[MissoulaGov] committee update 6-10-09

[Paradigm1 at aol.com]

Wow... truly a frightening development from the overworked  Ordinance 
Department at City Hall. I would hope the individuals  owning these 3500 
properties will be allowed to opt out or vote on it  themselves?  I can't imagine 
many of them being happy about being forced to  freeze their properties in 
time, so as to indulge the historic preservation  crowd. Or, go through what 
will undoubtedly be the nightmarish process of  getting a .... um... 
"Certificate of Appropriateness"... yikes. Is the City now  positioning itself to 
mandate our aesthetic and architectural decisions as well  ? Truly an Orwellian 
encroachment which I hope you will oppose. Historic  Preservation works 
best when the Owner, Architect, and Builder are pursuing it  voluntarily.... it 
should stay that way here in Missoula.  


Thanks,
 
Carl Posewitz,
 
Ward 3

 
 
In a message dated 6/11/2009 8:12:25 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,  
BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us writes:

 
Maybe Jim or someone from the  housing crowd can post a link to the income 
numbers you request.    
The 3500 number is correct. It  includes all the older homes in the 
districts like the University area. The  ordinance will follow right behind the 
zoning rewrite and will be considered a  rezone for the subject properties. 
They all will be receiving advance notice  of the planning board hearings. 
 
 
From:  missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com 
[mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com]  On Behalf Of Jed Taylor
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:26  AM
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov]  committee update 6-10-09

There  are 3,500 qualifying properties in Missoula that will come under 
historic  preservation control?  If that number is not a typo, is this a 
function  of some rather large districts where individual properties get scooped 
up by  one net?  How does this work dovetail with the zoning rewrite  work? 
Also,  is there any information available somewhere to estimate just how 
many  Missoula residents make 80% or less of the AMI?  What is the  AMI?  
These numbers would be rather revealing as to how income is  distributed, how 
it's likely not a bell curve, and how many people - council  members included 
- would qualify. 
Also,  am I to fear this rabble that seeks affordable housing in a town 
where many  are getting by working two or three jobs at $10 / hour?  Or should 
I  reserve my concern for local legislators this out of touch with what's 
going  on in their own city and seem to be afraid of pretty much everything 
that  comes before the Council, and who apparently assume someone who isn't 
pulling  down six figures is an untouchable sure to ruin the neighborhood? 
It's  the casual public comments I find to be the most revealing. 
  
____________________________________
 
From:  missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com 
[mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com]  On Behalf Of Bob Jaffe
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009  23:33
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: [MissoulaGov]  committee update 6-10-09 
Greetings, 
First I want to thank the folks who contributed comments  last week 
regarding the cost of developing housing in Missoula. The  information was very 
helpful. 
In Conservation this morning we reviewed the plan for the  development of 
the new Silver park at the Mill Site.  Nothing really new  from past Millsite 
presentations I have seen. There will be some loop trails  and a central 
patio type structure.  There was some discussion about  reducing the amount of 
turf grass and incorporating native grasses and other  low water plantings 
where appropriate. 
The plan is still to put in the parking lot near the  stadium and complete 
the connection to California street this summer for sure.  MRA is also 
looking at putting the whole park out to bid to see how it comes  back. If the 
stars align they may just go ahead and build the whole thing this  year. 
In PAZ we heard a presentation about historic preservation  from Jennifer 
Buddenborg of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The  gist was 
that historic preservation makes a place unique and desirable. It is  green and 
sustainable. It creates jobs, increases tourism, and is good for the  
economy. Our next item was to consider sending the new historic preservation  
ordinance to the planning board. This is an amendment to the zoning code to  
incorporate an extra review process to protect historic assets.  This  came 
before us a while ago but it had too many problems to move forward. The  
current version is much closer to something that could be adopted so we did  vote 
to send it on. 
The basic idea is that there will be an inventory  maintained of all 
historic assets. These are properties that are on the  historic register, qualify 
to be on the register, or are contributing  properties to an historic 
district.  Currently there are about 3500 such  properties identified in Missoula. 
In order to get a building permit to do  anything to the exterior of one of 
these properties there will be an extra  step where the preservation 
officer will need to review the application to  confirm that the project is 
appropriate. Some projects will be able to be  confirmed by the preservation 
officer, some will need to go to the  preservation commission. Approval will be 
based upon a number of factors  including design standards to be developed 
for each historic district. It will  be very interesting to see how this 
progresses through planning  board. 
After lunch we reconvened for A&F. We looked at a  project being put 
together by the Rocky Mountain Development Group to purchase  the old Missoula 
Athletic Club.  The MAC went under a couple of years  ago. The property has 
since been foreclosed on by the banks. Fortunately this  qualifies the property 
for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP).   The NSP is the piece of 
the bailout funding that went to help foreclosed  homeowners. There are the 
traditional set of strange rules and hoops to jump  through but in the end 
Montana gets about $19 million. Rick Wishcamper and his  partner Mike are 
the local experts on how to put together for profit real  estate deals with 
the government’s money. For this project they are requesting  $5 million in 
NSP money plus an additional $400,000 or so from another federal  pot. That 
covers about half the cost of the $10 million dollar project. The  other half 
also comes from the feds from some kind of HUD loan program. They  are going 
to build a 115 unit complex on the 3.5 acre site and rent the units  to 
folks who are at 80% area median income. The way the rules all work out  that 
means they could rent a two bedroom apartment for $722 including  utilities. 
It sounds like a pretty sweet deal for the developer but I guess  that’s 
what public private partnerships are all about. The feds are dumping  all kinds 
of money into getting properties out of foreclosure and creating  
affordable housing. That’s exactly what these guys are doing. 
As a side note, Renee voiced concern about the hazards of  putting 115 low 
income households all in the same place. She thought it was  ironic that the 
funds were for neighborhood stabilization when this many poor  people in 
the same place was likely to destabilize the neighborhood. She  appeared to be 
having trouble finding the right word to describe the element  that would 
live in such housing. Jason pointed out that he himself was the  element 
since he easily qualified. Stacy also noted that her family purchased  their 
home through assistance programs from HomeWord. Renee conceded that it  was 
likely she herself may fit into the 80% AMI category. 
The discussion reinforces the point that most folks can’t  afford housing 
in this town. I imagine that just about everyone on council  would be hard 
pressed to purchase a home in today’s market if they didn’t  already have 
equity. This was the point of the video the Mayor’s office put  out last year. 
To show that the folks who need assistance in housing are not  destitute and 
impoverished, but are just like you and me. So no reason to be  fearful of “
affordable” homes in your neighborhood.   
We voted to authorize the mayor to send the application on  to the state to 
compete for the NSP funds. 
In public Works we set the public hearing to establish SID  544 to install 
sewer lines in a chunk of the middle rattlesnake. Will  Snodgrass was there 
and made much fuss about the legality of the whole process  and again 
challenged the integrity of Steve King and Bruce Bender. He seems  quite certain 
that these two are pulling off some kind of nefarious scam  against the 
people of Missoula. If I understand him right, his complaint is  that we should 
not be using federal funds to install the sewer unless we have  first fully 
evaluated alternative methods of disposal.  I take it he  thinks the 
alternative methods are superior and we haven’t given them due  consideration. 
Once we were full on into the bored and sleepy part of the  day we took up 
the budget again. Still not really a whole lot going on there.  Everyone has 
cut back on all sorts of stuff. The administration has come up  with a 
scheme to fund what’s left. We’re not really in a position to argue  whether 
some department’s office supply budget is appropriate.  I’m sure  there is 
always a little more we could squeeze out of the departments but  sitting on 
council all we know is what they tell us. If they are asking for  new money 
we can debate whether we think the new thing is worthy of the  taxpayers 
money. But this year they were all requested to find 3% to cut from  their 
budgets. They are presenting us with the list of how they have tightened  up to 
get there.  So far these lists appear well thought through and I  haven’t 
seen much to challenge. 
Thanks for your interest,  
Bob Jaffe 
Missoula City Council, Ward 3 
1225 South 2nd West 
Missoula, MT 59801 
(406) 728-1052 



_______________________________________________
-----Please  delete extra content when replying to messages------

Note: This list is  NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But 
posts to this list may be  entered into the public record. 
Subscribe or view archives at  Missoulagov.org 
List Serve hosting provided by  www.CedarMountainSoftware.com. 

**************Download the AOL Classifieds Toolbar for local deals at your 
fingertips. 
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolclassifieds/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000004)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090611/92adc658/attachment.htm>