[MissoulaGov] Committee Update 11-18-09

Wed Nov 18 22:31:36 MST 2009

Sounds pretty slow in A&F, If I remember the process correctly, now is an excellent time to take stock on the city budget and begin thinking about the CIP. Council members always complain about not having enough time to review the budget in the summer, but the budget work really begins now (or soon) in the sense of determining what you need and want to do.
Are you guys doing strategy planning now?

Hang by your thumbs and write if you get work!

-----Original Message-----
From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Bob Jaffe
Sent: Wed 11/18/2009 10:22 PM
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 11-18-09

Greetings,

Today we started out with Public Safety making some changes to the garbage ordinance to limit its application to the city limits. The ordinance currently applies to areas within four miles of the city limits. This is setting the stage for some work being done by the urban wildlife subcommittee to address bear management in the city. We did this a few weeks ago but when it got to the floor we realized there were still some loose ends so it went back to committee.

In conservation we worked out a utility easement across the retention pond that qualified as parkland in the Pleasant View subdivision. This "park" is one of our favorite examples of the sort of stuff that used to be allowed to count towards the parkland dedication in the dark ages before the master parks plan. In any case, it now it has a utility easement across it. 

We also discussed Pam's referral regarding recycling in Missoula.  It turns out that the council went through this same process more than fifteen years ago. A working group was established and meetings were held and a document was produced outlining the various challenges, goals, and implementation plans for increasing recycling. The plan has been on the shelf since.  Pam says everything it discusses are the same issues we are faced with today. We determined that we should start out by reading the document. It appears to have been produced with a typewriter so Pam is going to get it scanned and sent to everyone.

In PAZ we set a public hearing to extend the interim zoning on the Gables subdivision in Orchard Homes for another six months. We also considered the Historic Preservation Ordinance again. A Motion was made to limit the scope of the ordinance to properties listed on the Historic Register. This was amended to also include eligible properties. An Eligible property is one that has gone through the whole process to get listed and has been determined eligible but the owner has not opted to actually have it listed. This is important because it is possible for parties other than the owner to take a property through the process of determining eligibility without the owner's consent. The amendment to expand the ordinance to eligible properties failed 5 to 5. I believe it was Marilyn, myself, Pam, Jason, and Dave in favor and Ed, Renee, Dick, Lynn, and Stacy against.  

A substitute motion was then offered by Dave to take the ordinance back to the way it came out of Planning Board and apply it to all properties within Historic Districts.  This failed nine to one. The original motion to restrict the ordinance to listed properties passed and the ordinance will be considered on Monday night.

There is still interest in seeing protections for the historic districts. The hope is that we will be able to make use of our new neighborhood character zoning overlay to establish district by district standards. I requested today that OPG put this in their work plan for FY11 to start this process. We will want to watch for this when the executive budget comes around.

I could go for applying this to the districts as a whole but I think using the overlay process will have more consensus. There is a lot of apprehension about creating this new hoop for people to jump through but over the years I have also heard a lot of arguments for the value in creating the hoops. One thing I find puzzling is that the folks on council who are always harping on protecting neighborhood character haven't gotten behind the ordinance.

In A&F we approved a couple more of the pieces in the financing of the Rattlesnake sewer project.

In Public Works we started up in Miller Creek looking at an agreement with Lloyd Twite to upgrade the sewer system. Twite is one of the primary developers of all the land up Miller Creek. He will put in the money up front for what has been calculated as his share of the sewer improvements needed for his future development. As the city collects connection fees over time from up there we will pay him back.

We also considered a similar agreement for money that is being put up for the lower Miller Creek road improvements. There was a deal where Twite and the Maloney ranch developers were each going to kick in about $500,000 for the project. Right of way issues have delayed the project and now more money is needed. The deal was revised to have the developers each contribute about $200,000 more. But for this part they wanted interest on the repayment of 6.5%. The repayment will come from transportation impact fees collected at the time the lots are developed. 

The deal is fair enough but I have some misgivings. Those interest payments add up to a few hundred thousand dollars that we will not see in future impact fees. This whole project has been very complex and contentious, so it's probably OK to leave a few chips on the table to get the deal done.   

We also learned about the curb ramp installation program that is coming up. There is a bunch of federal money available for putting in a bunch of the ADA ramps. We will do 5th and 6th from Higgins to Russell; 3rd from Higgins to the Tracks; Bancroft; South from Arthur to the Sentinal high school; Higgins from South to Pattee; Around Lewis and Clark, Paxson, Franklin, and Lowell schools.  We also learned more about the problems with the ADA ramps I mentioned the other day.  The city's Safe Routes to School program was randomly selected for an ADA audit. The auditors complained about places where we put in improvements in intersections that already had previously installed improvements. The previously installed ramps met the guidelines at the time, but they wanted them upgraded to the new standards. So all the stuff we put in was fine, but they wanted the old stuff upgraded as well. At the time, the plans were reviewed and approved by MDT and federal highway departments. The ADA auditors did not interpret the regs the same way.  The cost of the upgrades will be about $30,000. They consist of installing different color material at the end of the ramps so sight impaired people can tell when they are about to enter the roadway.  The ramps at the roundabout are built this way if you want to see what they are talking about.

Thanks for your interest,

Bob Jaffe

Missoula City Council, Ward 3

1225 South 2nd West

Missoula, MT 59801

(406) 728-1052

Messages and attachments sent to or from this e-mail account pertaining to City business may be considered public or private records depending on the message content. The City is often required by law to provide public records to individuals requesting them. The City is also required by law to protect private, confidential information. This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please notify the sender immediately, do not forward the message to anyone, and delete all copies. Thank you

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091118/c05fe323/attachment.htm>