot) wide concreted
sidewalk, and the related retaining wall. $100,000
• Cooper: Replace sidewalk around entire block. This sidewalk
serves as a main route to and from the University. Approx 1875’
of sidewalk total. $82,000
The new sidewalks must meet or exceed city code. Replacing the old
sidewalk will result in a safer sidewalk year around and enable the
sidewalk plows to better meet the snow removal, municipal code
12.24.020.
Alternatives
Considered:
Numerous.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased safety for community members.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: no estimate at this time.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund.
81
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
0
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
27
82
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Digital Film and Fiche Scanner PC System
Estimated Cost: $15,500
Project Number: GF109 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New Replacement Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Purchase of a Digital Film and Fiche scanner, PC, and monitor to allow
copying or scanning of microfilm or microfiche form the Library’s
collection.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use current machine which does not offer scanning and is 10
years old. The current maintenance contract is $1,999 per year.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The machine would allow microfilm images and text to be scanned and
sent electronically. It has the ability to improve images and text to be
printed or scanned and make colored copies of images. The Flat Media
Scanner could also be used with aperture cards, jumbo opaque
microcards, or microfiche, film transparencies, glass or film negative,
color slides, papers, books, and magazines.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: $1,205 per year for service
contract; would offset maintenance costs on older machine, saving approx
$794/yr.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund
Project Rating: 20
83
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
5
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
20
84
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks- East Gallatin Irrigation Repair
Estimated Cost:
$50,000
Project Number: GF111 – General Fund Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New X Replacement Facility X Equipment
Project
Description:
Update and repair the irrigation and pump system that has been
repeatedly damaged by construction of the restrooms and park expansion.
Alternatives
Considered:
Not irrigate until construction and master plan implementation is complete.
Patch together what we can of the existing system and irrigate some of the
park.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Efficiently irrigate the entire park
Minimize labor due to potentially hauling hoses around.
Shorten the time it takes to irrigate the park
Irrigate at night-minimize evaporation, transpiration and vandalism to
irrigation heads.
Healthier turf
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs would rise slightly, due to the
upgrades of valves, rotor heads and electrical wire in the ground. These
identified costs potentially could be offset by fuel, vehicle and manpower
savings attributed to continual manual watering.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 28
85
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
(15)
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
(5)
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
(2)
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
(3)
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
(0)
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
(0)
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
(3)
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
(28)
86
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Rose Park Parking Lot
Estimated
Cost:
$85,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF112 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Installation of parking lot at Rose park.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do not install a parking lot
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Accessible area to park that is not on the side of Oak St.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Minimal. Clean-up, possible snow plowing, painting lines every few years
Funding
Sources:
General fund
Project
Rating:
Level of Service: 25
87
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
25
88
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks Department Vehicle Replacements
Estimated Cost: $ 25,000 each, plus inflation each year
$ 60,000 for replacement of the 1 Ton in FY15 (w/plow & bed)*
Project Number: General Fund – GF115 Date
Scheduled:
FY11-15, each
year
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Park Vehicle Replacement Plan *Mileage as of 03/2009
Parks Department utilizes trucks for maintenance of the city parks.
Because these are not emergency response vehicles, they are replaced
as funding becomes available. All trucks are utilized well beyond 150,000
miles, and until service related down-time for equipment and staff become
problematic or safety is compromised.
Vehicle
Asset #
Description
Current
Mileage*
Estimated
Replacement
Year
1680 1986 Ford176,336 FY11
1495 1988 GMC193,054 FY12
1266 1985 Chevy142,147 FY13
5561 1997 Ford176,281 FY14
3023 2001 Dodge (1 Ton)* 23,000 FY15
3251 2001 Dodge146,048 FY16
2691 1990 Ford171,127 FY17
Alternatives
Considered:
None.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This insures safe and reliable vehicles for park use.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: These are replacements;
recurring costs frequently decline as newer cars replace older ones.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
89
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20 pts 20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard or
prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic level of
service as identified in an adopted city
wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10 pts 10 - Provides a significant decrease in city
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in city
operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10 pts 10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city or
indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the city
or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10 pts 10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission Work
Plan
Up to 10 pts 10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified project in
the Adopted Commission Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and will
accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
63
90
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Cemetery Department Vehicle Replacements
Estimated Cost: $ 42,500 FY12
$ 26,000 FY13
Project Number: General Fund – GF116 Date
Scheduled:
FY12-13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Cemetery Vehicle Replacement Plan *Mileage as of 03/2009
Cemetery Department utilizes Half-Ton and 1-Ton trucks for operations
and maintenance of the Sunset Hills Cemetery.
Vehicles at the Cemetery do not accumulate high mileage, due in part to
the small area that they service.
• The 1-Ton is critical to providing prompt burial services (loading
and unloading dirt) and sanding/plowing cemetery roads. While it
has relatively low mileage, the cost of repairs and its extremely
low fuel economy (460 engine) drive our recommendation to
replace this 20 year old vehicle.
• The ½ ton is used for maintenance (moving irrigation pipe) around
the cemetery.
Vehicle
Asset #
Description
Current
Mileage*
Estimated
Replacement
Year
1213 1989 1 Ton 4x440,000 FY12
1423 1985 ½ Ton 4x495,858 FY13
Alternatives
Considered:
None.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This insures safe and reliable vehicles for cemetery use.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: These are replacements;
recurring costs frequently decline as newer cars replace older ones.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
91
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20 pts 20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard or
prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic level of
service as identified in an adopted city
wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10 pts 10 - Provides a significant decrease in city
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in city
operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10 pts 10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city or
indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the city
or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10 pts 10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission Work
Plan
Up to 10 pts 10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified project in
the Adopted Commission Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and will
accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
5
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
34
92
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bogert Pool heaters and hot water heaters
Estimated Cost: $197,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF117 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The current boiler for Bogert pool is a 1946 380 million BTU
heater, and heat exchanger. The boiler is unreliable half way
through the season, locking out at night time. The boiler is
wrapped in an asbestos insulating blanket that has been cut
open and is breaking apart. The Gallatin county health
department has recommended removing this. The
replacement system will consist of four 200 thousand BTU
heat exchangers, with a total of 800 thousand BTUs. They
would be configured to run independently from each other, to
increase the total efficiency.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue using current boiler
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The new heat exchangers will decrease the amount of natural
gas consumed by Bogert during the summer season. It will
also increase the reliability of having the pool heated
throughout the night, providing warm water for morning
swim lessons.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual startup and winterization: $1000
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 55
93
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
8
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
8
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
1
94
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center Mechanical Improvements
Estimated Cost: $204,000 Total
Project Number: General Fund – GF118 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Lighting: The natatorium lighting is 35 years old, and the lights will no
longer be manufactured starting January 2010. In replacing the lighting
system we will increase the overall lighting for the pool, while reducing the
overall energy consumption. The new lighting will be a metal halide bulb
fixture that will have a greater light output at a lower energy usage. The
new fixtures will also be sealed against moisture, and easier for staff to
change the bulbs, as compared to the current system.
Pump: The main pool pump malfunctioned in September of 2009. The
aquatic staff met with many parties (repairmen, water dept., and
engineers) to determine the best fix. The pump was repaired well enough
to get through the remaining fiscal year. The consensus was to replace the
pump with a two pump system. This will allow the pumps to be alternated,
increasing the lifespan of each pump and impeller, and if we have a pump
break down we would not have to close the pool due to having a pump
that can take over the filtration.
Chemical Controller: The automated chemical controller is required
under the MT health code, to maintain the chemical disinfection and pH
balance of the pool. The current controller is 10 years old and is beginning
to fail. It currently is losing the LCD screen, making it impossible to read its
readings.
Chair Lift: The current wheel chair lift at the swim center is difficult for
patrons to transfer themselves from their chair to the lift. It has not
handholds for them to use, and if they have limited mobility it is difficult for
them to use the controls.
Filtration System: The current filtration at the Swim Center is difficult to
work in. Staff must climb into the filtration pit onto slick wood rails to scrub
the filter grids on a weekly basis. The filter pit holds approximately 60,000
gallons of water, which gets flushed down the drain. A regenerative media
system is a new media system that uses the same media that the Swim
Center currently uses, which provides the cleanest water. The system is
contained in a pressurized tank that will hold 400 gallons of water. To
clean the staff will only be required to press a button, reducing the
potential hazard.
Description
Estimated
Cost
Lighting $95,000
Main Pool Pump $85,000
Chemical Controller $12,000
Chair Lift $12,000
Total $204,000
Alternatives Numerous.
95
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This group of improvements make necessary repairs to the most critical
systems at the Swim Center. The useful life of the facility is significantly
extended with these improvements.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: These improvements are
expected to significantly decrease annual maintenance costs; via savings
of water, electricity, and chemicals.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20 pts 20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard or
prevents a critical breakdown of an existing city
facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally obsolete
existing city facility or equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic level of
service as identified in an adopted city wide
plan.
5 – Expands an approved City service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10 pts 10 - Provides a significant decrease in city
operating and/or maintenance expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on operating
and/or maintenance expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in city
operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10 pts 10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city or indirect
benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the city or
indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10 pts 10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to Complete
10
5. Commission Work
Plan
Up to 10 pts 10 – Identified project in Adopted Commission
Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified project in the
Adopted Commission Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and will
accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
5
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
55
96
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Automated chemical controller for the Bogert Pool
Estimated Cost:
$12,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF119 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
The automated chemical controller is required under the MT
health code, to maintain the chemical disinfection and pH
balance of the pool. The current controller is 10 years old and
is beginning to fail. It currently is losing the LCD screen,
making it impossible to read its readings. New systems are
more accurate, waste fewer chemicals.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue using the current Chemical controller.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The replacement will allow us to maintain the pool chemistry at
a consistent and comfortable level for the public. It will also
satisfy the MT health code for pool chemical regulation.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
New pH and Orp sensing probes yearly: $600 Current practice
has been to wait for the probes to die and then try and get
probes here as fast as possible. Probes are sensing 24 hours
a day; replacement yearly will increase their accuracy and
reduce wasted chemicals at the end of the probes life.
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 55
97
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10 ?
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
98
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bogert Pool filter replacement
Estimated Cost: $78,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF120 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
The existing filtration system is inadequate for an outdoor pool
filtration system; it will be replaced with a rapid sand filter or
equivalent system and new pumps.
The new system will drastically reduce the backwash time for
the pool reducing or eliminating closures for this process.
Alternatives
Considered:
Regenerative media filter: $160,000
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This project will increase the amount of filtration at Bogert pool
and at the same time reduce maintenance cost. Bogerts
current system requires a media change approximately 4
times throughout the season. In years past the pool did not
close for this but the new health codes would require us to
close for this. A rapid sand system would not have to have its
media changes at all during the season, and would only
require washing of the media.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Replace media on a yearly bases: dependent on filter size.
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 51
99
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
1
TOTAL Up to 70 51
100
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Insulation of the second and third floors of the Story
Mansion
Estimated
Cost:
$25,000.00
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF121 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
There is very little insulation in the Story Mansion. Insulation on
the main level is spotty due to the types of interior finishes on
the main level. There is some insulation in the third floor ceiling.
This project would add insulation to the second and third floors
and to the attic area of the building.
Alternatives
Considered:
Evaluate the need for wall insulation once a use for the second
and third floors of the building is determined. Complete a cost
benefit analysis based on the willingness to pay for increased
energy consumption and the impact that low amounts of
insulation has on critical building components, such as the roof.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Insulation should be the first step to determine whether
additional insulation will reduce the amount of snow melt from
the roof and the related ice problems that can shorten the
expected life of a roof.
Insulation will reduce energy costs for the building and result in
substantial annual cost savings. Insulation will also provide for a
comfortable work environment for the anticipated office uses on
the second floor of the building.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Utility savings anticipated from
reduced heat loss in the building.
Funding
Sources:
Possible Grant Funding
General Fund
Project
Rating:
55
101
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
55
102
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bogert pool Wheel Chair lift replacement
Estimated Cost: $12,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF122 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The current wheel chair lift at Bogert Pool is broken, difficult
for patrons to transfer themselves from their chair to the lift. It
does not have handholds for them to use, and if they have
limited mobility it is difficult for them to use the controls. The
new lift has handholds for them to pull themselves across
from chair to lift and back. The controls are located at the tip
of the handholds for easy access.
Alternatives
Considered:
none
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The new lift will allow for more independent use of the pool by
mobility-impaired patrons. Some patrons have a difficult
time moving from chair to lift, the Swim Center staff is not
trained to do this, and it is a liability if we do help. The new
lift will increase the ease of getting into the pool.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
The new chair is battery operated, it will need a new battery
once per year: $250
Funding
Sources:
100% general Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 46
103
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1
104
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
46
105
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center pool heat exchangers - 2
Estimated Cost:
$80,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF123 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a replacement project to keep the pool heaters updated.
The current heaters will be 8 years old for the scheduled fiscal
year.
Alternatives
Considered:
Replace one heat exchanger at a time: $40,000 each.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This project will help the facility take advantages of greener
heat exchangers. This will also allow for replacement of heat
exchangers before we have an un-repairable breakdown.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual service and cleaning: $500
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 46
106
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
6
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
46
107
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center Men’s lockers
Estimated
Cost:
$10,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF124 Date Scheduled: Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a replacement project to update and replace one set of
lockers in the men’s bathroom. The current set of lockers is
made of a hollow plastic material that has broken and has
become unsafe. The lockers will be replaced with a solid core
plastic lockers system that will have a longer life. Some of the
lockers purchased will be in a configuration to hold suit jackets
and shirts without having to fold them, allowing patrons to be
able to swim over their lunch break without having to worry
about their dress clothes.
Alternatives
Considered:
Keep original lockers
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This project will be used to replace the entire locker system at
the Swim Center over several years. These lockers are of a
heaver material compared to the current system and will last
longer.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Minimal maintenance- cleaning/repair as needed
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 47
108
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
109
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center Interior wall painting
Estimated Cost:
$35,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF125 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project will finish painting the interior walls at the Swim
Center with a two-part epoxy paint, which is required for our
facility. The east wall of the pool area was painted in 2009;
the remainder of the building was not painted. This will include
the remainder pool walls, the lobby, and both bathrooms.
Alternatives
Considered:
None
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The facility is looking neglected and un-kept; this will improve
the atmosphere of the pool, encouraging patrons to come
back.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
None
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 30
110
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
0
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
30
111
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Recreation Department Truck with plow
Estimated
Cost:
$23,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF126 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
New ¾ ton 4X4 gas or diesel double cab truck with a V-plow mounted on the
front.
Alternatives
Considered:
Contract our plowing for the Swim Center: $1000/yr
Advantages
of Approving
this Project:
• Be able to plow Swim Center lot
• Assist in plowing of Story
• Move 5 staff members at a time for Bogert start-up and shut-down
• Pull kayak trailer to classes at East Gallatin pond
• Replace 2 wheel drive truck with 151,000 miles.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project
Rating:
36
112
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
36
113
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Senior Center Mechanical Improvements
Estimated Cost: $30,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF128 Date
Scheduled:
FY 12
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
There have been multiple remodels of the Senior Center since it was put
in service in the early 1980s. As a cost saving measure each addition was
done with its own mechanical system. There are now 8 heating and
mechanical distribution systems and 5 air conditioning systems in the
facility.
Overall comfort systems in the building are fair now that the new air
conditioning system is installed in the dining area. There are areas of the
building that are still lacking in good air flow and equalizing of heating and
cooling temperatures.
The first step is an analysis of the building systems and a review of the
current mechanical controls to determine where the deficiencies are in the
building.
Alternatives
Considered:
An analysis of the building systems and a review of the current mechanical
controls is needed to determine the options for better control of the
numerous systems in the building.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Areas of the building need addition air flow to improve comfort levels in the
office areas upstairs. The current mechanical control system is old
enough that technical support is spotty from the original vendor.
An upgrade to the mechanical system will provide an opportunity to
integrate some of the multiple systems in the building leading to both
improved comfort levels in the building and an overall reduction in
energy use.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: A new system will provide
better control of the building temperatures and result in a reduction of
energy costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: 42
114
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
42
115
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Lindley Center Basement Renovation
Estimated Cost:
$21,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF129 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: New ■ Replacement ■ Facility Equipment
Project Description: The Lindley Center Basement has a number potential health and safety issues.
It is infested with rodents, is dilapidated and almost to the point of being non-
functional. The basement has previously been used for storage of Recreation
Department program supplies (used in youth programs) as well as storage for
other community groups such as BSF and the Gallatin Valley Bike Club. The
proposed project would include the following:
1. Cleaning/Disinfecting and packing out all salvageable supplies to an
on-site storage container.
2. Patching all holes where rodents are entering the structure.
3. Exterminating rodents that are present in the structure.
4. Cleaning/Disinfecting of the structure.
Alternatives
Considered:
Exterminate rodents, patch holes and no longer use the basement.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
• Reduced liability for the city
• A healthier/safer environment for staff
• A healthier/safer environment for the public, the heater is located in the
basement and therefore pulls air from the basement into the main part
of the building which is used on a weekly basis for public rentals and
youth recreation programs.
• Continued use for storage, which is much needed by the department
• Reduction of staff time for maintenance and upkeep
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs which would include an exterminator.
Funding Sources: 100% General Fund
116
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria
Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
9
4. Departmental Priority Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission Work Plan Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
1
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
51
117
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: City Hall Phase II Site Improvements
Estimated Cost: $35,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF130 Date
Scheduled:
FY 12
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
A general landscape plan was prepared for the building remodel. It
included planting beds, irrigation upgrades for a dated system and
modifications to provide water coverage for the revised site and better use
of treated city water.
Improvement items include:
• Irrigation upgrade and new irrigation lines to all parts of the site.
• Reclamation of the abandoned alley to the south of the City
Commission meeting room.
• Trees to provide screening and shading on the south facing
elevation.
• A storm water detention area on the north east end of the alley to
protect the creek from site run-off and any added siltation.
• Planting beds and screening from the parking lot to the south of
City Hall.
• Benches and or picnic tables for staff and citizen use.
• Better amenities for bike racks will also be included.
If approved the landscaping plan will be presented to the Commission for
final review and approval.
Alternatives
Considered:
Work is already under way with a citizen group to establish a rain garden
on the site and to begin the landscaping process. The group has agreed
to help with some of the site design work so that we can have an adequate
plan together for Planning Department review. Some fundraising is
anticipated but the city will need to have some funding available to
implement the work.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The site improvements will add to the overall character of the building as
an important municipal facility. Commitments were made in the LEED
application for future site development that will address lower maintenance
needs, less water use, and other green practices.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: The replacement of the
irrigation system with a properly zoned system will make better use of
treated city water. The landscape plan that has been initially developed
for the site includes both native plantings and other vegetation requiring
less water.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund. A volunteer group has been established to develop
the site with LEED type standards in mind. Some fund raising and
volunteer labor has been proposed by the group to use the site as a
demonstration site for sustainable landscaping practices.
Project Rating: 38
118
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
38
119
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Shop Complex Re-roof
Estimated Cost: $34,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF131 Date
Scheduled:
FY 12
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Re-roof the portion of the roof over the current vehicle maintenance area
at the shop complex.
Alternatives
Considered:
The main shop building is a “U” shaped building housing shop facilities on
the north, offices on the west leg, and vehicle maintenance on the south
end. The roof areas were called out as three separate projects, with the
west and north buildings already addressed with new roofs as they were
in the worst condition.
The work has started on a new vehicle maintenance building at the lower
yard. Once vehicle maintenance moves out, this wing of the building will
be re-modeled as office and shop space.
A new roof will protect the improvements made to the building.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
A new roof will protect the improvements made to the building when the
use is converted to office space.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No addition costs are
anticipated.
Funding
Sources:
General fund with some charges made to other divisions located at the
shop complex
Project Rating: 35
120
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
35
121
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Cemetery – Columbarium
Estimated
Cost:
$40,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF132 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: X New Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Above ground-ash burial plots. Our current columbarium niches are
expected to be sold out by FY12. Adding another columbarium will
meet the needs of those looking for above ground ash burial plots at
the cemetery.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to offer in-ground burials when the present columbarium is
full.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Offering the public an alternative to traditional burials
Lessen environmental impact compared to traditional burials
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Reduced maintenance and repair costs
Decreased fuel costs
Routine maintenance and servicing
Funding
Sources:
100% General fund
Project
Rating:
Level of Service: 32
122
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
123
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
32
124
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Cemetery – 4x4 4wheeler with plow
Estimated
Cost:
$10,500
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF133 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: New X Replacement Facility X Equipment
Project
Description:
ATV for plowing sidewalks
Spot spraying in cemetery
Transport Wacker within cemetery
Alternatives
Considered:
Borrow from other divisions if available
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Efficient and timely snow removal in and around the cemetery
Safety/eliminate possible back and leg injuries from lifting
Wacker into truck
More fuel efficient vehicle for use in cemetery
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Reduced maintenance and repair costs
Decreased fuel costs
Routine maintenance and servicing
Funding
Sources:
100% General fund
Project rating: Level of Service: 32
125
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
32
126
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Senior Center Flooring
Estimated Cost: $15,000.00
Project Number: General Fund – GF134 Date
Scheduled:
FY 12
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
The flooring in the main dining area at the Senior Center was replaced in
2008 with assistance from the Southwest Home Builders Association. The
building was put in service in the early 1980s. There are other floor areas
in the building that are showing their age. This project would replace floor
areas in the fireplace area, the conference and meeting rooms, and child
care areas.
Alternatives
Considered:
The best flooring materials for each application will be identified. The
areas with the highest public use and that are in the worst condition will be
addressed on a priority basis
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Better overall appearance of the facility. Some possible safety
improvements by replacing problem floor areas before they become a
trip hazard.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: The newer floor areas would
need to be maintained in an appropriate fashion so that the investment in
new flooring is protected to extend the life of the flooring materials that are
installed.
Funding
Sources:
General Fund with a request for some funding from the Senior Center and
the money paid by groups that use the facility.
Project Rating: 30
127
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
30
128
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Shop Complex sidewalk installation
Estimated Cost: $32,720.00
Project Number: General Fund – GF135 Date
Scheduled:
FY 13
Purpose: X New Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
The Shop Complex at 814 North Bozeman only has a section of sidewalk
along Tamarack Street. This project would install sidewalk sections
along North Bozeman Ave, and East Aspen Street. The section of walk
along North Rouse Ave would be addressed when the state completes
improvements to Rouse
Alternatives
Considered:
Leave existing perimeter conditions as is.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The city sidewalk program has been dormant for the last few years. There
is more emphasis in the community now on walkable communities.
Installing sidewalks around a city owned facility will demonstrate that the
city is taking an active role in encouraging safe pedestrian travel
throughout the community.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Addition staff time will be
required to clear these sections of walk during the winter. Close proximity
to the shops will negate the need for travel costs, but equipment and
hourly expenses will be incurred
Funding
Sources:
The bulk of the cost would be against the general fund with other
departments with offices at the shops sharing in some of the cost of
installation.
Project Rating: 52
129
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70 52
130
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Community Aquatic and Recreation Center Needs Assessment
Estimated Cost:
$65,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF136 Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
A study to include: The analysis of existing facilities, programs
and demographic data, and recommendations for the current
and future aquatic and recreational facilities needs of the
Bozeman area.
The study shall include: survey, public meetings, advertising,
analyzing existing aquatics and recreational facilities,
demographic analysis, marketing analysis, and the
development of recommendations.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This study will guide the development and design of future
aquatic and recreational facilities for the Bozeman area.
This will insure that we do not build what the community will
not support.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
none
Funding
Sources:
100% general fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 43
131
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
8
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
43
132
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center Pool Filtration System
Estimated Cost: $185,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF137 Date
Scheduled:
FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The current filtration at the Swim Center is a hazard to work
in. Staff must climb into the filtration pit onto slick wood rails to
scrub the filter grids on weekly bases. Once per month staff
must climb to the bottom of the pit to clean out all old filter
media, there is not a ladder the bottom of the pit so staff must
swing from pipes to get to the bottom. The filter pit holds
approximately 60,000 gallons of water, which gets flushed
down the drain.
A regenerative media system is a new media system that
uses the same media that the Swim Center currently uses,
which provides the cleanest water. The system is contained in
a pressurized tank that will hold 400 gallons of water. To
clean the staff will only be required to press a button, reducing
the potential hazard.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use current system
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This project will decrease the work place hazards for staff,
reduce staff time needed to clean filters, and replace media.
The regenerative media system will also save approximately
700,000 gallons of water per year in cleaning.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Maintenance and Operating cost will be equal or less then
current system.
Funding
Sources:
100% General fund
Project Rating: 45
133
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
7
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
7
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
45
134
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Park Restrooms-Attached to the west side of Beall Park Recreation Center
Estimated Cost:
Unknown
Project Number: General Fund – GF138 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New ■ Replacement ■ Facility Equipment
Project Description: Renovate the existing restrooms (both men’s & women’s) that are attached to
the Beall Park Recreation Center on the west side and accessed from Beall
Park. The renovation would combine the current 2 restrooms into one unisex
restroom and bring the restroom up to current ADA standards and greatly
reduce ongoing maintenance costs.
Alternatives
Considered:
Leave restrooms in current condition
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
• Compliance with ADA Accessibility Laws
• More energy efficient sinks, toilets and lights
• Attractive restrooms that the public will take better care of
• Easier to keep clean, providing a safer & healthier facility for the public
• Reduced maintenance costs
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs
Funding Sources: 100% General Fund
Project Rating 55
135
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria
Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
17
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
9
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental Priority Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
6
5. Commission Work Plan Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan –
MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
55
136
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: City Hall Phase III Site Improvements
Estimated Cost: $45,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF139 Date
Scheduled:
FY 15
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Phase III will address some of the longer term site needs.
Work proposed in this phase of improvements includes:
• An established path of travel through the parking lot from the parking
area along Rouse to the entry sidewalk.
• Resurfacing the parking lot and restriping will reduce annual
maintenance costs.
• Sections of sidewalk along Lamme are starting to deteriorate. Work
on these sidewalk sections will be combined with the establishment of
tree pits and drip irrigation. Current code calls for street trees
approximately every 50 feet.
• The curb area around the creek crossing bridge on Lamme is an odd
configuration that leads to water retention and freezing during the
winter.
• Site security and pedestrian lighting will also be evaluated once a site
plan and project costs are further refined.
Alternatives
Considered:
Certain components of Phase III will require coordination so that
improvements do not get damaged with future work on the site.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The site improvements will add to the overall character of the building as
an important municipal focal point. The work proposed in Phase III will
improve general pedestrian safety by getting people across the parking lot
and address some of the deterioration sidewalk on the East Lamme side
of the building. This area gets a good deal of pedestrian traffic for both
City Hall and Hawthorn school.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Some additional costs will be
incurred during the first few years as the plantings are starting to establish
themselves on-site. The upgraded sidewalk areas will still need to be
maintained, but a new walk will require less work to clear because the
surface will be uniform and have the proper drainage slopes.
Improvements to the parking lot will also reduce some of the overall
annual maintenance costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 45
137
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
3
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70 45
138
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Lindley Center Parking Lot Renovation
Estimated Cost: $42,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF140 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Seal and stripe the parking lot at the Lindley Center and include ADA
parking stalls. Install parking lot lights and bases, a dumpster pad and
dumpster enclosure fence.
This project aligns with section 10.10.1 of the PROST plan (adopted
October 2007) that recommends that City parks, recreation facilities and
trails are accessible to the greatest extent possible.
Alternatives
Considered:
Sealing and striping lot and not installing lights
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
• Will comply with city codes
• Will allow for more cars to be parked in the lot at a time.
• More organized parking which will make the lot safer and reduced
liability.
• Lights will help with public safety and parking lot/facility security.
• ADA spots will be designated which will make the lot accessible.
• The dumpster would be enclosed.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs to include stripping and periodic
overlays.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 50
139
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
13
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
9
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
8
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
50
140
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Story Mansion Re-roof
Estimated Cost: $141,508
Project Number: General Fund – GF141 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace the existing cedar shake roof with a cedar shingle roof.
Alternatives
Considered:
An application was submitted for replacement of the roof using
state historic preservation funds. Should this funding not come
through the replacement cost will need to be done with other grant
sources, fundraising, or general fund money.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The 2003 Architectural Assessment that was conducted on the
building back in 2003 listed the condition of the roof as fair. Since
taking ownership of the building the city has successfully taken care
of all building components that were called out as failing or in poor
condition under the same assessment report. Now that all the
critical items have been addressed, it is time for the next level of
repairs to be considered for priority.
With the renovations that were completed on the main level and
basement, a new heating systems was installed. The heat on the
upper unoccupied floors is set to protect interior finishes and
building systems. Because there is very little insulation in the
building a great deal of heat is going up through the roof. Any snow
accumulation is melting off and the water run-off from the melting
snow is starting to form ice dams at the eve areas of the roof.
Water infiltration from the run-off is starting to impact the facia and
soffit areas of the building. Insulation of the building will help with
the snow melt issue. A properly installed roof with the proper
underlayment will also reduce some of the ice damming problems.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: A new cedar shingle
roof would have an expected life of 35 to 40 years. If work
continues on the second and third floors of the mansion a new roof
is an important consideration for protecting the interior
improvements.
Funding
Sources:
Grant sources, fundraising, general fund, or some combination or
resources.
Project Rating: 49
141
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
10
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
5
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
49
142
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Swim Center Pool gutter tiles, and pool edge tiles
Estimated Cost: $210,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF142 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The current Pool gutter tiles are from the original build in
1974. They are made of concrete and over the years have
been eroded away and are becoming dangerously thin. The
tiles are no longer made; the gutter will be replaced with a
high impact plastic gutter system. The edge tiles around the
pool will be damaged during the process, and they are also no
longer available. A modern tile that will fit into the color
scheme of the pool will replace them.
Alternatives
Considered:
Replace with stainless steel gutters
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Failure of the gutter system would result in a pool closure.
This is part of the overall circulation system required for
filtration.
This project will reduce the chance that patrons get hurt as
the facility ages.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
None
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 47
143
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
5
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
10
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
144
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Story Mansion Sidewalk Replacement
Estimated Cost: $34,600.00 each year for two years.
Project Number: General Fund – GF144 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace the damaged areas of sidewalk around the perimeter
lot of the story Mansion
Alternatives
Considered:
Replace the worst sections of sidewalk as needed.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The current sidewalks are the standard 5 foot walkways.
Areas of the sidewalk are showing signs of wear making it
difficult to maintain in the winter. The turf areas on either side
of the sidewalk are higher that the sidewalk which leads to
snow and snow melt-off accumulation on the walk. The
Parks Department has moved to 6 foot wide sidewalks so it
can be cleared properly with the equipment we currently use
for winter snow removal.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Replacement of
the walks will facilitate more efficient snow removal on the
block.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 38
145
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
10
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
38
146
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Professional Building Re-roof
Estimated Cost: $44,000.00
Project Number: General Fund – GF145 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New X Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Re-roof of single membrane roofing system at the
Professional Building
Alternatives
Considered:
Repair any leaks in the roof as they occur. Continue to
monitor the condition of the roof and wait until the integrity of
the roof has further deteriorated to the point that spot repairs
are ineffective.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Since the City purchased the building in the mid-1990s, there
have been a number of roof related improvements and
repairs. The private offices that occupied the second floor
have been replaced with city offices. There are two
penetrations on the roof from old ventilation systems, from
the old dentist office that are no longer in use. A new air
handler was added for the second floor. An air conditioning
unit for the IT room was installed on the roof. A lightning
strike damaged a portion of the roof.
Staff has monitored the condition of the roof and some soft
spots have developed where water is getting through the
single ply membrane into the subsurface insulation. Repairs
have been completed but the roof is showing signs of wear
and replacement prior to failure is the best maintenance
practice.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Replacement of
the roof will help preserve the integrity of the building and
avoid untimely seasonal repair costs.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: 34
147
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
15
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
7
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
34
148
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks- Lindley Park irrigation system
Estimated Cost:
$100,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF146 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: X New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Completely replace the irrigation system at Lindley Park. The
system is one of the oldest in the city. It is becoming common
that the pipe and electrical wire are starting to fail on a regular
basis. It is important to keep this system working because
Lindley is one of our most used parks, keeping the grass
green before and after the Sweet Pea Festival, and it also a
part of the cemetery irrigation system.
Alternatives
Considered:
Repair existing system as needed
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Healthier turf, grass will be green, not dormant in the summer
Efficient use of the water (water conservation)
Irrigate at night-minimize evaporation and transpiration
Public safety, un-irrigated ground is hard and attracts
gophers.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs would rise slightly,
due to the nature of valves, rotor heads and electrical wire in
the ground.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 28
149
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
(10)
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
(5)
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
(2)
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
(3)
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
(5)
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
(0)
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
(3)
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
(28)
150
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parks- Softball Complex irrigation system
Estimated Cost:
$110,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF147 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: X New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Replace the existing irrigation system at the softball complex.
The system is 35 years old and starting to fail regularly. This
is not only due to its age but because many of the lines were
cut through and patched when the lighting system was
installed. Work has been done to fix the curb stops from
leaking by.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to repair existing system
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Healthier turf, grass will be green, not dormant in the summer
Efficient use of the water (water conservation)
Irrigate at night-minimize evaporation and transpiration
Public safety, un-irrigated ground is hard.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Annual operating and maintenance costs would rise slightly,
due to the nature of valves, rotor heads and electrical wire in
the ground.
Funding
Sources:
100% General Fund
Project Rating: Level of Service: 28
151
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
(10)
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
(5)
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
(2)
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
(3)
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
(5)
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
(0)
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
(3)
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
(28)
152
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Parks – BMX Parking Lot
Estimated
Cost:
$85,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF148 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Installation of parking lot at Westlake BMX park.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do not install a parking lot
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Also access for Childrens Memorial Park
Accessible area to park
Christmas tree dumping
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Minimal. Clean-up, possible snow plowing, painting lines every
few years
Funding
Sources:
General fund
Project
Rating:
Level of Service: 25
153
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
25
154
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
East Gallatin Parking Lot
Estimated
Cost:
$60,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF149 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Paving parking lot at the East Gallatin Recreation Area..
Alternatives
Considered:
Keep the parking lot gravel
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Reduced maintenance on the road.
We would be able to plow the parking lot after all snow events.
We now have to make sure the ground is frozen before we plow
so the parking lot does not come up with the snow.
No washboards and holes to trap water.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Minimal. Clean-up, possible snow plowing, painting lines every
few years
Funding
Sources:
General fund
Project
Rating:
Level of Service: 25
155
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
25
156
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Story Mansion Stair and Elevator Addition
Estimated Cost: $602,616
Project Number: General Fund – GF150 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: X New Replacement X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Construct a stair and elevator tower for the Story Mansion.
Alternatives
Considered:
Future uses of the building will determine the need for this addition.
The building can continue to operate as a community center without
an elevator. Should a prospective tenant for the second floor come
forward, the need for the elevator and the responsibility for
installation would be determined.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
A stair and elevator tower would address the accessibility
requirements for the Story Mansion. The main level meets
accessibility requirements. Should the second and third floors be
renovated for uses that require public access then an elevator
would need to be installed.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: An elevator would
require an annual contract for monitoring the emergency phone. All
other city elevators are also under a general maintenance contract
for repairs and upkeep. The state also charges an annual
inspection and certificate fee for all elevators.
Funding
Sources:
Grant funding, fund raising, general fund, or some combination of
resources.
Project Rating: 25
157
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
25
158
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Parks - Beall Basketball Courts
Estimated
Cost:
$18,000
Project
Number:
General Fund – GF151 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: New Replacement Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Resurface or tile the existing court.
Alternatives
Considered:
Leave it the way it is.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Improved basketball courts that are level, safe and are an asset to
the park.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Minimal
Funding
Sources:
General fund
Project
Rating:
Level of Service: 23
159
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
10
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
3
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
23
160
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Story Mansion Interior Renovations for Second and Third
Floors
Estimated Cost:
$128,680
Project Number: General Fund – GF152 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New X
Replacement
X Facility Equipment
Project
Description:
Structural upgrades to the 3rd floor of the Story Mansion.
Provide a second set of stairs per code requirements from the
1st level to the 3rd level. The work included in this estimate is
for code compliance. This work does not include the remodel
of the bedroom areas into offices or other uses. Costs for
renovation of the space for a proposed use will be developed
when the uses are know.
Alternatives
Considered:
Include these structural and code upgrades in the cost of the
renovation when a use of the space is determined.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This work will need to be done in order to utilize the upper
floors of the mansion. There is interest in an addition source
of income for the mansion by leasing out space to an
appropriate tenant.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Renovation of the
second and third floors will increase the annual maintenance
costs for the building. A portion of these costs could be
recovered from the lease payments.
Funding
Sources:
Grant sources, fund raising, tenant improvements, general
fund.
Project Rating: 15
161
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
5
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
0
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
2
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
3
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
15
162
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Shops Complex
Estimated
Cost:
Total Cost Unknown.
Project
Number:
Public Works – PW01 Date
Scheduled:
Remainder
FY11-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project consists of completion of the phased renovations of a City
Shops facilities.
• Phase I – FY10: New Vehicle Maintenance Facility & remodel of
the old Vehicle Maintenance area for remaining shop complex
operations
• Future Phases – Move Streets & Sign/Signal, Remodel of
Remaining Streets/Sign & Signal areas, Parks Barn Improvements.
The present shops complex is built in a residential neighborhood and it is
estimated to have nearly twice the employees working out of the complex
than what it was designed for. Phase I improvements will move three
Vehicle Mtc employees to a new location and remodel the remaining area
for the benefit of other divisions (Water/Sewer, etc.)
Future Phases will likely include relocating Street & Sign/Signal divisions to
the New Vehicle Maintenance location. Further remodel or improvement of
the existing site, including the existing Parks Barn.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to operate in existing facilities.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Constructing the complex in phases will allow additional time to secure
funding for other phases, lessen traffic at the current site, possibly relocate
the existing water fill site, and free up space in the current complex to
alleviate crowding for other divisions.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Unknown at this point.
Funding
Sources:
Future Phases = Street Maintenance Fund, Forestry Fund, General Fund
(Parks)
163
ST
R
E
E
T
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
C
I
P
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
(2
5
,
6
5
0
)
$
88
,
0
4
7
$
(1
6
,
2
9
1
)
$
16
2
,
6
1
2
$
15
7
,
2
4
4
$
351,846$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
24
3
,
6
9
7
30
1
,
6
1
8
36
8
,
9
0
2
44
7
,
3
5
6
53
4
,
9
8
5
635,646
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
13
0
,
0
0
0
40
5
,
9
5
6
19
0
,
0
0
0
45
2
,
7
2
3
34
0
,
3
8
3
200,000
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
C
I
P
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
88
,
0
4
7
$
(1
6
,
2
9
1
)
$
16
2
,
6
1
2
$
15
7
,
2
4
4
$
35
1
,
8
4
6
$
787,492$
16
4
ST
R
E
E
T
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
0
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
In
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
2.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.00
3.50
Ra
t
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.00
2.00
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
4.
0
0
5.
0
0
5.
0
0
5.
0
0
5.00
5.50
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
1.
0
0
1.
0
0
1.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.00
2.00
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
5.
0
0
6.
0
0
6.
0
0
7.
0
0
7.00
7.50
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
Fr
o
m
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
Y
e
a
r
(
s
)
9.
0
0
11
.
0
0
13
.
0
0
15
.
0
0
17
.
0
0
19.00
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.00
2.00
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
11
.
0
0
13
.
0
0
15
.
0
0
17
.
0
0
19
.
0
0
21.00
16
5
ST
R
E
E
T
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ba
s
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
f
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
2,
0
6
7
,
9
1
6
$
2,
1
8
8
,
8
1
2
$
2,
3
2
0
,
1
4
1
$
2,
4
5
9
,
3
4
9
$
2,
6
3
1
,
5
0
3
$
2,815,709$
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
2,
1
8
8
,
8
1
2
$
2,
3
2
0
,
1
4
1
$
2,
4
5
9
,
3
4
9
$
2,
6
3
1
,
5
0
3
$
2,
8
1
5
,
7
0
9
$
3,026,887$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
24
0
,
7
6
9
$
30
1
,
6
1
8
$
36
8
,
9
0
2
$
44
7
,
3
5
6
$
53
4
,
9
8
5
$
635,646$
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
B
o
n
d
I
s
s
u
e
s
I
N
T
E
R
C
A
P
O
t
h
e
r
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
24
0
,
7
6
9
$
30
1
,
6
1
8
$
36
8
,
9
0
2
$
44
7
,
3
5
6
$
53
4
,
9
8
5
$
635,646$
16
6
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
ST
R
E
E
T
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
F
U
N
D
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY
1
5
TotalScheduled
ST
R
0
1
1
T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
W
/
P
L
O
W
A
N
D
S
A
N
D
E
R
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
47
,
2
4
4
47,244
ST
R
0
6
CO
M
P
A
C
T
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
6
7
,
4
9
2
67,492
ST
R
0
9
LO
A
D
E
R
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
17
5
,
4
7
9
175,479
ST
R
1
1
ME
D
I
A
N
A
N
D
B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
M
A
I
N
T
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
3
5
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
45
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
220,000
ST
R
1
3
PA
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
I
C
T
I
O
N
S
I
G
N
S
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
- 2,112,000
ST
R
1
7
SI
N
G
L
E
A
X
E
L
D
U
M
P
T
RU
C
K
W
/
P
L
O
W
A
N
D
S
A
N
D
E
R
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
14
0
,
3
8
3
140,383
ST
R
1
9
TA
N
D
E
M
A
X
E
L
D
U
M
P
T
RU
C
K
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
17
8
,
4
6
4
178,464
ST
R
2
0
BI
K
E
P
A
T
H
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
2
5
,
0
0
0
25
,
0
0
0
25
,
0
0
0
25
,
0
0
0
25
,
0
0
0
125,000
ST
R
2
1
CO
N
V
E
Y
O
R
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
35
,
0
0
0
35,000
ST
R
2
2
GR
A
D
E
R
L
E
A
S
E
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
5
0
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
250,000
ST
R
2
3
SE
L
F
P
R
O
P
E
L
L
E
D
C
O
N
V
E
Y
O
R
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
- 196,000
ST
R
2
4
SW
E
E
P
E
R
S
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
5
0
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
75
,
0
0
0
350,000
PW
0
1
SH
O
P
S
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
UNKNOWN
TO
T
A
L
40
5
,
9
5
6
$
19
0
,
0
0
0
$
45
2
,
7
2
3
$
34
0
,
3
8
3
$
20
0
,
0
0
0
$
1,589,062$ 2,308,000$
16
7
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
One Ton Flex-Fuel Truck
Estimated Cost:
$47,244
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR01 Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a one ton 4x4 cab and chassis truck with bed. It
would be equipped with plow and sander.
It would replace an existing 1986 model that is now 20 years old.
This truck is used in the day to day operation of the Street Dept.
This truck would use alternative fuel such as Ethanol or BioDiesel.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use 1986 model when it is operational.
Retire truck and not replace.
Lease
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
New vehicle would be more reliable and would be able to contribute to
snow removal operations. Would not need to budget money for major
repairs. Would achieve better fuel economy and use alternative fuels.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
168
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Compact Utility Tractor
Estimated Cost: $67,492
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR06 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a 60 horsepower Utility Tractor that would replace the
Sign and Signal Departments 1969 model (now 37 years old) and the
Street Departments 1981 model (now 25 years old).
It would be used for sign post removal and installation, leaf cleanup, snow
removal, alley brush cleaning and misc. dirt and landscaping work.
This tractor would be powered by alternative fuels such as BioDiesel.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use old unreliable tractors.
Rent when available.
Lease.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased production. Increase in safety. Use of alternative fuels. Able to
adapt our specialty attachments which we unable to do with lease
equipment. Better fuel economy and fewer maintenance costs due to
newer model.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
169
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Loader
Estimated Cost: $175,479
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR09 Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a front end loader to replace our 1978 Fiat, which is
now 28 years old. When this loader is used with any frequency it seldom
makes it thru an 8 hour shift.
It would be used as a back up or for limited use to other departments.
The new loader would use alternative fuels such as BioDiesel.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use Fiat when it runs.
Lease
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Safer more reliable equipment. Newer technology would increase
production. Use of alternative fuels. Decrease in exhaust emissions.
Able to be more productive and not have to schedule our work around
whether the Fiat is operational.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
170
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Median & Boulevard Maintenance
Estimated Cost: $35,000 in FY11, Increasing $5,000 each year after.
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR11 Date
Scheduled:
FY11-FY15
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This money would be used to repair and maintain the City’s boulevards
and medians. Projects might include irrigation, seeding, planting and
curbing.
Currently no money is budgeted for this type of work.
Money would be added to this fund yearly so as to continue to bring our
medians and boulevards up to the standards our citizens expect.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to do minimal repairs to the medians and boulevards using
Street Depts. operational funds.
Do nothing.
Recruit volunteers, this would be used any time it is possible with the
proposed funding.
Take out the medians and pave them.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Keeping boulevards and medians maintained help keep our street edges
intact. Many of our medians are in entryway corridors and are in dire need
of repair. Well maintained boulevards and medians help with storm water
runoff thus keeping it out of our streams. Not having to water by hand and
budget for the manpower to do so. Street edges bordered by medians not
having to be repaired yearly because of the curb edges breaking off.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: As scheduled.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
171
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Parking Restriction Signage Project
Estimated Cost: $2,112,000
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR13 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request to fund the installation of parking restriction signs. The 2
million + estimate is figuring that if we have 200 miles of streets and a sign
is placed every 100 feet on both sides of the street as they are in the
residential permit parking areas is some parts of town then a total of
21,120 signs would be needed. The average cost for a new sign
installation is about $100. This money or a portion of it would only be
needed if the commission passes the pending ordinance. This is just an
estimate; a more accurate number would be presented under the fiscal
note during ordinance review.
Alternatives
Considered:
Limit number of signs.
Not install signs making ordinance difficult to enforce.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Installing signs would make it easier for police to enforce. People will be
more likely to not park on the sides of the streets when they shouldn’t
making snow removal more productive. Traveling on narrow streets will
be easier in the winter with parking only on one side. Should be a one
time expense other than maintenance and replacing damaged signs.
Future signs would be installed at developers’ expense.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
172
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Single Axle Dump Truck
Estimated Cost: $140,383
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR17 Date
Scheduled:
FY14
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a single axle dump truck with 4 yard box. A plow and
sander would also be included. This would replace a 1986 dump truck
(now 20 years old) that would be move to backup. The backup 1978
dump truck (now 28 years old) would be retired.
The 1986 truck is underpowered with a gas engine that averages 2-3
MPG.
This truck would be fueled with alternative fuels such as BioDiesel.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use 1986 model.
Rent.
Lease.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
More productivity, current model can’t make it up Highland Blvd. fully
loaded. Better fuel economy and fewer emissions. Use of alternative
fuels. Reliability. Safer. Save on maintenance and repair costs. Less
fuel consumed.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
173
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Tandem Axle Dump Truck
Estimated Cost: $178,464
Project Number: Street Maintenance – STR19 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a tandem axle dump truck. It would be equipped with
a plow and sander.
This would be an addition to our fleet.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use the smaller trucks that take longer to do the snow routes.
Lease.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increase our snow removal fleet to provide better response to the citizens.
Able to haul more, tandem axle can haul more than twice as much as a
single axle. Spend less time traveling back to refill with sand with the
bigger capacity. Less wear and maintenance on the larger trucks.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
174
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bike Route Improvements
Estimated Cost:
$25,000 each year
Project Number: Street Maintenance Fund –
STR20 Date
Scheduled:
Annually
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This item would provide for bike-related infrastructure including (but, not
limited to) racks, signs, striping, curb-cuts, and separated pathways. The
currently-underway Transportation Plan Update could be a method for
prioritizing possible future projects which will rely heavily upon these funds
(as well as the recently adopted Safe Routes to School Program).
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue with existing infrastructure.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Safety will likely be improved.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: none
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance Fund
175
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Conveyor
Estimated Cost: $35,000
Project Number: Street Maintenance-STR21 Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request for a self powered conveyor for stacking materials.
Currently we stack with a loader and can only go as high as the loader
can safely stockpile.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use a loader. Buy used.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Available to stack materials in a smaller footprint thus saving valuable
space in the lower yard and old landfill.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: minimal
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance District Revenue
176
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Lease/Purchase Motor Graders
for Winter Snow Plowing and Gravel Road Maintenance
Estimated Cost: $50,000 per year
Project Number: Street Maintenance Fund
STR22 Date
Scheduled:
FY11-FY15,
Annually
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request to establish a 25 year replacement schedule for our
graders. Currently our fleet is comprised of a 1981, 1994, 1998, 2003
and a 2007. The ’03 and ’07 are currently on a lease purchase so the
1981 wouldn’t be replaced until 2012. Although the industry standard
schedules a 15 year replacement we believe with our extensive
preventative maintenance schedule will allow us to get 20 to 25 years
out of a grader.
Alternatives
Considered:
Budget 250k every 5 years to purchase.
Cut back on our use of graders in the residential areas.
Continue to use what we have and replace when we have complete
failure.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Much more reliable equipment.
Less emissions
Better fuel economy
Less down time.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Decrease in costs due to newer equipment.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance Revenue
177
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Lease/Purchase Sweepers
for Bike Lanes and Normal Sweeping Routes
Estimated Cost:
$25,000 FY10, $50,000 FY11, $75,000 Each Year After
Project Number: Street Maintenance Fund
STR24
Date Scheduled: FY11-FY15,
Annually
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request to replace our sweepers every 5 years, with a phased
implementation in FY10, 11 & 12.
In the past we depended on the State for funds through the MACI
program to purchase a sweeper every five years. Industry standards
recommend replacing municipal street sweepers every 4-5 years. There
is no longer funding for street sweepers. Our current fleet of sweepers
include a 1986, 1991, 1999 and a 2005 model. Except for the 2005, they
spend more time in the shop than in operation. The company that
manufactured the ’86, ’91 and ’99 is no longer in business so we have to
search for many of the parts.
Alternatives
Considered:
Budget 200k every year until all sweepers are replaced.
Cut back on our sweeping
There are no local contractors at this time.
Continue to use what we have.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Much improved operations.
Better air quality.
Improved storm water discharge.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Decrease in costs due to newer equipment.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Maintenance Revenue
178
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Shops Complex
Estimated
Cost:
Total Cost Unknown.
Project
Number:
Public Works – PW01 Date
Scheduled:
Remainder
FY11-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project consists of completion of the phased renovations of a City
Shops facilities.
• Phase I – FY10: New Vehicle Maintenance Facility & remodel of
the old Vehicle Maintenance area for remaining shop complex
operations
• Future Phases – Move Streets & Sign/Signal, Remodel of
Remaining Streets/Sign & Signal areas, Parks Barn Improvements.
The present shops complex is built in a residential neighborhood and it is
estimated to have nearly twice the employees working out of the complex
than what it was designed for. Phase I improvements will move three
Vehicle Mtc employees to a new location and remodel the remaining area
for the benefit of other divisions (Water/Sewer, etc.)
Future Phases will likely include relocating Street & Sign/Signal divisions to
the New Vehicle Maintenance location. Further remodel or improvement of
the existing site, including the existing Parks Barn.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to operate in existing facilities.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Constructing the complex in phases will allow additional time to secure
funding for other phases, lessen traffic at the current site, possibly relocate
the existing water fill site, and free up space in the current complex to
alleviate crowding for other divisions.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Unknown at this point.
Funding
Sources:
Future Phases = Street Maintenance Fund, Forestry Fund, General Fund
(Parks)
179
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
74
,
4
5
0
$
74
,
4
5
0
$
74
,
4
5
0
$
91
,
8
3
2
$
85
,
2
8
4
$
43,505$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
-
17
,
3
8
2
26
,
0
7
3
26
,
0
7
3
26,073
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
-
-
-
32
,
6
2
1
67
,
8
5
2
35,283
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
74
,
4
5
0
$
74
,
4
5
0
$
91
,
8
3
2
$
85
,
2
8
4
$
43
,
5
0
5
$
34,295$ Page 1
18
0
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
In
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
Ra
t
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
m
t
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
Fr
o
m
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
Y
e
a
r
(
s
)
-
-
-
2
.
0
0
3
.
0
0
3
.
0
0
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
2.
0
0
1.
0
0
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
-
2.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.00
3.00 Page 2
18
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ba
s
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
f
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
869,100$
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
86
9
,
1
0
0
$
869,100$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
$
-
$
17
,
3
8
2
$
26
,
0
7
3
$
26
,
0
7
3
$
26,073$
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
B
o
n
d
I
s
s
u
e
s
I
N
T
E
R
C
A
P
O
t
h
e
r
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
$
-
$
17
,
3
8
2
$
26
,
0
7
3
$
26
,
0
7
3
$
26,073$ Page 3
18
2
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
Y
R
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
T
o
t
a
l
Sch
e
d
u
l
e
d
BI
0
1
20
0
3
Je
e
p
L
i
b
e
r
t
y
4
W
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
2
,
6
2
1
3
2
,
6
2
1
BI
0
1
20
0
6
Je
e
p
L
i
b
e
r
t
y
4
W
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
3
,
9
2
6
33
,
9
2
6
BI
0
1
20
0
4
Je
e
p
G
r
a
n
d
C
h
e
r
o
k
e
e
4
W
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
3
,
9
2
6
33
,
9
2
6
BI
0
1
20
0
8
Do
d
g
e
D
u
r
a
n
g
o
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
5
,
2
8
3
35
,
2
8
3
BI
0
1
20
0
6
Do
d
g
e
D
u
r
a
n
g
o
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
3
6
,
6
9
4
BI
0
1
20
0
6
Je
e
p
L
i
b
e
r
t
y
4
W
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
3
6
,
6
9
4
BI
0
1
20
0
8
Do
d
g
e
D
u
r
a
n
g
o
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
3
6
,
6
9
4
BI
0
1
20
0
8
Do
d
g
e
D
u
r
a
n
g
o
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
3
6
,
6
9
4
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
-
$
-
$
3
2
,
6
2
1
$
67
,
8
5
2
$
35
,
2
8
3
$
13
5
,
7
5
6
$
146,777$ Page 4
18
3
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Staff Vehicle Replacement Program
Estimated
Cost:
$32,621 in FY13, plus 4% inflation there-after for each vehicle replaced.
Project
Number:
Building Inspection - BI01 Date Scheduled: FY11-FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This items for the scheduled replacement of Building Inspection vehicles based on age and
use of the vehicle, with the replaced vehicles handed down to other City Department staffs.
This program will address the long term vehicle needs of the Building Division, and some
related Fire Division positions which share Building Code Enforcement responsibilities,
through the regular rotation of new vehicles into and out of the Division.
Veh. Asset Vehicle
Year No. Make VIN Use
Current
Mileage Disposition
2003 3144 Jeep Liberty 4WD 1J4GL48K93W628654 Building Inspector 42,147 Replace in 2013
2006 3354 Jeep Liberty 4WD 1J4GL48K26W262928 Code Enforcement
28,450 Replace in 2014
2004 3218 Jeep Gr. Cherokee 1J4GW48N14C342060 Chief Building Official
34,772 Replace in 2014
2006 3328 Dodge Durango 1D4HB38NX6F148941 Building Inspector
34,068 Replace in 2015
2006 3353 Jeep Liberty 4WD 1J4GL48K46W262929 Building Inspector
15,766 Replace in 2016
2008 3404 Dodge Durango 1D8HB48258F117819 Plan Review
7,109 Replace in 2016
2008 3405 Dodge Durango 1D8HB48218F117820 Building Inspector
14,136 Replace in 2017
2008 3329 Dodge Durango 1D4HB38N16F148942 Office Spare 43,993 Unscheduled
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to utilize vehicles beyond their depreciated life.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Based on the age and use of the vehicle, a new vehicle is purchased as replacement and
the used vehicle is reassigned to an appropriate city department for its use.
In the past, vehicles were replaced after 5 years. We are stretching the useful life within
the division to 6-8 years depending on use.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: minimal.
Funding
Sources:
100% Building Inspection Fund Revenue
184
FO
R
E
S
T
R
Y
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
C
I
P
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
74
,
0
0
0
$
1,
6
4
9
$
61
,
4
0
0
$
56
,
0
4
9
$
12
1
,
2
9
7
$
163,808$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
57
,
4
5
3
59
,
7
5
1
62
,
1
4
1
65
,
2
4
8
68
,
5
1
1
71,936
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
12
9
,
8
0
4
-
67
,
4
9
2
-
26
,
0
0
0
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
C
I
P
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
1,
6
4
9
$
61
,
4
0
0
$
56
,
0
4
9
$
12
1
,
2
9
7
$
16
3
,
8
0
8
$
235,744$ PAGE 1
18
5
FO
R
E
S
T
R
Y
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
In
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
-
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.00
3.00
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
-
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.
0
0
3.00
3.00
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
1.
0
0
1.
0
0
1.
0
0
2.
0
0
2.00
2.00
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
1.
0
0
4.
0
0
4.
0
0
5.
0
0
5.00
5.00
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
Fr
o
m
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
Y
e
a
r
(
s
)
14
.
5
0
1
4
.
5
0
1
4
.
5
0
1
4
.
5
0
1
4
.
5
0
1
4
.
5
0
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
14
.
5
0
14
.
5
0
14
.
5
0
14
.
5
0
14
.
5
0
14.50 PAGE 2
18
6
FO
R
E
S
T
R
Y
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
jec
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Ba
s
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
f
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
3
9
2
,
3
0
4
$
3
9
6
,
2
2
7
$
4
1
2
,
0
7
6
$
4
2
8
,
5
5
9
$
4
4
9
,
9
8
7
$
4
7
2
,
4
8
6
$
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
3
9
6
,
2
2
7
$
4
1
2
,
0
7
6
$
4
2
8
,
5
5
9
$
4
4
9
,
9
8
7
$
4
7
2
,
4
8
6
$
4
9
6
,
1
1
1
$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
5
7
,
4
5
3
$
5
9
,
7
5
1
$
6
2
,
1
4
1
$
6
5
,
2
4
8
$
6
8
,
5
1
1
$
7
1
,
9
3
6
$
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
B
o
n
d
I
s
s
u
e
s
I
N
T
E
R
C
A
P
O
t
h
e
r
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
5
7
,
4
5
3
$
5
9
,
7
5
1
$
6
2
,
1
4
1
$
6
5
,
2
4
8
$
6
8
,
5
1
1
$
7
1
,
9
3
6
$ PAGE 3
18
7
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
FO
R
E
S
T
R
Y
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
&
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
t
/
D
i
v
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
T
o
t
a
l
Scheduled
FO
R
-
0
6CH
I
P
P
E
R
Fo
r
e
s
t
r
y
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
67
,
4
9
2
67,492
FO
R
-
0
71/
2
T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
F
o
r
e
s
t
r
y
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
2
6
,
0
0
0
2
6
,
0
0
0
PW
-
0
1
S
H
O
P
S
C
O
M
P
L
E
X
F
o
r
e
s
t
r
y
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
UNKNOWN
To
t
a
l
-
$
6
7
,
4
9
2
$
-
$
2
6
,
0
0
0
$
-
$
93,492
$
-$ PAGE 4
18
8
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Chipper
Estimated Cost:
$67,492
Project Number: Forestry – FOR05 Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This a request to replace a 2000 model chipper.
This would be a scheduled equipment replacement as this chipper would
be over 11 years old.
This equipment would be powered by an alternative fuel such as
BioDiesel.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older, inefficient model.
Lease.
As directed by Commission.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
1. More reliable equipment.
2. Safer
3. Use of alternative fuels.
4. Lower exhaust emissions.
5. More production due to improvements in design.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: no increase. A new chipper
would be cheaper than the existing repairs required on the older model
currently in use.
Funding
Sources:
100% Tree Maintenance District Fund Revenue
189
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Standard Cab Flex Fuel 4x4 Pickup
Estimated Cost: $ 26,000
Project Number: Forestry-FOR07 Date
Scheduled:
FY 14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is a request to replace a 1999 pickup. This would be a scheduled
replacement as this truck will be 15 years old. This truck would be passed
on to another department such as Parks to be used by seasonal.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older, less fuel efficient model.
Lease.
As directed by Commission.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
1. More reliable
2. Safer
3. Use of alternative fuels
4. Lower exhaust emissions
5. More production due to improvement in design
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
None
Funding
Sources:
100% Tree Maintenance District Fund Revenue
190
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Shops Complex
Estimated
Cost:
Total Cost Unknown.
Project
Number:
Public Works – PW01 Date
Scheduled:
Remainder
FY11-15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project consists of identifying a site (ideally, among currently owned
City properties) for the phased construction and relocation of all City Shops
facilities.
The present shops complex is built in a residential neighborhood and it is
estimated to have twice the employees working out of the complex than
what it was designed for. The present complex has high traffic loads. With
the public water fill station there, driving and walking in the complex is
dangerous at high traffic periods.
Over the past few years, a number of solutions to this issue have been
pursued. The Cardinal Distributing property seemed an ideal long-term
solution, but fell through due to Montana Rail Link’s refusal to lease land to
the City. Because of the complexities of trying to find another suitable
option for this large and diverse group of facilities, we are not able to
quantify all of the costs or project phases at this time.
Alternatives
Considered:
Build a smaller satellite facility for high traffic volume operations; leave low
traffic operations at existing facility.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Constructing the complex in phases will allow additional time to secure
funding for other phases, lessen traffic at the current site, possibly relocate
the existing water fill site, and free up space in the current complex to
alleviate crowding for other divisions.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Unknown at this point.
Funding
Sources:
Phase I = Remodel of vacated Vehicle Maintenance Area in FY10.
Other Phases = Wastewater Fund, Street Maintenance Fund, Forestry
Fund, Solid Waste Fund, General Fund (Parks)
The existing site (purchased by the General Fund) would be sold once the
final phase of the project is completed. This could pay for some of the
General Fund’s financial obligations for the project.
191
FI
R
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
&
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
21
1
,
9
8
0
$
53
1
,
2
7
2
$
35
1
,
1
8
9
$
68
3
,
8
9
0
$
31
3
,
0
1
6
$
664,788$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
31
9
,
2
9
2
32
9
,
9
1
7
33
2
,
7
0
1
34
9
,
1
2
6
35
1
,
7
7
2
372,628
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
-
5
1
0
,
0
0
0
-
7
2
0
,
0
0
0
-
4
6
2
,
0
9
4
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
53
1
,
2
7
2
$
35
1
,
1
8
9
$
68
3
,
8
9
0
$
31
3
,
0
1
6
$
66
4
,
7
8
8
$
575,321$ Page 1
19
2
FI
R
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
&
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Pr
i
o
r
Y
e
a
r
M
i
l
l
V
a
l
u
e
74
,
1
7
8
$
78
,
2
5
8
$
79
,
8
2
3
$
81
,
4
1
9
$
83
,
8
6
2
$
86,378$
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
5.
5
%
2%
2%
3%
3%
4%
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
M
i
l
l
V
a
l
u
e
78
,
2
5
8
$
79
,
8
2
3
$
81
,
4
1
9
$
83
,
8
6
2
$
86
,
3
7
8
$
89,833$
Mu
l
t
i
p
l
y
b
y
4
M
i
l
l
s
-
A
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
L
e
v
y
4
M
i
l
l
s
4
M
i
l
l
s
4
M
i
l
l
s
4
M
i
l
l
s
4
M
i
l
l
s
4
M
i
l
l
s
Le
v
y
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
C
I
P
31
3
,
0
3
1
$
31
9
,
2
9
2
$
32
5
,
6
7
8
$
33
5
,
4
4
8
$
34
5
,
5
1
1
$
359,332$
Ot
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
E
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
6,
2
6
1
10
,
6
2
5
7,
0
2
4
13
,
6
7
8
6,
2
6
0
13,296
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
31
9
,
2
9
2
$
32
9
,
9
1
7
$
33
2
,
7
0
1
$
34
9
,
1
2
6
$
35
1
,
7
7
2
$
372,628$ Page 3
19
3
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
FI
R
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
&
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
FE
-
0
1
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
O
F
F
I
R
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
1
FI
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
51
0
,
0
0
0
510,000
FE
-
0
2
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
O
F
L
A
D
D
E
R
T
R
U
C
K
FI
R
E
D
EP
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
72
0
,
0
0
0
720,000
FE
-
0
3
F
I
R
E
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
#
1
R
E
M
O
D
E
L
FI
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
462,094 462,094
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
51
0
,
0
0
0
$
-
$
7
2
0
,
0
0
0
$
-
$
4
6
2
,
0
9
4
$
1,692,094$ -$ Page 4
19
4
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Fire Engine #1 – Replacement
Estimated Cost: $510,000 Total
Project Number: Fire Equipment & Capital
Fund – FE01
Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project will replace the front line fire engine at Station 1
which is nearing the end of its safe and useful service life.
This apparatus has recently required significant structural
remanufacture and requires extensive electrical system
rebuild. The compressed air foam system (CAFS) works
intermittently and the costs to rebuild the system to bring it up
to a minimum level of reliability are prohibitive when
compared to the value of the truck at this point in its service
life cycle.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continued use of current fire apparatus with significant
increases to our annual maintenance budget; buy a used
engine; lease/purchase an engine.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Reduced maintenance costs and increased reliability for a
significant piece of the City’s structural firefighting
resources.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Maintenance
costs for the current engine will cease. Other costs will
increase based upon insurance, maintenance and repair,
lubricants, fuel and oil expenses. Further increases will occur
based also upon the actual number of responses and hours
used.
Funding
Sources:
100% Fire Equipment & Capital Replacement Fund
195
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name: Ladder Truck Replacement
Estimated Cost: $720,000
Project Number: Fire Equipment & Capital
Fund – FE02
Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project will fund the purchase and equipment of a new
aerial platform truck for the fire department in FY12. We
anticipate purchasing a “Refurbished Ladder Truck”; a new
truck equipped with a refurbished ladder.
An aerial platform truck is different from a ladder truck in that
it has a platform at the tip of the ladder that allows firefighters
to operate water streams and perform rescue and other
operations from the tip of the ladder device while it is in
operation, a capability we do not currently have.
The City’s ladder truck was purchased in 1986 and has
served the community well for over 20 years. Recent required
annual UL ladder tests have revealed that the ladder beds are
beginning to twist and warp from use and age. Additionally,
the open air rear cab violates firefighter safety requirements of
NFPA as firefighters are exposed to traffic during responses
and are not protected in the event of a crash.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use current ladder truck until it must be taken out
of service, have present ladder and cab refurbished at
manufacturing facility, purchase used aerial platform truck,
lease/purchase new aerial platform truck.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provide a critical life-safety resource that will enhance the fire
department’s ability to protect the city and its residents. This
aerial device is particularly important to provide fire and
rescue services to the downtown area, large commercial
structures and multi-family residential structures. It will also
gain us important points in ISO’s scoring matrix.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: The costs we pay
to maintain our current ladder truck will be reduced if it is
placed in a reserve role. Our costs will increase based upon
insurance, maintenance and repair, lubricants, fuel and oil
expenses. Further increases will occur based also upon the
actual number of responses and hours used.
Funding
Sources:
100% Fire Equipment & Capital Replacement Fund
196
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Fire Station One Remodel
Estimated
Cost:
$462,094.00
Project
Number:
Fire Equipment & Capital Fund –
FE03 Date
Scheduled:
FY2015
Purpose: □ New Replacement Facility
WA
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
C
I
P
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
7,
2
3
7
,
1
6
3
$
7
,
8
8
9
,
8
2
0
$
7
,
8
0
2
,
7
9
8
$
8
,
5
1
6
,
4
4
9
$
(
6
3
3
,
1
0
1
)
$
1
,
2
7
7
,
1
7
1
$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
2
,
7
4
0
,
8
1
1
6
,
4
6
1
,
2
2
5
1
0
,
8
5
3
,
7
2
3
1
,
7
5
1
,
3
0
4
2
,
0
0
0
,
2
7
2
2
,
0
0
0
,
2
7
2
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
2
,
0
8
8
,
1
5
4
6
,
5
4
8
,
2
4
7
1
0
,
1
4
0
,
0
7
2
1
0
,
9
0
0
,
8
5
4
9
0
,
0
0
0
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
0
0
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
C
I
P
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
7,
8
8
9
,
8
2
0
$
7,
8
0
2
,
7
9
8
$
8,
5
1
6
,
4
4
9
$
(6
3
3
,
1
0
1
)
$
1,
2
7
7
,
1
7
1
$
2,067,443$
19
8
WA
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
Ra
t
e
S
t
u
d
y
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
R
a
t
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.2%4.0%
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.
2
%
3.2%4.0%
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
1.
0
%
1.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.0%2.0%
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
4.
2
%
4.
2
%
5.
2
%
5.
2
%
5.2%6.0%
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
42
.
3
%
3
7
.
9
%
2
8
.
2
%
2
6
.
2
%
2
9
.
4
%
2
8
.
3
%
19
9
WA
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
6,
4
7
8
,
0
9
9
$
6,
4
9
7
,
5
0
8
$
6,
5
7
2
,
4
2
0
$
6,
6
7
4
,
1
2
9
$
6,
8
0
8
,
0
5
0
$
7,080,372$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
2,
7
4
0
,
8
1
1
$
2,
4
6
1
,
2
2
5
$
1,
8
5
3
,
7
2
3
$
1,
7
5
1
,
3
0
4
$
2,
0
0
0
,
2
7
2
$
2,000,272$
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
S
R
F
L
o
a
n
4,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
9,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
C
a
s
h
O
n
H
a
n
d
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
2,
7
4
0
,
8
1
1
$
6,
4
6
1
,
2
2
5
$
10
,
8
5
3
,
7
2
3
$
1,
7
5
1
,
3
0
4
$
2,
0
0
0
,
2
7
2
$
2,000,272$
20
0
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
WA
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15TotalScheduled
W0
3
BI-
A
N
N
U
A
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
90
,
0
0
0
90
,
0
0
0
180,000
W0
4
WA
T
E
R
B
I
-
A
N
N
U
A
L
U
P
G
R
A
D
E
S
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
1
,
10
0
,
0
0
0
1,
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
1,2
1
0
,
0
0
0
3,410,000
W0
7
22
M
G
M
E
M
B
R
A
N
E
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
W
A
T
E
R
P
L
A
N
T
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
5
,
2
7
6
,
5
0
5
9,8
0
0
,
8
5
4
9,
8
0
0
,
8
5
4
24,878,213
W1
2
1 T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
W
/
H
O
I
S
T
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
4
6
,
7
9
4
46,794
W1
5
ME
T
E
R
V
A
N
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
2
,
4
4
8
32,448
W1
6
BA
C
K
H
O
E
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
11
1
,
3
6
2
111,362
W1
7
1 T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
37
,
8
5
6
37,856
W2
0
TR
A
N
S
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
M
A
I
N
B
Y
P
A
S
S
V
A
L
V
E
S
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
- 75,000
W2
2
4X
4
1
/
2
T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
WA
T
E
R
P
L
A
N
T
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
3
5
,
0
0
0
35,000
WW
2
3
MI
N
I
E
X
C
A
V
A
T
O
R
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
- 25,000
GF
9
9
I
5
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
7,
5
0
0
7,500
PW
0
2
LA
U
R
E
L
G
L
E
N
S
H
O
P
A
N
N
E
X
WA
T
E
R
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
10
0
,
0
0
0
100,000
W2
3
LY
M
A
N
C
R
E
E
K
D
E
C
H
L
O
R
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
WA
T
E
R
P
L
A
N
T
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
5
0
,
0
0
0
50,000
To
t
a
l
6,5
4
8
,
2
4
7
$
10
,
1
4
0
,
0
7
2
$
10
,
9
0
0
,
8
5
4
$
90
,
0
0
0
$
1,2
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
28,889,173$ 100,000$
20
1
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bi-Annual Engineering Design & Survey
Estimated Cost: $90,000 per year
Project Number: Water Operations – W03 Date
Scheduled:
FY12 &
FY14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This item provides for design work to be completed every-other year, in
anticipation of the Bi-Annual System Upgrades. We alternate funding of
design work and construction work within the CIP.
As the Water Operations Division operates the existing system,
maintenance projects become apparent. Given our knowledge of system
conditions today, the following projects are candidates for design funding
and were identified in the Facility Plan:
• South 8th Avenue
• E. Koch: Lindley to Bozeman
• Lindley: Olive to Koch
• S. Bozeman: Olive to Story
As annual operations occur, other more-urgent projects may be identified
and designed under this project heading.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides for the design of necessary water system maintenance work.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
None
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Utility Fund
202
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bi-Annual Water Upgrades
Estimated Cost:
$1,000,000 FY11, $1,100,000 FY13, $1,210,000 FY15
Project Number: Water Operations – W04 Date
Scheduled:
FY11 &
FY13 &
FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This item provides for construction to be completed every-other year, after
the Bi-Annual Engineering Design. We alternate funding of design work
and construction work within the CIP.
As the Water Operations Division operates the existing system,
maintenance projects become apparent. Given our knowledge of system
conditions today, the following projects are candidates for construction
funding and were identified in the Facility Plan:
• South 8th Avenue
• E. Koch: Lindley to Bozeman
• Lindley: Olive to Koch
• S. Bozeman: Olive to Story
As annual operations occur, other more-urgent projects may be identified,
designed, and constructed under this project heading.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides for the construction of necessary water system maintenance
work.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in general
maintenance costs. Current cost estimate of $12,500 per water-main mile
maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Utility Fund
203
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
22MG Membrane Water Treatment Plant
Estimated Cost: $40.7 Million Total
Project Number: Water Plant – W07 Date
Scheduled:
FY08-FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This new Membrane Filter Treatment Plant is the preferred water treatment
alternative identified in the adopted Water Facility Plan. It is recommended
to be built with an initial configuration providing 22MGD of water treatment
capacity, with future expansion capability to 36MGD. This addresses both
the 10- and 20- year capacity requirement forecast for the City’s water
treatment system.
The current 15MGD WTP equipment is nearing the end of its useful life;
the plant’s direct filtration treatment process, while effective most of the
year, becomes only marginally effective during spring runoff or flash
thunderstorms in the watershed, dropping plant efficiency as low as 70%;
and, rapid population growth and expansion of city water services is
increasing demand for water. The current plant capacity may be exceeded
in as few as five years.
The New Plant will be sited at the existing WTP site in an 18,800 sf
building located directly north of the existing plant. It will include gravity
thickeners, a drying bed building with dual vacuum-assisted beds, triplex
micro strainers and sludge pumps. All these new facilities will easily fit on
the approximately 33-acre parcel of City-owned property on the site.
A 12-month pilot testing phase will need to be completed prior to design
finalization. We are required to have the new plant online by October 2013.
Extensions of that deadline are possible, but we are not relying on the
assumption that they would be granted.
The most recent estimate of plant costs was provided in the Spring of
2009, at a total of $40.7 Million.
Alternatives
Considered:
The Water Facility Plan considered numerous alternatives for water
treatment. This was identified as the preferred alternative in the adopted
plan.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Planning for increased water supply to meet growing demands and to
replace existing equipment that is at the end of its useful life.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
This plant is estimated to require two new operators, in addition to existing
plant staff. Annual O&M costs = est. $1,735,901 (including existing staff
plus new plant expenses).
Funding
Sources:
FY08 & FY09 & FY10 Pilot Testing and Design = $3,382,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $2,266,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $1,116,000
FY11 & FY12 & FY13 Engineering & Construction = $37,318,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $25,003,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $12,315,000
204
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
1 Ton Truck With Hoist – Flex Fuel
Estimated Cost:
$46,749
Project Number: Water Operations – W12 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This request replaces asset # 2914, a 2001 Dodge 1-ton with a 1-ton truck
with a hoist.
This truck is used daily in both water and sewer operations to transport
personnel and equipment, and responds to water and sewer line
emergencies. This particular truck has proven to be a very unreliable
vehicle; the transmission has been replaced twice. Because of reliability
problems and maintenance costs, we are recommending replacing this
vehicle sooner than customary.
Flex Fuel Vehicles will be purchased.
Alternatives
Considered:
Keep the trucks and spend maintenance dollars to have truck serviceable.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Advantages to the City for approving this request include savings on fuel.
The new vehicles will improve safety of crews, there would be lower repair
costs and it would help maintain current operations levels.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Utility Fund
205
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Meter Van (or Meter Reading Vehicle.)
Estimated Cost: $33,746
Project Number: Water Operations – W15 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Meter Van is used daily in meter reading and installations.
This van gets high mileage due to the fact it travels every street in our city
once a month taking radio reads. Current mileage is 84,625, as of
December 2009.
While a van has its advantages for carrying equipment and staff, we will
analyze whether a smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle could be used
instead of a van.
Alternatives
Considered:
Increased cost for repairs and down time.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Minimize down time and increase safety in operation and daily duties.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Utility Fund
206
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
4x4 Backhoe
Estimated Cost:
$107,078
Project Number: Water Operations – W16 Date
Scheduled: FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This vehicle replaces current asset #2633, a 1999 John Deere
backhoe with 2168 hours on it. This hoe is used primarily for
compacting ditches, loading trucks with material and does not have
an extendable boom.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which is becoming unreliable and
costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and water operations.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Operating and repair costs are expected to be lower than the
existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Fund
207
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-FY15
Project Name:
4x4 Flex Fuel Truck
Estimated Cost:
$37,856
Project Number: Water Operations – W17 Date
Scheduled: FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This vehicle replaces current asset #2647, a 1998 Chevy 4x4. It
will be replaced once it approaches 100,000 miles, estimated to be
FY12. This truck is used in our water valve operation program and
is used in various light duty jobs.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which is becoming unreliable and
costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and water operations.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Operating and repair costs are expected to be lower than the
existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Fund
208
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-FY15
Project Name:
4x4 ½ Ton Flex Fuel Truck
Estimated Cost:
$35,000
Project Number: Water Plant – W22 Date
Scheduled: FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This vehicle replaces current asset #3219, a 2004 Dodge, and will
be replaced when it approaches 100,000 miles, estimated to be
FY11. The vehicle will be used on a daily visits to finished water
storage tanks, the Lyman WTP, and for the water quality sampling
run.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which is becoming unreliable and
costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and water operations.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
Operating and repair costs are expected to be lower than the
existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Fund
209
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Lyman Creek Water – De-chlorination
Estimated Cost:
$50,000
Project Number: Water Plant – W23 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: ■ New
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Mini Excavator
Estimated Cost: $50,000 Total ($25,000 to each fund)
Project Number: Wastewater Operations -
WW23
Date
Scheduled: Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This piece of equipment due to its small size, is very useful in
excavating where the backhoe cannot fit or due to its weight will
damage sidewalks and lawns. Could be used by the Street
Department for excavating storm sewers.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to rent this piece of equipment.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Give’s both the Water and Street Departments a piece of equipment
that can work in small spaces
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than a normal size backhoe.
Funding
Sources:
50% Water Fund
50% Wastewater Fund
211
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
IBM i5 Replacement
Estimated Cost:
$45,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF99 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the mainframe computer that runs the City’s Enterprise-
wide Financial software. This hardware needs to be replaced
approximately every 5 years and was last replaced in FY2006.
This item is critical to our ability to:
• Bill and collect Water/Sewer/Garbage/Parking charges.
• Bill and collect Street & Tree Assessments.
• Receipt and track all other money owed/paid to the City.
• Make payments to vendor’s doing business with the City.
• Process payroll for City employees.
• Create financial statements and reports.
• Web-enables payments.
Alternatives
Considered:
• Replace existing Enterprise-wide software with PC-based
software. Brendan spoke with the County IT Director and
received this info related to the County’s system: 1st year cost =
$250,000 (installation, training, hardware). Thereafter,
approximately $30,000 in annual maintenance costs, with a
replacement $10,000 server being required every 5th year.
• Continue to use current hardware for as long as possible.
However, in addition to Financial Applications, the IBM server also
hosts SunGard HTE applications for Building Permits, Code
Enforcement, and Planning & Zoning. All these additional users
and all this additional data are going to increasingly tax the
servers resources to the point where system performance and
customer service response time will probably be affected.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Unnecessary system down-time is avoided when critical hardware is
replaced in a timely fashion.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No significant changes in
system operations or maintenance costs are anticipated.
Funding
Sources:
Water Fund: $7,500
Sewer Fund: $7,500
Solid Waste Fund: $7,500
General Fund: $22,500
Project Rating:
47
212
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
7
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
213
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
214
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Laurel Glen Shops Annex
Estimated Cost:
$200,000.00
Project Number: Public Works – PW02 Date
Scheduled: FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
To upgrade current facility which is basically a pole barn with
electricity to a facility which can house vehicles and
personnel. This would include floor, paving, water/sewer
services, offices, sidewalks.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Fuel savings in having vehicles stationed on the west side of
the city, quicker response times to the surrounding area,
frees up room at existing shop complex.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
$5,000.00 to $6,000.00
Funding
Sources:
50% Water Fund
50% Sewer Fund
215
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
C
I
P
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
-
$
1
,
9
3
8
,
9
0
0
$
2
4
1
,
4
0
0
$
2
6
7
,
3
9
5
$
1
,
1
5
8
,
5
1
3
$
1
,
3
4
7
,
7
2
6
$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
1
6
,
5
6
2
,
9
2
4
1
2
,
5
5
4
,
1
8
0
1
,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
1
,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
1
,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
1
,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
1
4
,
6
2
4
,
0
2
4
1
4
,
2
5
1
,
6
8
0
1
,
2
0
8
,
2
1
8
3
4
3
,
0
9
4
1
,
0
4
5
,
0
0
0
3
5
2
,
0
0
0
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
C
I
P
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
1,
9
3
8
,
9
0
0
$
24
1
,
4
0
0
$
26
7
,
3
9
5
$
1,
1
5
8
,
5
1
3
$
1,
3
4
7
,
7
2
6
$
2,229,939$
21
6
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
Ra
t
e
S
t
u
d
y
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
R
a
t
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
10
.
2
%
1
0
.
2
%
1
0
.
2
%
4.
0
%
4.0%4.0%
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
10
.
2
%
1
0
.
2
%
1
0
.
2
%
4.
0
%
4.0%4.0%
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
1.
0
%
1.
0
%
1.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.0%2.0%
__
_
_
_
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
11
.
2
%
1
1
.
2
%
1
1
.
2
%
6.
0
%
6.0%6.0%
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
26
.
3
%
2
8
.
8
%
2
0
.
6
%
1
9
.
8
%
1
9
.
0
%
1
8
.
3
%
21
7
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
4,
9
3
9
,
4
8
7
$
5,
4
4
3
,
3
1
5
$
5,
9
9
8
,
5
3
3
$
6,
2
3
8
,
4
7
4
$
6,
4
8
8
,
0
1
3
$
6,747,534$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
1,
2
9
7
,
4
2
4
$
1,
5
6
9
,
1
8
0
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,234,213
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
1,
2
3
0
,
5
0
0
S
R
F
L
o
a
n
-
N
e
t
o
f
I
s
s
u
a
n
c
e
C
o
s
t
s
/
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
14
,
0
3
5
,
0
0
0
10
,
9
8
5
,
0
0
0
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
16
,
5
6
2
,
9
2
4
$
12
,
5
5
4
,
1
8
0
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,
2
3
4
,
2
1
3
$
1,234,213
21
8
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
F
U
N
D
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
t
#
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
TotalScheduled
WW
0
2
1
T
O
N
T
R
U
C
K
W
/
H
O
I
S
T
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
45
,
0
0
0
45
,
0
0
0
90,000
WW
0
3
3
/
4
T
O
N
4
X
4
P
I
C
K
U
P
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
3
7
,
8
5
6
-
37,856
WW
0
4
B
N
R
P
L
A
N
T
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
WW
P
L
A
N
T
PR
O
J
E
C
T
1
4
,
0
6
6
,
3
2
4
-
14,066,324
WW
0
7
B
I
-
A
N
N
U
A
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
9
0
,
0
0
0
90
,
0
0
0
90,000 270,000
WW
0
8
W
A
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
B
I
-
A
N
N
U
A
L
U
P
G
R
A
D
E
S
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
80
0
,
0
0
0
1,0
0
0
,
0
0
0
1,800,000
WW
1
7
T
E
L
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
V
A
N
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
26
3
,
2
1
8
263,218
WW
2
1
F
L
U
S
H
E
R
T
R
U
C
K
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
25
3
,
0
9
4
253,094
WW
2
3
M
I
N
I
E
X
C
A
V
A
T
O
R
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
- 25,000
WW
2
4
L
A
T
C
H
E
T
L
A
B
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
WW
P
L
A
N
T
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
5
0
,
0
0
0
50,000
WW
2
5
L
I
F
T
I
N
G
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
WW
P
L
A
N
T
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
- 87,000
PW
0
2
L
A
U
R
E
L
G
L
E
N
S
H
O
P
S
A
N
N
E
X
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
10
0
,
0
0
0
100,000
GF
9
9
i
5
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
7
,
5
0
0
7,500
WW
2
6
V
A
C
T
R
U
C
K
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
WW
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
EQ
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
262,000 262,000 .
To
t
a
l
14
,
2
5
1
,
6
8
0
$
1,2
0
8
,
2
1
8
$
34
3
,
0
9
4
$
1,0
4
5
,
0
0
0
$
352,000$ 17,199,993$ 112,000$
21
9
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
1 Ton Flex Fuel Truck with Hoist
Estimated Cost: $45,000 each, FY12 & FY14
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW02
Date
Scheduled:
FY12 &
FY14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
FY12: Replaces a 2000 1-ton truck with a hoist. At the time of
replacement, this truck will be 11 years old.
FY14: Replaces a 2004 Ford F250, asset #3232.
These trucks are used daily in both water and sewer operations to
transport personnel and equipment.
The existing truck will not be traded in; it will be utilized as a back-up
vehicle when needed.
Alternatives
Considered:
Keep the truck and spend maintenance dollars to have truck serviceable.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Advantages to the City for approving this request include savings on fuel
and emissions. The new vehicles will improve safety of crews, there would
be lower repair costs and it would help maintain current operations levels.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Other Non-Capital Costs: none.
Total:
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Utility Revenue
220
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
¾ Ton Flex Fuel Pickup Truck
Estimated Cost: $37,856
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW03
Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This is to replace asset # 2916 which is a 2001 Dodge Dakota ½ ton
pickup. At the time replaced, this vehicle will be 9 years old and have
approx 73,000 miles.
This truck is used to transport operations crews performing one call
locates. Crews respond to over 5,000 calls a year for locate requests.
The existing vehicle will be traded in, to reduce the total purchase price.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which is extremely small for the average
water department employee.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Advantages to the City for approving this request include continued
reliability in water operations. Repair and maintenance costs will be
minimized with replacement
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Other Non-Capital Costs: none.
Total:
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Utility Revenue
221
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) Construction –
Phase I
Estimated
Cost:
$53.8 Million – Total, Phase I
Project
Number:
Wastewater Plant – WW04 Date
Scheduled:
FY07 – FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The existing plant has reached its original design capacity of 5.8 MGD. Current
organic loadings (lbs of BOD) now exceed the plant’s original design capacity
for BOD by more than 20%. These critical loading parameters clearly point to
the need for a major facility expansion.
The City’s current MPDES (Montana Pollution Discharge Elimination System)
permit includes a compliance schedule that requires us to begin removing total
nitrogen and total phosphorous by September 2011 to meet interim Nutrient
Standards set by the State Department of Environmental Quality. In order to
meet the requirements of this schedule, the city needs to move forward with the
construction of a WRF facility, as our existing facility is not designed to remove
nitrogen & phosphorous.
Bids received for the WRF facility on October 1, 2008 put the total project costs
at a low of $65.7 Million (low bid) to a high of over $80.5 Million (high bid.)
Because the low bid was so much higher than our estimate, the project has
been scaled back but will still meet our permit requirements established for
September 2011. Total adjusted project price is now estimated at $53.8 Million.
Alternatives
Considered:
A variety of treatment technologies and alternatives are presented in the
January 2006 Wastewater Facilities Plan.
Alternative funding scenarios have been prepared, exploring the rates
necessary to cover plant costs and differing amounts of impact fee dollars
available for construction.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Major capital expansion of the Bozeman WRF will enable the City to meet its
ever growing demand for wastewater services and still produce a high quality
effluent that is in full compliance with the City’s MPDES discharge permit.
Expansion of the Bozeman WRF is consistent with the City’s long-term need to
accommodate rapid growth and economic development in the Gallatin Valley.
Estimated
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Similar to existing plant operations
costs. The Facilities Plan estimates a total of $1,439,360 annually including all
labor, power, chemicals, equipment maintenance, and equipment replacement.
Funding
Sources:
FY07 Design: Total $3.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility Cash = $2.33 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Cash = $1.57 Million
FY09 & FY10 & FY11 Construction: Total $49.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility = $33.5 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Eligible = $16.4 Million Eligible*
*We anticipate having a minimum of $13.1 Million available from Impact Fees
through the end of the construction period. Impact fee collections during the
construction period will be dedicated to the project. The remainder of eligible
construction costs would be dedicated to debt service on the Utility Revenue
Bonds, as it is collected in the Impact Fee Fund.
222
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Bi-Annual Engineering Design
Estimated Cost: $90,000 in FY12 & $90,000 in FY14
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW07
Date
Scheduled:
FY11, FY13
& FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This item provides for design work to be completed every-other year, in
anticipation of the Bi-Annual System Upgrades. We alternate funding of
design work and construction work within the CIP.
As the Wastewater Operations Division televises (views) the existing
system, maintenance projects become apparent.
As annual televising continues, other more-urgent projects may be
identified and designed under this project heading.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides for design of necessary sewer system maintenance work.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
None
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Utility Fund
223
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Annual Wastewater Upgrades
Estimated Cost: $800,000 in FY12 & $1,000,000 in FY14
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW08
Date
Scheduled:
FY12 &
FY14
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This item provides for construction to be completed every-other year, after
the Bi-Annual Engineering Design. We alternate funding of design work
and construction work within the CIP.
As the Wastewater Operations Division televises (views) the existing
system, maintenance projects become apparent.
As annual televising continues, other more-urgent projects may be
identified, designed, and constructed under this project heading.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides for the construction of necessary sewer system maintenance
work.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
None.
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Utility Fund
224
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Television Van
Estimated Cost: $263,218
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW17
Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement for the existing Sewer TV Van, routinely replaced every 5
years. Current Van purchased in FY07.
This van should be equipped with all modifications to put into service for
video inspecting our existing and newly constructed sewage collection
infrastructure. The van will allow us to travel out of the sewer main and
not only inspect the city’s portion of the service but the homeowner’s side
and even into the structure itself. This is critical in identifying infiltration
issues and helps identify homes that have sump pumps dumping into our
system. This can be done from the street and service workers would not
have to enter private residences to televise back out to the main.
Alternatives
Considered:
To attempt to maintain our existing TV van, this is becoming obsolete and
outdated with the present and upcoming technology.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides for the timely replacement of critical maintenance equipment.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Total:
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Utility Revenues -
Approx. 5 year cost recover through TV Line Service Fee, currently 80
cents per foot inspected.
225
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Sewer Flusher Truck with TV capability
Estimated Cost: $253,094
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW21
Date
Scheduled: FY13
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This vehicle replaces current asset #3031, a 2002 Freightliner with
over 20,845 miles on it.
This truck is used to flush over 200 miles of sewer main every year
and is a critical piece of machinery for the sewer department.
This unit will have a TV camera which will allow us to see
objects/defects that cause the flusher to stop. This camera has
become an industry standard piece of equipment.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which will be costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and wastewater operations.
Camera will eliminate need for follow up TV inspection by the TV
van.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than the existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater utility fund
226
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Mini Excavator
Estimated Cost: $50,000 Total ($25,000 to each fund)
Project Number: Wastewater Operations -
WW23
Date
Scheduled: Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This piece of equipment due to it’s small size, is very useful in
excavating where the backhoe cannot fit or due to it’s weight will
damage sidewalks and lawns. Could be used by the Street
Department for excavating storm sewers.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to rent this piece of equipment.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Give’s both the Water and Street Departments a piece of equipment
that can work in small spaces
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than a normal size backhoe.
Funding
Sources:
50% Water Fund
50% Wastewater Fund
227
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Laurel Glen Shops Annex
Estimated Cost:
$200,000.00
Project Number: Public Works – PW02 Date
Scheduled: FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
To upgrade current facility which is basically a pole barn with
electricity to a facility which can house vehicles and
personnel. This would include floor, paving, water/sewer
services, offices, sidewalks.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Fuel savings in having vehicles stationed on the west side of
the city, quicker response times to the surrounding area,
frees up room at existing shop complex.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs:
$5,000.00 to $6,000.00
Funding
Sources:
50% Water Fund
50% Sewer Fund
228
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
IBM i5 Replacement
Estimated Cost:
$45,000
Project Number: General Fund – GF99 Date
Scheduled:
FY11
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the mainframe computer that runs the City’s Enterprise-
wide Financial software. This hardware needs to be replaced
approximately every 5 years and was last replaced in FY2006.
This item is critical to our ability to:
• Bill and collect Water/Sewer/Garbage/Parking charges.
• Bill and collect Street & Tree Assessments.
• Receipt and track all other money owed/paid to the City.
• Make payments to vendor’s doing business with the City.
• Process payroll for City employees.
• Create financial statements and reports.
• Web-enables payments.
Alternatives
Considered:
• Replace existing Enterprise-wide software with PC-based
software. Brendan spoke with the County IT Director and
received this info related to the County’s system: 1st year cost =
$250,000 (installation, training, hardware). Thereafter,
approximately $30,000 in annual maintenance costs, with a
replacement $10,000 server being required every 5th year.
• Continue to use current hardware for as long as possible.
However, in addition to Financial Applications, the IBM server also
hosts SunGard HTE applications for Building Permits, Code
Enforcement, and Planning & Zoning. All these additional users
and all this additional data are going to increasingly tax the
servers resources to the point where system performance and
customer service response time will probably be affected.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Unnecessary system down-time is avoided when critical hardware is
replaced in a timely fashion.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: No significant changes in
system operations or maintenance costs are anticipated.
Funding
Sources:
Water Fund: $7,500
Sewer Fund: $7,500
Solid Waste Fund: $7,500
General Fund: $22,500
Project Rating:
47
229
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Criteria Rating Notes This
Project’s
Score
1. Level of Service Up to 20
pts
20 - Corrects a health or safety hazard
or prevents a critical breakdown of an
existing city facility or equipment.
15 - Repairs, rehabilitates, or replaces
physically deteriorated or functionally
obsolete existing city facility or
equipment.
10 - Brings an area up to the basic
level of service as identified in an
adopted city wide plan.
5 – Expands an approved City
service.
0 – Other.
20
2. Operating Budget
Impact
Up to 10
pts
10 - Provides a significant decrease in
city operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
5 – Has a neutral or small impact on
operating and/or maintenance
expenses.
0 – Provides a significant increase in
city operating requirements.
5
3. Service Area Up to 10
pts
10 – Direct Benefit to entire city.
5 – Direct benefit to roughly half city
or indirect benefit to entire city.
2 – Direct benefit to small area of the
city or indirect benefit to several areas.
7
4. Departmental
Priority
Up to 10
pts
10 – Critical to Department’s Mission
7 – High
3 – Moderate
0 – Questionable/Very Difficult to
Complete
10
5. Commission
Work Plan
Up to 10
pts
10 – Identified project in Adopted
Commission Work Plan
5 – Contributes to an indentified
project in the Adopted Commission
Work Plan.
0 – Not identified in Adopted
Commission Work Plan.
0
6. Municipal Climate
Protection (Municipal
Climate Action Plan
– MCAP)
Up to 5 pts 5 – Is recommended by MCAP and
will accomplish a stated MCAP goal.
3 – Will assist in meeting MCAP goal.
0 – No relation to MCAP.
0
7. Seasonal Use Up to 5 pts 5 – Year Round.
3 – Six to Eleven months per year.
1 – Five or fewer months per year.
5
TOTAL Up to 70
pts.
47
230
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
231
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Vac Truck Replacement
Estimated Cost: $262,000
Project Number: Wastewater Operations –
WW26
Date
Scheduled: FY15
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
Replacement of the City’s Vac Truck.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to use older vehicle which will be costly to maintain.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased reliability and safety for staff and wastewater operations.
Camera will eliminate need for follow up TV inspection by the TV
van.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and repair
costs are expected to be lower than the existing vehicle.
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater utility fund
232
VE
H
I
C
L
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
F
Y
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Be
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
6,
4
0
0
$
9,
1
0
0
$
15
,
5
9
3
$
22
,
0
8
8
$
28
,
5
8
6
$
35,086$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
1,
8
7
7
,
7
8
1
6,
4
9
3
6,
4
9
5
6,
4
9
8
6,
5
0
0
6,503
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
1,
8
7
5
,
0
8
1
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
9,
1
0
0
$
15
,
5
9
3
$
22
,
0
8
8
$
28
,
5
8
6
$
35
,
0
8
6
$
41,589$
23
3
VE
H
I
C
L
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
F
U
N
D
RA
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
S
&
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
0
N
O
F
C
U
S
T
O
M
E
R
G
R
O
W
T
H
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ra
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
/
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
In
f
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
A
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
-
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.0%4.0%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
-
To
t
a
l
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
-
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.0%4.0%
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
-
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
B
a
s
e
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
-
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.0%4.0%
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
:
Fr
o
m
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
Y
e
a
r
(
s
)
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%1%
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
R
a
t
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%1%
23
4
VE
H
I
C
L
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY14FY15
Ba
s
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
f
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
64
9
,
0
0
0
$
64
9
,
0
0
0
$
64
9
,
2
6
0
$
64
9
,
5
1
9
$
64
9
,
7
7
9
$
650,039$
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
64
9
,
0
0
0
$
64
9
,
2
6
0
$
64
9
,
5
1
9
$
64
9
,
7
7
9
$
65
0
,
0
3
9
$
650,299$
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
2,
7
0
0
$
6,
4
9
3
$
6,
4
9
5
$
6,
4
9
8
$
6,
5
0
0
$
6,503$
Ad
d
:
G
r
a
n
t
s
27
7
,
0
0
0
T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
s
f
r
o
m
O
t
h
e
r
F
u
n
d
s
1,
4
5
7
,
2
0
8
P
r
o
c
e
e
d
s
o
f
L
a
n
d
L
e
a
s
e
14
0
,
8
7
3
O
t
h
e
r
(
S
R
F
)
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
1,
8
7
7
,
7
8
1
$
6,
4
9
3
$
6,
4
9
5
$
6,
4
9
8
$
6,
5
0
0
$
6,503$
23
5
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
VE
H
I
C
L
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
#
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
0
9
F
Y
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
F
Y
1
3
TotalScheduled
No
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
L
i
s
t
e
d
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-$ -$
23
6
ST
R
E
E
T
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
7,
0
4
8
,
0
0
0
$
5,
9
9
8
,
0
0
0
$
6,
2
7
7
,
9
9
0
$
6,
1
7
1
,
3
8
0
$
2,
8
6
1
,
3
3
4
$
2,926,672$
A
d
d
:
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
40
0
,
0
0
0
62
9
,
9
9
0
64
3
,
3
9
0
68
5
,
9
5
4
66
5
,
3
3
8
685,093
O
t
h
e
r
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
-
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
2
6
4
,
0
0
0
-
2
,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
1,
4
5
0
,
0
0
0
35
0
,
0
0
0
85
0
,
0
0
0
6,
2
6
0
,
0
0
0
60
0
,
0
0
0
5,600,000
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
5,
9
9
8
,
0
0
0
$
6,
2
7
7
,
9
9
0
$
6,
1
7
1
,
3
8
0
$
2,
8
6
1
,
3
3
4
$
2,
9
2
6
,
6
7
2
$
211,765$
23
7
ST
R
E
E
T
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Gr
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
0%
2%
2%
2%
3%
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
60
0
,
0
0
0
$
60
0
,
0
0
0
$
61
2
,
0
0
0
$
62
4
,
2
4
0
$
63
6
,
7
2
5
$
655,827
$
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
E
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
(
C
h
a
r
g
e
s
)
12
5
,
0
0
0
29
,
9
9
0
31
,
3
9
0
61
,
7
1
4
28
,
6
1
3
29,267
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Im
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
72
5
,
0
0
0
$
62
9
,
9
9
0
$
64
3
,
3
9
0
$
68
5
,
9
5
4
$
66
5
,
3
3
8
$
685,093
$
Ad
d
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
1
.
S
I
D
o
r
O
t
h
e
r
:
S
I
F
0
2
-
B
a
x
t
e
r
(
1
9
t
h
t
o
C
o
t
t
o
n
w
o
o
d
)
UN
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
D
2
.
S
t
a
t
e
U
r
b
a
n
F
u
n
d
s
:
S
I
F
0
6
-
C
o
l
l
e
g
e
(
M
a
i
n
t
o
1
9
t
h
)
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
2,
2
6
4
,
0
0
0
3
.
S
I
D
o
r
O
t
h
e
r
:
S
I
F
0
8
-
D
u
r
s
t
o
n
(
F
o
w
l
e
r
t
o
C
o
t
t
o
n
w
o
o
d
)
2,200,000
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
-
-
10
0
,
0
0
0
2,
2
6
4
,
0
0
0
-
2
,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
72
5
,
0
0
0
$
62
9
,
9
9
0
$
74
3
,
3
9
0
$
2,
9
4
9
,
9
5
4
$
66
5
,
3
3
8
$
2,885,093
$
23
8
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
ST
R
E
E
T
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
F
Y
1
5
TotalScheduled
SI
F
0
1
RIG
H
T
O
F
W
A
Y
A
C
Q
U
I
S
I
T
I
O
N
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
10
0
,
0
0
0
500,000
SI
F
0
2
BA
X
T
E
R
(
1
9
T
H
T
O
C
O
T
T
O
N
W
O
O
D
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
50
0
,
0
0
0
500,000
2,850,000
SI
F
0
4
CH
U
R
C
H
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
5,800,000
SI
F
0
5
CO
L
L
E
G
E
(
8
T
H
T
O
1
9
T
H
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
2,000,000
SI
F
0
6
CO
L
L
E
G
E
(
M
A
I
N
T
O
1
9
T
H
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
2
5
0
,
0
0
0
25
0
,
0
0
0
5,
6
6
0
,
0
0
0
6,160,000
SI
F
0
8
DU
R
S
T
O
N
(
F
O
W
L
E
R
T
O
C
O
T
T
O
N
W
O
O
D
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
50
0
,
0
0
0
5,0
0
0
,
0
0
0
5,500,000
SI
F
0
9
KA
G
Y
(
W
I
L
L
S
O
N
T
O
1
9
T
H
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
6,650,000
SI
F
1
0
OA
K
(
C
E
D
A
R
T
O
M
A
I
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
U
N
K
N
O
W
N
SI
F
1
1
OA
K
(
R
O
U
S
E
T
O
C
E
D
A
R
)
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
8,900,000
SI
F
1
9
IN
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
:
2
7
t
h
&
O
A
K
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
500,000
SI
F
2
0
IN
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
:
7
t
h
&
K
A
G
Y
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
540,000
SI
F
2
1
GR
A
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
-
1,000,000
SI
F
2
2
IN
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
:
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
&
8
T
H
ST
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
500,000
To
t
a
l
35
0
,
0
0
0
$
85
0
,
0
0
0
$
6,
2
6
0
,
0
0
0
$
60
0
,
0
0
0
$
5,6
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
13,660,000$ 27,740,000$
No
t
e
:
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
w
i
t
h
e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
s
o
u
r
ce
s
(
i
e
.
F
e
d
e
r
a
l
A
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
g
r
a
n
t
s
,
u
r
b
a
n
f
un
d
s
,
o
r
d
ev
e
l
o
p
e
r
c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
)
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
"
t
o
t
a
l
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
c
o
s
t
s
"
,
w
i
t
h
c
o
r
r
e
s
po
n
d
i
n
g
re
v
e
n
u
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
f
i
n
a
n
c
e
d
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
l
y
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
d
o
l
l
a
r
s
b
u
t
o
u
t
o
f
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
C
i
t
y
f
u
n
ds
a
r
e
s
h
o
w
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
a
m
o
u
n
t
i
n
ea
c
h
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
C
I
P
.
23
9
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Right of Way Acquisition (on-going)
Estimated Cost: $100,000 each year
Project Number: Street Impact Fees – SIF
01
Date
Scheduled:
FY11 –
FY15
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Annual allocation available for right-of-way purchases as they become
available. Purchasing additional right-of-way is critical to expanding the
capacity of streets in the city.
This is deemed to be 100% impact fee eligible – as additional right-of-way
is not required if we are not expanding the capacity of the street.
Alternatives
Considered:
1. Condemn property for right-of-way; pay court costs as well as
appraised value of property. Time consuming for city staff and a relatively
expensive process.
2. Wait for land to develop and acquire additional right-of-way through
annexation or subdivision.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Provides dollars for the purchase of necessary right-of-way as it becomes
available on the market. Avoids the expensive, antagonistic
condemnation process where possible.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Street Impact Fees can not be
spent on operating and maintaining facilities. There is expected to be a
very minimal, incremental cost to the Street Maintenance District from this
expenditure.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Impact Fees
240
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Baxter (19TH to Cottonwood)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $3,350,000; $2,000,000 from Street Impact Fees
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 02
Date
Scheduled:
Design – FY15
Const. – FY16
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Reconstruct Baxter Lane (from 19th Avenue to Cottonwood) to a Minor
Arterial standard as shown in the Transportation Plan.
Continued development in the northwest quadrant of the City insures that
this improvement will be needed in the not too distant future.
It is estimated that approximately 60% of this project will be eligible for
impact fees. The remainder of project costs would need to come from
Special Improvement District assessments on property in the area.
Construction is expected to occur in FY16.
Alternatives
Considered:
Full payment by SID, or developer constructed.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved capacity and safety in this corridor;
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $2,000,000
40% - Special Improvement District (SID) or Other = $1,350,000
241
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Church
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $9,600,000; Street Impact Fees $5,800,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 04
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Reconstruct Church Avenue to the collector standard identified in the
Transportation plan from Main Street to Kagy Boulevard.
The need for this project comes from increased traffic due to growth in the
South Bozeman area as well as the county area south of Bozeman–
making this project eligible for impact fee funds.
While this improvement is identified in the transportation plan as
recommended major improvement 26, Right-of-Way issues will likely make
this one of the most difficult and expensive street projects in the City’s
future.
Church is designated an Urban Route, and would be eligible for the
expenditure of Urban Funds.
Alternatives
Considered:
Use of Urban Funds, or creation of an SID for full financing.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved safety and capacity, both for motorized vehicles as well as
bicycles and pedestrians. The use of street impact fee funds enables the
community to leverage the available State Urban transportation funds to
complete other projects and address more of the city’s pressing
transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $5,800,000
40% - Urban Funds, SID, or other sources = $3,800,000
242
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
College (8th to 19th)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $3,350,000; Street Impact Fees $2,000,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 05
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Reconstruct West College Street (from 8th Avenue to 19th Avenue) to a
minor arterial standard as shown in the Transportation Plan.
This section of West College has already exceeded the volume of traffic it
was projected to carry in 2020 according to the Transportation Plan.
Planned improvements to South 19th and increased development in the
South 19th corridor will only further increase traffic demand on this facility.
Additionally this facility lacks pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Alternatives
Considered:
Use of Urban funds for full financing, CTEP grants if available.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved safety and capacity, both for motorized vehicles as well as
bicycles and pedestrians.
The use of street impact fee funds enables the community to leverage the
available State Urban transportation funds to complete other projects and
address more of the city’s pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $2,000,000
40% - State Urban Funds = $1,350,000
Photo #1
243
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
College (Main to 19th)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $6,160,000; Street Impact Fees $3,696,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 06
Date
Scheduled:
FY11 - FY13
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Reconstruct West College Street from Main Street (Huffine Lane) to 19th
Avenue to a principal arterial standard as shown in the Transportation
Plan. This section of West College has already exceeded the volume of
traffic it was projected to carry in 2010 according to the Transportation
Plan. In the peak AM hour traffic is backed up from 19th to Huffine and
beyond.
Planned improvements to South 19th and increased development in the
Huffine Lane corridor will only further increase traffic demand on this
facility. In addition this facility lacks pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Alternatives
Considered:
Use of Urban funds for full financing, CTEP grants if available.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved safety and capacity, both for motorized vehicles as well as
bicycles and pedestrians.
The use of street impact fee funds enables the community to leverage the
available State Urban transportation funds to complete other projects and
address more of the city’s pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $3,696,000
40% - State Urban Funds = $2,464,000
Photo #1
244
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Durston (Fowler to Cottonwood)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $5,500,000; Street Impact Fees $3,300,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 08
Date
Scheduled:
FY14 & FY15
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
While this section of Durston Road was not anticipated in the 1993
Transportation Plan to carry significant traffic volumes, it is apparent from
recent development activity that the areas served by this collector roadway
may cause the predicted volumes to be exceeded.
Incremental improvement of Durston Road with development projects may
be possible, thus preventing a severe drop in service level similar to that
experienced on West Babcock Street.
Alternatives
Considered:
SID for full financing, or incremental construction by developers.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved safety and capacity, both for motorized vehicles as well as
bicycles and pedestrians.
The use of street impact fee funds enables the community to leverage the
available State Urban transportation funds to complete other projects and
address more of the city’s pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $3,300,000
40% - Special Improvement District = $2,200,000
245
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Kagy (Willson to 19th)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $6,650,000; Street Impact Fees $4,000,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees – SIF
09
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Widen Kagy Boulevard and add turning lanes at key intersections. This
portion of Kagy currently carries about 9,000 vehicles per day.
The capacity this two lane street can reasonably carry is about 12,000
vehicles per day. Expansion of capacity will be needed in the foreseeable
future to handle current and future traffic loads.
Kagy serves as an important element of Bozeman's perimeter street
system connecting Highland Blvd., Willson Ave. and S.19th. It also serves
as the primary access to Montana State University and the University's
major athletic facilities.
Alternatives
Considered:
Pursue the use of Urban Funds.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Kagy is a State Urban Route and is eligible for expenditure of State urban
funds designated annually for the City of Bozeman; however, the
availability of urban funds cannot match the pace of the City's
transportation improvement needs.
The need for this project comes from increased traffic due to growth in the
Bozeman area and the project is eligible for Impact Fee Funds. Use of
Street Impact Funds enables the community to leverage the available
State Urban transportation funds to complete projects and address more of
its pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $4,000,000
40% - State Urban Funds = $2,650,000
246
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Oak (Cedar to Main)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: UNKNOWN
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 10
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Construct Oak Street from Rouse to Cedar to a collector standard as
identified in the Transportation Plan.
This would make development of an important and underutilized portion of
the City possible, including reclamation of what was a superfund site
(Idaho Pole).
Because of the complicated right-of-way, superfund, and wetland issues, it
is very difficult to estimate the costs of this project. It is included in this
schedule with costs “Unknown” because it has been identified as a project
that could significantly improve travel, if it could be built.
Alternatives
Considered:
SID or Developer Contributions for full construction.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The need for this project comes from increased traffic due to growth in the
Bozeman area and the project is eligible for Impact Fee Funds.
Use of Street Impact Funds enables the community to leverage the
available State Urban transportation funds to complete projects and
address more of its pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
Given the fact that this portion of street does not currently exist, the project
will likely be eligible for Street Impact Fees. However, given the scope of
the project, costs are unknown.
247
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
248
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Oak (Rouse to Cedar)
Estimated Cost: Total Project: $8,900,000; Street Impact Fees $5,340,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 11
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Construct Oak Street from Rouse to Cedar to a collector standard as
identified in the Transportation Plan.
This would make development of an important and underutilized portion of
the City possible, including reclamation of what was a superfund site
(Idaho Pole).
Alternatives
Considered:
SID or Developer Contributions for full construction.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Kagy is a State Urban Route and is eligible for expenditure of State urban
funds designated annually for the City of Bozeman; however, the
availability of urban funds cannot match the pace of the City's
transportation improvement needs.
The need for this project comes from increased traffic due to growth in the
Bozeman area and the project is eligible for Impact Fee Funds. Use of
Street Impact Funds enables the community to leverage the available
State Urban transportation funds to complete projects and address more
of its pressing transportation needs.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
60% - Street Impact Fees = $5,340,000
40% - Other Sources (Developer Contribution, SID, TIF) = $3,560,000
249
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Intersection Control: 27th & Oak
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 19
Date
Scheduled:
FY12
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Control of the intersection of 27th Avenue and Oak Street, a collector and
an arterial. Recent development proposals indicate that the need for this
improvement will soon be warranted.
If a signal is chosen, there may be some emergency maintenance/repair
events should the signal fail per an existing agreement with MDT, but in
general this will be an MDT maintained signal.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing or consider other alternatives as suggested by the Montana
Department of Transportation. Create an SID or identify and apply for
other potential sources of funding (CMAQ…)
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and safety at this intersection.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Other Non-Capital Costs:
Total: none
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Impact Fees
250
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Intersection Control: 7th & Kagy
Estimated Cost: $540,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 20
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Control of the intersection of 7th Avenue and Kagy, a collector and an
arterial. Recent development proposals indicate that the need for this
improvement will soon be warranted.
If a signal is chosen, there may be some emergency maintenance/repair
events should the signal fail per an existing agreement with MDT, but in
general this will be an MDT maintained signal.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing or consider other alternatives as suggested by the Montana
Department of Transportation. Create an SID or identify and apply for other
potential sources of funding (CMAQ…)
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and safety at this intersection.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Other Non-Capital Costs:
Total: none
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Impact Fees
251
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Graf Street Extension/Connection
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 21
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is to extend Graf Street approximately ¼ mile in order to
connect the street to allow through traffic to flow east from 19th Avenue.
This is an important connection for public safety purposes – allowing fire
service to meet their response time requirements in areas where they
currently cannot.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing and wait for development to connect the street.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and better emergency response to the local area.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Incremental increases in
sweeping, plowing and general maintenance costs. Current cost estimate
of $8,725 per street mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Impact Fee – to be recovered by developer payback.
252
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Intersection Control: West College Street /8th
Avenue Intersection Improvements
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Project Number: Street Impact Fees –
SIF 22
Date
Scheduled:
FY13
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Install improved control (roundabout or signal) at the intersection of West
College Street and 8th Avenue, a minor arterial and a collector. This
intersection has seen steadily increasing demand with the growth of MSU.
The Draft 2007 Transportation Plan Update indicates that LOS issues are
beginning to appear at this intersection.
If a signal is chosen as the improvement, there may be some emergency
maintenance/repair events should it fail per an existing agreement with
MDT, but in general this would be an MDT maintained signal.
This intersection improvement project will be identified as TSM 18 in the
2007 Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan Update.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing or consider other alternatives as suggested by the Montana
Department of Transportation. Create an SID or identify and apply for
other potential sources of funding (CMAQ…)
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and safety at this intersection.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating Costs:
Annual Maintenance Costs:
Other Non-Capital Costs:
Total: none
Funding
Sources:
100% Street Impact Fees
253
FI
R
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
2
0
1
1
-
2
0
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
8
5
0
$
3,719
$
7,493$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
6
,
8
5
0
18
8
,
7
1
9
192,493
196,343
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
6
,
8
5
0
188,719
192,493
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
-
$
-
$
1,
8
5
0
$
3,
7
1
9
$
7,493
$
11,343$
Page 1
25
4
FI
R
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
6
,
8
5
0
$
18
8
,
7
1
9
$
19
2
,
4
9
3
$
196,343
$
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Im
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
6
,
8
5
0
$
18
8
,
7
1
9
$
19
2
,
4
9
3
$
196,343
$
Ad
d
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
I
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
E
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
o
n
d
I
s
s
u
e
o
r
O
t
h
e
r
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
6
,
8
5
0
$
18
8
,
7
1
9
$
19
2
,
4
9
3
$
196,343
$
No
t
e
s
:
Page 2
25
5
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
FI
R
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
t
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
FIF
0
3
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
P
R
E
E
M
P
T
I
O
N
FIR
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
- 172,801
FIF
0
6
F
I
R
E
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
#
4
FIR
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
- 2,771,366
FIF
0
7
F
I
R
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
#
4
FIR
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
- 598,363
FIF
0
8
F
I
R
E
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
#
3
D
E
B
T
R
E
T
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
FIR
E
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
1
8
5
,
0
0
0
18
5
,
0
0
0
18
6
,
8
5
0
18
8
,
7
1
9
192,493
938,061 26,223
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
5
,
0
0
0
$
18
6
,
8
5
0
$
18
8
,
7
1
9
$
192,493
$
938,061$ 3,568,753$ Page 3
25
6
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Traffic Signal Preemption Program
Estimated Cost: $172,801
Project Number: Fire Impact Fees – FIF03 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is the installation of ten (10) fire apparatus emitters,
intersection wiring, and signal receivers at approximately 17 city
intersections to improve response times to emergencies throughout the
community. This dual priority system uses precisely timed impulses of high
intensity light in several wavelengths to activate a traffic control system
which facilitates emergency vehicle response. Its dual priority capability
allows the system to give top priority to emergency vehicles and secondary
priority to other users, such as snow plows.
For the last several years, most of the new traffic signals installed in
Bozeman have included the signal-based modules and will not require
upgrade as a part of this project.
The installation of this system will allow traffic the green signal in the
direction of the emergency responder, thus, facilitating travel to the
emergency. Nationwide, this system's installation has reduced average
emergency response times by as much as 17 to 20%, according to the
vendor. Because Station location is based on response time, improving
emergency response times generally decreases the need for additional
physical fire stations to be built.
Alternatives
Considered:
Continue to operate without a signal preemption system.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This system's installation improves emergency response time and, more
importantly, response safety in those communities where it is used. Its dual
priority capability allows other users under a priority system to access
signal preemption. It severely reduces the need for our emergency
responders to occasionally travel into opposing lanes of traffic, a risky
route to negotiate. And, it clearly allows traffic movement in the direction
by the emergency responder.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Impact Fees can not be used for
annual operating and maintenance costs. The General Fund will need to
provide for repair and replacement of system components as they outlive
their useful life.
Funding
Sources:
100% Fire Impact Fees
257
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Fire Station #4 – South West Bozeman
Estimated Cost: $2,771,366
Project Number: Fire Impact Fees – FIF06 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is identified as a priority in the adopted Fire Facility Plan
because most of the City's north and west areas are located such that our
response time exceeds four to six minutes for fire and medical
emergencies.
Land acquisition costs are not included. The City currently owns the site
on the southwest corner of 19th Avenue and Graf Street, which is ideally
situated for this station.
This station will be needed as our community grows in its South West
Quadrant. We will need to watch annexations and subdivisions within the
area and schedule this project accordingly.
Alternatives
Considered:
Many are available: Scale down the project size and/or materials used in
construction to accommodate a residential type facility similar to Station
#2; require automatic sprinkler systems as built-in protection for all new
construction located outside of existing stations' response time service
districts; continue operating under current resources; relocated existing
stations; accept longer-than-historical response times and high life and fire
losses; acquire fire district's fixed facilities as annexation by the City
continues.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The completion of this project would enhance our ability to respond to
growing parts of the community within a time frame that has been
historically acceptable to the citizens of Bozeman.
Station #1 and #2 are located in areas which ineffectively serve the
existing community as well as the portions which are on Rouse street, a
heavily traveled way with a stop light, which occasionally limits our drivers
to unsafe access to Rouse or Mendenhall.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Impact Fees can not be spent on
operations and maintenance costs. The City’s General Fund will bear the
annual operating and maintenance expenses associated with this facility,
estimated at $1,200,000, including all crew personnel.
Funding
Sources:
100% Fire Impact Fees
258
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Fire Engine for Station #4
Estimated Cost: $598,363
Project Number: Fire Impact Fees – FIF07 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement □ Facility ■ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is the purchase of an engine and accompanying equipment for
use out of new Fire Station 4.
It will be necessary to have this engine at the Station when it opens.
There is an estimated 12 month lead time in delivery of this type of
equipment.
This engine will be needed for Station #4, which will be required as our
community grows in its South West Quadrant. We will need to watch
annexations and subdivisions within the area and schedule this project
accordingly.
Alternatives
Considered:
Use of 1989 Pierce Reserve Pumper Darley; buy a used engine;
lease/purchase an engine.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Purchase of this unit will adequately equip Station #4 for fire and other
emergency responses.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Impact Fees can not be used for
annual operating and maintenance costs. The City’s General Fund will
pay for the increased fuel, maintenance and insurance costs associated
with this engine, estimated at less than $30,000 per year.
Funding
Sources:
100% Fire Impact Fees
259
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Construction of Fire Station #3
Debt Service Payment
Estimated
Cost:
$108,000 Estimated Each Year, Principal and Interest
Plus, any additional Impact Fee Revenue to retire the debt as soon as
possible.
Project
Number:
FIF08 – Fire Impact Fees Date
Scheduled:
Each Year until
Paid – FY11-
15
Purpose: ■ New Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The construction costs for Fire Station #3 are 100% impact fee eligible. At
the time of construction, there was not enough cash in the Fire Impact Fee
fund to pay all the eligible costs. As a result, the City’s general borrowing
authority was used to borrow $890,000 to finish the project.
Because current state statutes do not provide specific authority for cities to
borrow against streams of impact fee revenues, we needed to borrow the
funds under the city’s general borrowing authority (general obligation) MCA
7-7-4104. This loan is ultimately secured by the City’s General Fund; we
intend to use Fire Impact Fees collected during each year to make the debt
service payments, but if those should fall short the General Fund would be
required to make the payment.
Under current Intercap rates, a loan of $890,000 would require annual debt
payments of $108,000 (10 year term, 4.25%). There is no penalty for early
payment, and it would be our intention to pay off this loan as quickly as
possible, dedicating all annual revenues to debt payments.
Alternatives
Considered:
The City could opt to not pay this loan off early; instead making the annual
payments each year. However, because the debt is ultimately backed by the
City’s General Fund, borrowing authority under MCA 7-7-4104 is limited to a
fixed amount, and interest costs accumulate, it is best to pay this debt as
soon as possible.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
The General Fund will not be required to pay for capacity expanding costs of
the Fire Station.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Currently supported in General
Fund budget.
Funding
Sources:
Loan made on borrowing authority of the City’s General Fund (MCA.7-7-
4104)
All loan repayments will be made by Fire Impact Fee Fund.
260
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
261
WA
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
F
Y
1
1
-
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
jec
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
7,
5
6
0
,
0
0
0
$
7,
5
3
5
,
0
0
0
$
7,
1
7
2
,
6
7
5
$
2,
5
1
5
,
2
5
6
$
40
,
2
0
3
$
40,203$
A
d
d
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
52
5
,
0
0
0
33
7
,
6
7
5
34
2
,
5
8
1
32
4
,
9
4
8
31
8
,
5
6
7
324,935
L
e
s
s
:
T
o
t
a
l
C
r
e
d
i
t
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
55
0
,
0
0
0
70
0
,
0
0
0
5,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
31
8
,
5
6
7
324,935
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
7,
5
3
5
,
0
0
0
$
7,
1
7
2
,
6
7
5
$
2,
5
1
5
,
2
5
6
$
40
,
2
0
3
$
40
,
2
0
3
$
40,203$
26
2
WA
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Gr
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
2%
2%
2%
2%
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
40
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
6
,
0
0
0
$
31
2
,
1
2
0
$
31
8
,
3
6
2
$
324,730
$
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
I
n
c
o
m
e
(
C
h
a
r
g
e
)
12
5
,
0
0
0
37
,
6
7
5
35
,
8
6
3
12
,
5
7
6
20
1
201
Im
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
52
5
,
0
0
0
33
7
,
6
7
5
34
2
,
5
8
1
32
4
,
9
4
8
31
8
,
5
6
7
324,935
Ad
d
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
To
t
a
l
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
52
5
,
0
0
0
$
33
7
,
6
7
5
$
34
2
,
5
8
1
$
32
4
,
9
4
8
$
31
8
,
5
6
7
$
324,935
$
No
t
e
s
:
26
3
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
WA
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
It
e
m
R
e
f
#
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
t
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
/
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Cat
e
gor
y
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
F
Y
1
5
TotalScheduled
W0
7
2
2
M
G
M
E
M
B
R
A
N
E
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
Wa
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
5,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
2,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
-
8
,
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
WI
F
0
1
S
O
U
R
D
O
U
G
H
C
R
EE
K
D
A
M
Wa
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
200,000 19,750,000
WI
F
0
3
5
.
3
M
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
R
ES
E
R
V
O
I
R
W
a
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
- 5,300,000
WI
F
0
5
R
E
D
U
N
D
A
N
T
T
R
A
N
S
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
M
A
I
N
F
R
O
M
W
T
P
Wa
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
- 21,680,000
WI
F
0
7
G
R
A
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
Wa
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
- 150,000
wif
0
8
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
D
E
B
T
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
P
A
Y
M
E
N
T
W
a
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
31
8
,
5
6
7
32
4
,
9
3
5
643,502
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
70
0
,
0
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
2,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
31
8
,
5
6
7
$
32
4
,
9
3
5
$
9,143,502$ 46,880,000$
26
4
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
22MG Membrane Water Treatment Plant
Estimated Cost: $40.2 Million Total
Project Number: Water Plant – W07 Date
Scheduled:
FY08-FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This new Membrane Filter Treatment Plant is the preferred water treatment
alternative identified in the adopted Water Facility Plan. It is recommended
to be built with an initial configuration providing 22MGD of water treatment
capacity, with future expansion capability to 36MGD. This addresses both
the 10- and 20- year capacity requirement forecast for the City’s water
treatment system.
The current 15MGD WTP equipment is nearing the end of its useful life;
the plant’s direct filtration treatment process, while effective most of the
year, becomes only marginally effective during spring runoff or flash
thunderstorms in the watershed, dropping plant efficiency as low as 70%;
and, rapid population growth and expansion of city water services is
increasing demand for water. The current plant capacity may be exceeded
in as few as five years.
The New Plant will be sited at the existing WTP site in an 18,800 sf
building located directly north of the existing plant. It will include gravity
thickeners, a drying bed building with dual vacuum-assisted beds, triplex
micro strainers and sludge pumps. All these new facilities will easily fit on
the approximately 33-acre parcel of City-owned property on the site.
A 12-month pilot testing phase will need to be completed prior to design
finalization. We are required to have the new plant online by October 2013.
Extensions of that deadline are possible, but we are not relying on the
assumption that they would be granted.
Alternatives
Considered:
The Water Facility Plan considered numerous alternatives for water
treatment. This was identified as the preferred alternative in the adopted
plan.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Planning for increased water supply to meet growing demands and to
replace existing equipment that is at the end of its useful life.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
This plant is estimated to require two new operators, in addition to existing
plant staff. Annual O&M costs = est. $1,735,901 (including existing staff
plus new plant expenses).
Funding
Sources:
FY08 Pilot Testing = $200,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $133,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $67,000
FY09 & FY10 Design = $3,000,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $2,000,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $1,000,000
FY11 & 12 Construction = $37,000,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $24,700,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $12,300,000
265
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Sourdough Creek (Mystic Lake) Dam
Estimated Cost: $20 Million Total; $200,000 FY11 Begin Design
Project Number: Water Impact Fees –
WIF01
Date
Scheduled:
FY08 – Prelim
Design Consult
FY11 – Begin
Design
Unscheduled -
Construction
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The City currently has storage rights to approximately 1,955 Million
Gallons per Year, with a reservation for an additional 931 MGY, worth of
storage rights on Sourdough Creek. These rights were historically
allocated based on available storage in Mystic Lake. The Mystic Lake
Dam, however, has been breached, rendering these storage rights
essentially useless until a new dam is constructed on Sourdough Creek to
replace the Mystic Lake Dam.
Because this volume of storage right is very significant, the City intends to
utilize these rights to meet future water needs.
This option is suggested in addition to continued water conservation efforts
throughout the City.
Alternatives
Considered:
The Facility Plan explores many options for additional future water in
Section 3.C.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Additional water is secured to meet future resident needs.
Estimated New
Recurring
Costs:
Unknown at this time.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Impact Fees
266
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
5.3MG Concrete Water Storage Reservoir
Estimated Cost: $5,300,000
Project Number: Water Impact Fees –
WIF03
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
(Online by 2017)
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
A new 5.3MB partially buried concrete water storage reservoir is to be
constructed by 2017. The proposed location of the reservoir is on City
property adjacent (to the North) of the proposed new Hyalite/Sourdough
water treatment plant.
By the year 2017, current available storage will be inadequate to meet the
City’s needs according to MDEQ minimum system storage requirements.
This reservoir is sized to meet the City’s storage needs up to 2025,
assuming a 5% annual growth rate.
Locating the storage reservoir at the recommended site will raise the
hydraulic grade line in the City’s water system, which will increase
pressure for the southern part of the City and will allow future development
to occur in the south on a gravity system.
Alternatives
Considered:
The water facility plan reviewed numerous options. This is the preferred
alternative of the adopted plan.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Increased water storage to meet the needs of our growth community, and
the requirement of MDEQ. Increased system water pressure in the
southern part of the City.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Requires minimal operation and maintenance. Checking of valves, level
sensors and vents on an annual basis and diver inspection and vacuuming
every five years. Estimated at $4,000 annually.
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Impact Fees
267
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
New Transmission Main from Water Treatment Plant (System
Redundancy/Capacity Expansion)
Estimated
Cost:
$21,682,548 Total
Project
Number:
Water Impact Fees– WIF05 Date Scheduled: Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The Water Facility Plan identifies this project as the most critical redundancy issue in the City’s
water distribution system. The City receives the majority of its water from the Water Treatment
Plant through an existing 30 inch concrete transmission main. If this main is off-line for any
reason, the City will need to rely on storage from its three reservoirs. At 2005 water demand
levels, storage reserves would be depleted in three days during the average day demand, and in
24 hours during the maximum day demand.
Not only will a second transmission main provide the security of redundancy if the existing 30-
inch main is removed from service, but the existing 30-inch main is expected to reach capacity by
the year 2020.
Redundancy Area: Water Treatment Plant
New Size Description of Estimated Footage (ft)
Old Size Construction Cost
4,525 N/A 12" Install New 12" $ 911,335
2,636 N/A 24" Install New 24" $ 1,101,716
5,154 N/A 36" Install New 36" $ 3,481,785
17,093 N/A 48" Install New 48" $16,187,712
Total Project Cost $21,682,548
The precise location of the required mains is somewhat flexible, but in general will be from
Wagonwheel road (extended) in S. 19th to Goldenstein to South 3rd to Nash Road (see exhibit
5.B.3 of the facility plan).
Given the priority of the Water Treatment Plant project, the City is not currently planning
to complete these projects.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do not build redundant transmission main.
Advantages
of Approving
this Project:
The city will be assured that water can be supplied even if one transmission main sustains
damage and is offline for a number of days.
Estimated
New Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Impact Fees can not be spent on annual operations and
maintenance costs. The Water Utility will see incremental increases in general maintenance
costs. Current cost estimate of $12,500 per water-main mile maintained annually.
Funding
Sources:
Impact Fee eligible portions are related to improvement costs beyond an 8” line capacity. At this
point in time, it is estimated that the 12” and 24” lines are most likely to be built within the next 5
years; the cost of over-sizing those lines would be eligible for impact fees and is estimated to total
$1,874,886. Given the priority of the Water Treatment Plant project, it’s relative size and scope,
these improvements have been moved to “unscheduled.”
268
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Exhibit #1 –
New
Transmission
Main Map
269
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Graf Street Extension/Connection
Estimated Cost: $150,000
Project Number: Water Impact Fees – WIF
07
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is to extend Water Mains below Graf Street approximately ¼
mile in order to connect infrastructure east from 19th Avenue.
This is an important connection for public safety purposes – allowing fire
service to meet their response time requirements in areas where they
currently cannot. The Water infrastructure should be installed at the same
time the street connection is made.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing and wait for development to connect the infrastructure.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and better emergency response to the local area.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% Water Impact Fee – to be recovered by developer payback.
270
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Water Treatment Plant – Debt Service
Estimated
Cost:
$5,000,000 Principal, plus accrued interest
Project
Number:
Water Impact Fees – WIF08 Date
Scheduled:
FY14-
unknown
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Total adjusted project price for the Water Treatment Plant (WTP) construction of
phase one is estimated at $40 Million.
Of that amount, $13.3 Million is for capacity expanding costs of construction.
The impact fee account will not have enough cash on hand to pay the costs of
construction when the facility is built. As such, impact fee revenues will be
dedicated to pay the outstanding debt in future years, as fee revenues are
collected.
At this point, approximately $5 Million of impact fee eligible costs will be paid
with a long-term loan (20 years, 4%) through the State’s Revolving Loan Fund.
A debt schedule will be updated semi-annually with the amount of impact fee
dollars that have been dedicated to debt payments until the full amount owed is
paid.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Major capital expansion of the Bozeman WRF will enable the City to meet its
ever growing demand for wastewater services and still produce a high quality
effluent that is in full compliance with the City’s MPDES discharge permit.
Expansion of the Bozeman WRF is consistent with the City’s long-term need to
accommodate rapid growth and economic development in the Gallatin Valley.
Estimated
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
FY08 Pilot Testing = $200,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $133,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $67,000
FY09 & FY10 Design = $3,000,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $2,000,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $1,000,000
FY11 & 12 Construction = $37,000,000 Total
67% Water Utility Fund = $24,700,000
33% Water Impact Fees = $12,300,000
*We anticipate having a minimum of $8.3 Million available from Impact Fees
through the end of the construction period. Impact fee collections during the
construction period will be dedicated to the project. The remainder of eligible
construction costs would be dedicated to debt service on the Utility Revenue
Bonds, as it is collected in the Impact Fee Fund.
271
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
272
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
O
F
C
I
P
B
A
L
A
N
C
E
S
,
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
S
A
N
D
E
X
P
E
N
D
I
T
U
R
E
S
CI
P
P
l
a
n
F
Y
1
1
-
F
Y
1
5
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
F
Y
1
1
F
Y
1
2
F
Y
1
3
F
Y
1
4
F
Y
1
5
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
B
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-$
A
d
d
:
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
40
0
,
0
0
0
30
0
,
0
0
0
30
3
,
0
0
0
30
6
,
0
3
0
31
2
,
1
5
1
318,394
O
t
h
e
r
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
e
s
s
:
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
C
I
P
E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
40
0
,
0
0
0
30
0
,
0
0
0
30
3
,
0
0
0
30
6
,
0
3
0
31
2
,
1
5
1
318,394
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
Y
e
a
r
-
E
n
d
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
C
a
s
h
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-$
1
27
3
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
F
U
N
D
RE
V
E
N
U
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY
1
0
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY15
Gr
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
s
40
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
3
,
0
0
0
$
30
6
,
0
3
0
$
31
2
,
1
5
1
$
318,394
$
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
I
n
c
o
m
e
(
C
h
a
r
g
e
)
10
0
,
0
0
0
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Im
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
C
I
P
50
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
3
,
0
0
0
$
30
6
,
0
3
0
$
31
2
,
1
5
1
$
318,394
$
Ad
d
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
O
t
h
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
50
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
3
,
0
0
0
$
30
6
,
0
3
0
$
31
2
,
1
5
1
$
318,394
$
2
27
4
CI
T
Y
O
F
B
O
Z
E
M
A
N
CA
P
I
T
A
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
WA
S
T
E
W
A
T
E
R
I
M
P
A
C
T
F
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
It
e
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
C
o
s
t
s
b
y
F
i
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
t
#
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
i
t
l
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
FY
1
1
FY
1
2
FY
1
3
FY
1
4
FY
1
5
TotalScheduled
WW
0
4
W
R
F
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
-
P
h
a
s
e
I
WW
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
30
3
,
0
0
0
-
603,000
WW
I
F
0
5
H
O
S
P
I
T
A
L
T
R
U
N
K
:
H
A
G
G
E
R
T
Y
T
O
K
A
G
Y
WW
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
- 1,062,000
WW
I
F
1
1
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
F
R
O
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
:
T
A
M
A
R
A
C
K
/
R
O
U
S
E
W
W
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
- 1,800,000
WW
I
F
1
2
G
R
A
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
WW
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
- 50,000
WW
I
F
1
3
D
E
S
I
G
N
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
-
W
R
F
P
L
A
N
T
WW
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
-
- 5,228,368
WW
I
F
1
4
W
R
F
P
H
A
S
E
I
D
E
B
T
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
WW
I
m
p
a
c
t
F
e
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
30
6
,
0
3
0
31
2
,
1
5
1
31
8
,
3
9
4
936,574 -
To
t
a
l
30
0
,
0
0
0
$
30
3
,
0
0
0
$
30
6
,
0
3
0
$
31
2
,
1
5
1
$
31
8
,
3
9
4
$
1,539,574$ 8,140,368$ 3
27
5
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) Construction –
Phase I
Estimated
Cost:
$53.8 Million – Total, Phase I
Project
Number:
Wastewater Plant – WW04 Date
Scheduled:
FY07 – FY12
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
The existing plant has reached its original design capacity of 5.8 MGD. Current
organic loadings (lbs of BOD) now exceed the plant’s original design capacity
for BOD by more than 20%. These critical loading parameters clearly point to
the need for a major facility expansion.
The City’s current MPDES (Montana Pollution Discharge Elimination System)
permit includes a compliance schedule that requires us to begin removing total
nitrogen and total phosphorous by September 2011 to meet interim Nutrient
Standards set by the State Department of Environmental Quality. In order to
meet the requirements of this schedule, the city needs to move forward with the
construction of a WRF facility, as our existing facility is not designed to remove
nitrogen & phosphorous.
Bids received for the WRF facility on October 1, 2008 put the total project costs
at a low of $65.7 Million (low bid) to a high of over $80.5 Million (high bid.)
Because the low bid was so much higher than our estimate, the project has
been scaled back but will still meet our permit requirements established for
September 2011. Total adjusted project price is now estimated at $53.8 Million.
Alternatives
Considered:
A variety of treatment technologies and alternatives are presented in the
January 2006 Wastewater Facilities Plan.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Major capital expansion of the Bozeman WRF will enable the City to meet its
ever growing demand for wastewater services and still produce a high quality
effluent that is in full compliance with the City’s MPDES discharge permit.
Expansion of the Bozeman WRF is consistent with the City’s long-term need to
accommodate rapid growth and economic development in the Gallatin Valley.
Estimated
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: Similar to existing plant operations
costs. The Facilities Plan estimates a total of $1,439,360 annually including all
labor, power, chemicals, equipment maintenance, and equipment replacement.
Funding
Sources:
FY07 Design: Total $3.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility Cash = $2.33 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Cash = $1.57 Million
FY09 & FY10 & FY11 Construction: Total $49.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility = $33.5 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Eligible = $16.4 Million Eligible*
*We anticipate having a minimum of $13.1 Million available from Impact Fees
through the end of the construction period. Impact fee collections during the
construction period will be dedicated to construction of the project. The
remainder of eligible construction costs would be recovered via debt service on
the Utility Revenue Bonds, as money is collected in the Impact Fee Fund.
276
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Hospital Trunk: Haggerty to Kagy
Estimated Cost: Total: $1,062,000; $743,400 Wastewater Impact Fees
Project
Number:
WWater Impact Fees -
WWIF05
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Construct ~7,900 LF of 12" and 15" sewer collector from manhole C0507 to
1E22.
Existing portions of this collector are not sized for anticipated future
development and the new portions of this collector, which will need to be
constructed with development, will need to be oversized to meet future
needs.
It is estimated that 70% of this project costs will be due to capacity
expansion and will be eligible for Wastewater Impact Fees.
The remaining 30% of the project costs will need to be provided by a
developer contribution or other source. At this time, the City’s Wastewater
Utility does not have a need to replace the existing facility; as such, no
utility dollars are scheduled to be spent.
Alternatives
Considered:
Limit future development in the area.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
If constructed to the line sizes master planned in the City’s Wastewater
Facilities plan, capacity will be provided for anticipating the long-term future
growth in this area.
Estimated New
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Impact fees can not fund
operating and maintenance costs. The city’s wastewater utility will pay for
these costs, which are estimated to be a small increment of the city’s
system as a whole.
Funding
Sources:
70% Wastewater Impact Fees = $743,400
30% Developer Contribution = $318,600
277
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Replace Front Street: Tamarack/Rouse
Estimated Cost: $1,800,000
Project Number: WWater Impact Fees –
WWIF11
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project consists of construction of ~11,000 LF 18", 21" & 24" sewer
pipe from manhole F0330 to C0507.
The lower portion of the existing sewer is at capacity. Additional capacity
is needed to serve the future Bozeman Deaconess Hospital development
and lands to the south.
It is estimated that 70% of this project costs will be due to capacity
expansion and will be eligible for Wastewater Impact Fees.
The remaining 30% of the project costs will need to be provided by a
developer contribution or other source. At this time, the City’s Wastewater
Utility does not have a need to replace the existing facility; as such, no
utility dollars are scheduled to be spent.
Alternatives
Considered:
Limit development to only that capacity of the existing sewer.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
This project will significantly increase the service area and capacity of the
trunk sewer.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs: Impact fees can not fund
operating and maintenance costs. The city’s wastewater utility will pay for
these costs, which are estimated to be a small increment of the city’s
system as a whole.
Funding
Sources:
70% Wastewater Impact Fees = $1,260,000
30% Developer Contribution = $540,000
278
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project Name:
Graf Street Extension/Connection
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Project Number: Wastewater Impact Fees –
WWIF 12
Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
This project is to extend Wastewater Mains below Graf Street
approximately ¼ mile in order to connect infrastructure east from 19th
Avenue.
This is an important connection for public safety purposes – allowing fire
service to meet their response time requirements in areas where they
currently cannot. The Wastewater infrastructure should be installed at the
same time the street connection is made.
Alternatives
Considered:
Do nothing and wait for development to connect the infrastructure.
Advantages of
Approving this
Project:
Improved traffic flow and better emergency response to the local area.
Estimated New
Future Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Impact Fee – to be recovered by developer payback.
279
Project
Name:
Design Phase II - WRF Plant Improvements
Estimated
Cost:
$5.2 Million Total
Project
Number:
Wastewater Plant – WWIF13 Date
Scheduled:
Unscheduled
Purpose: ■ New □ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
In January 2006 Morrison & Maierle Consulting Engineers completed a
comprehensive Wastewater Facilities Plan. The plan recommends the City
proceed with a 3-phased project schedule that includes the construction of a
new Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) that is capable of handling our increased
flows while also reducing the amount of Total Nitrogen discharged to the East
Gallatin River.
Phase I of the Plant improvements are scheduled for FY07-FY11.
This project is for the Engineering Pre-Design work and the Final Engineering
Design work for Phase II of the project. This phase will include one new
primary clarifier, more BNR reactor basins & clarifiers, tertiary deep bed
filtration, liquid sludge storage tanks, anaerobic digestion, dewatering cake
storage building and effluent re-use pumping station.
The vast majority of the Phase II improvements are capacity expanding, and the
project is estimated to be 100% impact fee eligible. However, once design
work begins, we will be continually evaluating the impact fee eligibility of the
features of the phase.
Alternatives
Considered:
A variety of treatment technologies and alternatives are presented in the
January 2006 Wastewater Facilities Plan.
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Major capital expansion of the Bozeman WRF will enable the City to meet its
estimated demand for wastewater services and still produce a high quality
effluent that is in full compliance with the City’s MPDES discharge permit.
Expansion of the Bozeman WRF is consistent with the City’s long-term need to
accommodate rapid growth and economic development in the Gallatin Valley.
Estimated
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs: no estimates at this time.
Funding
Sources:
100% Wastewater Impact Fees
Pre-Design: $899,891
Final Design: $4,328,477
.
280
City of Bozeman Capital Improvements Plan FY11-15
Project
Name:
Water Reclamation Facility – Phase I Debt Service
Estimated
Cost:
$4,870,000 Principal, plus accrued interest
Project
Number:
Wastewater Impact Fees –
WWIF14
Date
Scheduled:
FY12-
unknown
Purpose: □ New ■ Replacement ■ Facility □ Equipment
Project
Description:
Total adjusted project price for the Water Reclamation Facility (WRF)
construction of phase one is estimated at $53.8 Million.
Of that amount, $17.9 Million is for capacity expanding costs of construction.
The impact fee account will not have enough cash on hand to pay the costs of
construction when the facility is built. As such, impact fee revenues will be
dedicated to pay the outstanding debt in future years, as fee revenues are
collected.
At this point, approximately $4.87 Million of impact fee eligible costs will be paid
with a long-term loan (20 years, 3.75%) through the State’s Revolving Loan
Fund.
A debt schedule will be updated semi-annually with the amount of impact fee
dollars that have been dedicated to debt payments until the full amount owed is
paid.
Alternatives
Considered:
Advantages
of
Approving
this Project:
Major capital expansion of the Bozeman WRF will enable the City to meet its
ever growing demand for wastewater services and still produce a high quality
effluent that is in full compliance with the City’s MPDES discharge permit.
Expansion of the Bozeman WRF is consistent with the City’s long-term need to
accommodate rapid growth and economic development in the Gallatin Valley.
Estimated
Future
Recurring
Costs:
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Funding
Sources:
FY07 Design: Total $3.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility Cash = $2.33 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Cash = $1.57 Million
FY09 & FY10 & FY11 Construction: Total $49.9 Million
67% Wastewater Utility = $33.5 Million
33% Wastewater Impact Fee Eligible = $16.4 Million Eligible*
*We anticipate having a minimum of $13.1 Million available from Impact Fees
through the end of the construction period. Impact fee collections during the
construction period will be dedicated to the project. The remainder of eligible
construction costs would be dedicated to debt service on the Utility Revenue
Bonds, as it is collected in the Impact Fee Fund.
281