HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 04.08.2014 MINUTES
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
APRIL 8, 2014 6:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
A Council Workshop was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Mark Mace at
6:30 p.m. on April 8, 2014.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
_x Emelie Eaton _x_ Doug Poehls
x Bruce McGee x Richard Herr
Chuck Dickerson _x_ Scot Stokes
x Tom Nelson x Bill Mountsier
OTHERS PRESENT:
Heidi Jensen, CAO
Monica Plecker, Planning Director
Kurt Markegard, PWD
Chad Hanson, Great West Engineering
Crystal Bennett, Great West Engineering
Tim Reiter, Utility Plant Superintendent
Public Input (three - minute limit):
There was no public input.
General items:
• Appointment: Laurel Volunteer Ambulance Service — Jordan White
The appointment will be on the April 15 council agenda.
Executive Review:
• Yellowstone County Public Works Department — Repair of bridge on Laurel Airport Road
Tim Miller, Yellowstone County Public Works Director, explained that the County is submitting an
application for a TSEP grant for the replacement of the railroad overpass on Laurel Airport Road.
This is a good sized project, but it is warranted, due to the high volume of traffic and the development
in that area. The estimated budget will cost between $900,000 and $1 million. The County can apply
for half of a matching TSEP Grant and are asking for support from the city to help them get the grant.
Bill Oke, the engineer, showed some detailed drawings and pictures of the bridge. The proposed
bridge will be substantially wider, and there will be room for sidewalks on each side. The proposed
new bridge will be a three span structure and will accommodate two sets of tracks underneath, instead
of the one track currently. The site distance will be considerably greater. The grades coming up to it
will be much longer and more tapered with safe recovery zones on the shoulders.
Mr. Oke asked permission to pass around a sign -up sheet for support of this project. The County is in
competition with thirty or forty other jurisdictions for the TSEP Grant funds and a rating system
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
tabulates points for various things that are turned in with the application. Public support is important,
as a point is received for every signature.
Bill Oke stated that the current bridge is barely 24 feet, and the new one will be 39 feet wide. It will
be a full two -lane plus 7.5 feet on either side for future use. The road is currently limited legally to 42
mph, if the criteria for site distances is applied. It will increase to about 60 mph by blending the
grades down. If the County does not receive the TSEP Grant, the project would probably be
postponed until the next TSEP application process or until funding is available.
• Resolution — Adopt Preliminary Engineering Report (PER)
• Resolution — Adopt the Environmental Assessment (EA)
• Resolution — Adopt the funding strategy
• Resolution — Authorize submission of TSEP Grant
• Resolution — Authorize submission of DNRC Grant
Heidi stated that these five items pertain to the adoption of the Preliminary Engineering Report. She
deferred to Public Works Director, Kurt Markegard and Great West Engineering to provide the
information.
Kurt explained that the five resolutions related to the PER, the Environmental Assessment for the
PER, the TSEP Grant, the DNRC Grant, and the funding strategy. A public hearing was held last
Tuesday and the Public Works Committee discussed the PER and the recommendations last night.
Crystal Bennett and Chad Hanson, from Great West Engineering, attended tonight to answer any
questions. Another public hearing and presentation is scheduled on April 15 as the city needs
support and public comment.
Chad stated that they were willing to answer any questions regarding the PER and the grant
applications. It is necessary to specifically narrow down the project for the grant application. The
presentation on April 15 will be an abbreviated version of last week's presentation. At that point,
they will need to know the direction that the staff and council want to go.
Kurt explained that the city has to apply for the grants in order to make the projects supportable.
During the public hearing, two scenarios were presented that included the sediment basins and the
storage tank. The two projects would cost about $7.6 million.
Kurt recommended that the council seriously consider applying for a grant to do one project and then
apply for another grant in two years for the other project. This would maximize the grant funding.
The city does not have a huge sewer project coming up, and solid waste and street projects do not
require grant application. He again stated his recommendation to split the projects up and maximize
the grant funding, which would lower the cost to the ratepayers. There are deficiencies, but moving
the Cherry Hills booster station would solve some issues. The first project would include the sed
basins, the building over the sed basins, and possibly securing the plant with Homeland Security
Grants.
Doug stated that there is already a plan for the sed basins, but he questioned whether the city has
property for another water tank. There is no property available currently, but the process could start
after the PER is adopted. Some design and engineering of the elevation would need to be done in
order to determine the right location.
2
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
There was further discussion regard the TSEP funds, the need to acquire right -of -way for the water
tank, providing settled water versus filtered water to CHS Refinery, the issues with sludge removal,
and the need to communicate with CHS Refinery regarding their water needs.
Emelie stated that, at the council retreat, there was talk that the reasoning for having staff looking for
a bulk water station and possibly taking on the septic receiving station was that the projects would
potentially bring in funding for improvements at the water station and the sewer station. There was
no mention of anything pending with regard to immediate projects. She asked if something changed
with regard to that and if these projects still need the additional funding and staff still needs to pursue
the bulk water station and the septic.
Mayor Mace asked if she was talking about it in relation to the PER and he asked Kurt to respond.
Kurt explained that the PER looks at deficiencies within the system, so those projects would not be
included in the PER. The PER looks out for expansion, as far as the pressure zones, but the PER was
the engineering report on the services. The PER asks if the city can meet its population growth in the
future with storage, fire flow, etc. Kurt stated that local projects are put into the budget for approval
by the council. Chad is working on cost estimates for the sewer station and will present the cost
estimates to the council to decide whether to pursue it. The costs should be available in the next few
weeks so they can be incorporated into the budget if council so chooses. Kurt stated that the bulk
water fill station is a work in progress, as staff is still looking at locations. Once a location is
determined, staff can talk to Great West about the cost estimate. With every location there are
nuances like power, phones, what to do with spilled water, convenience, curb, gutter and storm water
modifications, etc.
Mayor Mace asked Council Member Eaton if the explanation answered her questions.
Council Member Eaton stated not in the least, but thank you.
• Resolution — MOU with Beartooth RC &D
Beartooth RC &D representatives Luke Walawander, Economic Development Director, and Earl
Atwood, Office Manager, attended the council workshop. Luke presented information regarding who
Beartooth RC &D is, what they do, how their services benefit the City of Laurel, their projects in the
Laurel area, and the 2014 Memorandum of Understanding. The primary purpose of the MOU is to
provide matching funds for a federal EDA grant, which establishes Beartooth RC &D's five - county
Economic Development District, and is assessed annually. In Yellowstone County, per a negotiated
agreement, the annual assessment is allocated: Yellowstone County is 24% for $6,442.62; City of
Billings is 36% for $9,663.93; City of Laurel is 6% for $1,610.66; and Big Sky EDA is 34% for
$9,127.05.
A copy of the presentation is attached to the council workshop minutes. The resolution for the MOU
will be on the April 15t council agenda.
• Council Issues:
o Discussion regarding loophole in fence permits (Bruce McGee)
3
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
Bruce questioned recent developments about fencing permits, requirements, and how the council
changed the ordinance in order to accommodate the changes. He questioned whether a situation has
been created in which someone could build first and then be permitted afterwards. He thinks the
council should look at the code enforcement policy in the Laurel Municipal Code to see if it is being
followed and if something should be added to restrict the opportunity to build first and then be
permitted after the fact. He stated that, in the fence permit, the code enforcement officer has the
ability to make decisions and nothing in the fence permit section (Chapter 15.20) states the
opportunity to get a variance after the fact of building. The code states that a special investigation is
required, it speaks about the establishment of a permit being paid in addition to the investigation, and
the enforcement and violation and penalty says that "if on inspection, the condition or placement of a
fence is found not to comply with the requirements of this code, the building inspector shall issue
written notice to the owner, specifying the nonconformity and require the owner to correct the same,
as directed by the building inspector." It leaves it up to the building inspector as to what must be
done to make the correction, and the person violating a provision of this chapter could be convicted
and punished as set forth in Section 1.36.010.
Bruce asked if the council wants to make changes on the fence permit situation or to leave it and
continue to deal with it on a case -by -case basis. He stated that nothing in the code enforcement
addresses the city planning authority that would hear a variance request and then make a
recommendation to the council. He stated that a Construction Board of Appeals exists. He wonders
if the council should update the LMC on the different committees that are in place.
Mayor Mace asked Monica Plecker to address some of the issues.
Monica explained that LMC Chapter 15.20, which specifically addresses the permitting process, is
different from the fence ordinance, which is a zoning ordinance in Chapter 17. It is Chapter 17 that
makes the connection with the City- County Planning Board. Monica stated that the most recent
variance regarding the fence height was for a fence that was constructed without a permit. The
building official went through the process of providing the Zimmermans with written information that
they were out of compliance and needed to come into compliance. After the Zimmermans came in,
there was discussion regarding how to best resolve the issue. The Zimmermans kept talking about the
challenges with having commercial property adjacent to them that has not always been commercial.
The city council was not in favor of the property being commercial, but the people were in favor of it,
which created a unique situation. When applicants ask if they can apply for a variance, Monica tells
them they can apply for a variance but there is no guarantee that it will be granted. In every staff
report, she included Chapter 17.60, which talks about land use variances and the seven criteria that
should all be followed. There are times when the Planning Board and the city council tend to hone in
on one or two criteria. In the case of the Zimmermans, the particular criteria was a "special and
peculiar situation" as it relates to the adjacent property, which was not always zoned commercial and
has since changed the dynamic of the residential area. The City- County Planning Board reviewed the
variance request because the fence could not be permitted due to the fence height regulation. Fence
heights are found in Chapter 17 of the Laurel Municipal Code.
There was discussion regarding the permitting process, the situation with the Zimmerman's fence, the
process for a variance request, the possibility of other people circumventing the system and building
without the proper permit.
4
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
Monica stated that the City- County Planning Board minutes reflect that the Board really struggled
with the fact that someone who clearly recognized the code and was told by the building official that
they could not permit the fence went ahead and built it anyway. However, although it was after the
fact, they did go through the municipal code channel to try to get their fence legally permitted.
Monica stated that she was open to suggestions of a way to circumvent this.
There was further discussion regarding the ability of the council to deny a variance request, the
penalties stated in Section 1.36.010, and the need to fine someone that builds without a permit.
Bruce stated that there is a provision for fines in Chapter 15.20. He stated that he has no problem in
now discovering that Chapter 17 addresses land use variances and that there was always an
opportunity for folks to ask for a variance. The City- County Planning Board does a good job on
reviewing variances and the city council pays close attention to the City - County Planning Board's
recommendations. He suggested that simply stating that "if you build before you request the variance
without permitting, you are not allowed to backtrack and ask for a variance at that time." He would
like the council to engage in further discussion regarding this. The change would help to route people
in the right direction to request the variance, let the City- County Planning Board review it and make a
recommendation to the council for a decision. The other way is to continue to do business in the same
way and be more enlightened about the zoning commission and the ordinances.
Mayor Mace stated that the city attorney would be contacted regarding the issue for discussion at the
next council workshop.
o Discussion regarding LMC 2.10.030 D. (Bruce McGee)
Bruce stated that recently the city council had an issue with the LMC's requirement to have a super
majority in place before an action can be taken by the council. LMC 2.10.030 states that "a quorum
shall consist of five council members. The affirmative vote of five council members shall be
necessary to adopt or reject any motion, resolution, or ordinance or pass any measure unless a greater
number is required by statute." With a simple majority, one council member can basically veto a
vote, causing a vote to actually fail. Bruce asked for further discussion regarding 2.10.030 to see if
the council wants to keep or change the verbiage.
Mayor Mace stated that the discussion will be on the April 29 council workshop agenda.
o Lease Task Force update
Heidi explained that Servpro has provided a preliminary estimate on the restoration of the buildings in
Riverside Park, and the numbers are much better than anticipated. Schroeder Construction and
TetraTech are currently investigating any asbestos that may be in the buildings. Heidi will present
pictures of the buildings and the cost estimates for repairs at the council workshop on April 29 The
council can then choose whether or not to proceed with restoration of the buildings. Servpro ranked
the buildings on which ones are most feasible to restore with the least amount of cost.
• Discussion regarding Lease Task Force members
Tom mentioned that Bruce McGee expressed an interest in stepping down to let Rick Herr serve on
the Lease Task Force. As the head of the task force, he would like to see that happen if the Mayor
chose to make the change.
5
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
Heidi explained that, after some investigation, it does not appear that appointments were actually
made to the task force so a formal appointment is not necessary.
There was further discussion.
Tom stated that he wanted to bring it to the mayor's attention if he would like to make the change for
the two members.
Mayor Mace stated that he would do it.
o Update on 2011 Yellowstone River flooding event
Heidi reported on today's conference call with FEMA, which revolved around the environmental
assessment and how it is currently under review in the historic preservation department at FEMA.
Their review process is much more stringent than any of the other agencies from which the city will
seek permitting. The conference call included discussion about new ADA requirements that must be
met in the permitting process. The ten minute discussion revolved around making sure that the
permitting was in compliance with any new standards that the Feds may have adopted recently, and it
sounds like Great West Engineering almost has everything completed. There will be a funding
discussion on April 21 st
Other items
There were none.
Review of draft council agenda for April 15, 2014
• Public hearing: Preliminary Engineering Report/Environmental Assessment
Attendance at the April 15, 2014 council meeting
All council members present will attend.
Announcements
Doug stated that he is working on the siren issue. A new siren is expensive, but there are some
options. The siren needs to be removed from the building.
Heidi stated that she asked Servpro, who is currently doing the construction on the city hall building
and providing estimates for the buildings in Riverside Park, to remove the siren from city hall. The
contractor said that a crane is needed to remove the siren off the building, and it would cost
approximately $3,000. The siren should be removed within the next few weeks.
Doug recently talked to Duane Winslow and Industrial Communications about a new siren. The city
cannot use the one in the baseball field, as it is strictly a disaster siren and cannot be used as a fire
call. Doug is looking at other options and expects to get a preliminary quote from a company for a
new tower to mount the siren on in Firemen's Park by the Chamber building. Industrial
Communications is going to give a quote for the cost to replace and put in a new siren.
Tom mentioned that the Cemetery Commission will meet on Thursday, April 17
Bruce asked regarding the possibility of using the crane to remove the siren from city hall and
mounting it to another location at the same time in order to keep the cost down.
6
Council Workshop Minutes of April 8, 2014
Doug will find out some information soon.
Recognition of Employees
• Bruce Lefler — 33 years of service on April 6
• Doug Reiber — 33 years of service on April 6th
• Robert Volmer — 31 years of service on April 15
• Tim Reiter — 28 years of service on April 2
• Cindy Allen — 16 years of service on April 17th
• Kelly Rhoads — 9 years of service on April 11
• Brenda Sell — 9 years of service on April 28
• Jim Huertas — 7 years of service on April 18
• R. 0. Volmer — 6 years of service on April 28
Mayor Mace mentioned that several employees have worked for the city for many years and he
encouraged the council to congratulate and thank the employees for their service.
The council workshop adjourned at 7:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cindy Allen
Council Secretary
NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for the
listed workshop agenda items.
7
4- 0
• .
,i-
o ,,
V o 06 o
c E u °cis'
O _c Q
(.0)
o
o °
>' i
.
U o0
.......
_c
a.) ii- •,_,
,.. •....
L.... o . .
N
C� tu0 Y
, ; J • _
n
- $ ..‘it, . ,,,,„ ,
c , , , . ,
, , :
cc)
,_ i €,. 0
N .s
w
6
0
ac
t
..
( 'iI 7 <
s
eg
I—
es _. a-+
O
V
cu
3 a,
L
. L
Z ci
O � L
O c O S C5
0 CD
a Q a) a N
o
V +, co 0 N
s-. a
�
O v
O N k,
i �°
Q.) w o
m
c
o
u1.. —I w
0
QJ
Z
2
t � MS
1 f i A g,
1
,,,, t ,
L
CI-
L b.0 E
C Q CO
O N 4J 4--) w
c
0 L-
0 0 ° 12/ L
a
[6 a)
N
m Q J +,
o C
- °� a) v
`n O ° ca O
,,,, a ,,
... , ,,
.. *. ,,,,..,,, , ,L ,
c . , ....
...,..,,,,, ...
cc
...
f 6 4-
}., z p
c
N — +�
6, s_ a--' �; s ca Q
'> co p O
O cn 0 N }' - c E 0 ai
0 = -O c6 }, _O 4— O
06 ,v D > p 0 0
V Q O S- > +a V
DC 4- O 0 co CU 0 c w cu
1
CU N Q 4 0 N 0 2
m a) — c . 0 0 06
w
• 4—• 1- i • N V N te C
c p0 cv p Mot 02
r-I C p O r-I CO
a CI co + , p a) w
O • -0 ca O o p _c
>
-0 a 0 - 4-' i ca -0 i
W 0 -0 O N � O
V 4- — 0 2 1 _ c(t 4.-+ a N Q _0 ' —v)
� v
0 a-- 0 a) ' _ _
+ a.., U CI) ."`m
t /1 N
II C
W a) V 1— a) .- + - < 0
• • •
------ 411 t-
7 ter 'i\ LL
k _,
LL
ti CC ni g
. i N v
Cp
CO O CO
CU y = W CIO
i N H 0 > W in
.... i -C3 M .1 13 C u .
CU C E .g E a W
ha b.0 "0 i
E a3 •_
• — 4A c p c�
• _
i a) •
cn ca > . -
0_
O Q O c * ' 0 >
Q = °A GJ 0 w
c m ate-+ .0 O
O 0 • — 4... 4A c c O
c n c _ � 0 0- u
• W a) = a) 's = v E IV
• > to _a E _ w
• a) N 4_ CL W = V 0 c
0 -1 rt; Q O N .0 O co
V N 4_+ W aA w E? • G �_ V =
a) •N 0 V
Q - • Vf - N — •–
g It.) H .0 ca a-+
= o U v
.— -� i i 1 1 i
L
•
P t , '
.. 4z V
4 y = LE
'' _ 0 a v)
o O
L._ °' E Z 0
i,,, i tX0 C CU
a� E "7:5 CU
- o o E
a� °' N _c
> a
= ai a, ate,
0 cc <'
.0 W O = NIJ
MI O
N 4, „ O N
• ai � c Q p isz 1-
O v; o ; o
et; CU
N O Z
• O v) co
,_ O O O
•_
#a .4 +_
O
elaC L_
+-+ cn cn V 4-I N
S C e o o
L O CU
/ igv, L
i ! / T
4 0
0 U
c a2 D
z , . i > — Cu > •
c . To . _ = U
73 c CD
- 0 a) = C a1
V _C
I1 .-' ' CO =
•— •— Q.
Z CO c N N N
0,1 - 0 • — +. a) a)
U
0 1) >' 0 2 8 = 4-I
0J C V) >' s ig a) c
a) Q a) •5 >
101 ts L. W C N N 0
Si. U • u 4 >' o U
o
O O S- = O O 0
p N% ca p -0 2 >. 2
0 01
a)
_s
2
J ' '2
I t ,,rk w 3
4A
CU o CD
Q C 1-
CO
CU O 4 ''
1 73 (T3 .4.; ID
C to > co =
Q
In 1 0
-) c
�V =• U C .. = 4 U O
J
L
CU CD L N . N Q 4A CO
*44 -I-) L. >. 1 0 f6
O O O =. cc cu z cc � p
O i >'—cL)cow
"its • ...... ca .1 E • • • • .
O CO MD ca
O =
Z mina
N
/ l :5v
i If 1 . ea) C L _
' O
• -
CE
6, C 4-0
i f� • —
w
Q a--+
U ' C Q CU Cii
CU
- u O L_
I. w O
.1.+ `- v _ N O
•+--+ 1-f) L
= s_ v N � � 0
d 00 N
(U (D N N LA
Nei al • — 4 _, O_ to ii)- •t)• in-
(11) C cn 0 < • — . •
CO L a--+
i i w CO
i N a) ca V) I- c
v) •- �
•- L_ •- m - to
O +J o 0° m (0
O
sts .41./ CU • - O O
O 0� 4 --I N
Z 4... O o 03 v N
- -----111 k
: ;41t,,':" f
‘ c (r)
aI
CD
co
MO
' 5 c +., � O Q •cn
�i .7 ) c
L- .-.t
n °� a CD 3 C
U
C 0 4 2
F-- •F-+ 2 0 U a013 >, N C 6 12,.., CQ - 13.0 � c n Ln 0
ago .0 au o v' •N 0 m
m N a j N L cu
._ L Cu -0 O ca
N ° aA
v ; in- : V) o ° -0 O , m
•1.r _ a o v)= o_ a c c
V E v O .� a a n3
Cisa "t3 a L :15 > O
N a) • ri p co i cv •_ L_ V • ._ N
O tap Q .N Z � O . > > iii
N N O U
_ .^ N' 4-1 A c6 a 0 L
0 a) C >, o co
i O 61-1 O N c
, a > aA
a 1 o ° %-- C c o °J
U- O }, C O v U : o 3
N . CO ti E i . E O N L t CZ
a) 0 E
0 .
,,,,__Aml„,
t \ co OA
C
'„ •§ o = C o
1- v N a)
U 1 13 cO
^ ~ E 3 -
CO }' 0 0. = a)
• N 0 L •> OD > O
W CO . —
` 0 >. ++ O N .cc
To CO O a--+ V) v U a-+ te L
U Q N
S ca i cam o E • c — Y N
v
• a, a) N 0 Y w co N
• Q Q c 1. 9- E > •L a)
v; 0,6 4-' 0 E .- 2 4-, .
elaa " t 3 8 V 0 U i_ U W wo = �+ '
`� Q. (a +-� m •c a) Iv_
o
,c) u ‘I- a)
c . � a 3 p o 0
i L f6 >
ri •— C6 U 3 N a)
QJ 73 to 0 W E c 2 o= c aA E
c • •a� N Q C6 +a 0 (D 0 a)
0 _ • a--a - v 3 - '„
.E.�
IIIMMImi SU m 0 C O a te _, V (0 l 0 :,) 4 2
(6
Gi >
= co + O
O Q � , -
N N 4- N 0 �
a H O in H 0.0 . (6 C
Ty 2 bO O cn a) >- 0_ < 0 - 0
0 •
o a
N. v
( 4 4 - 4,', '',., 7 i . . . ... .
, - Nt ,,, , I/ . , .:...,,,,J,,,,,t,*"7 (1) L n ° Z
\.''`- - '" H CU V) H Q.) C alia Q v a o a o0
a
� ' �, 0 0 ti
au
L
R N M tD Ln
3 l0 01 L. O
W N m O N
W l0 I--1 N
4-1 .. C1).‘ %—j Oi
C *N -ch i./1. -VI- tn-
M CD 0 Up U: O N ■ O N M M
N N V 4-1
0 ca =
A CD 0 0 ° O
0 ....c . U 1 w v � i .
� 0 -� W � to � �
Z i. 4..) > � cu rzs = 3 (ti ° � � �
0 11*1 s - Ct3 -C3 � aA U • � M >- U V m
a--+ .... cc;
4::, i L_ 0 > .v)
N • •
. . .
IA
l _/
� 4) O
\ V L
CS 0 Z 0 = o .4
A.- g ...... 0 6 w >. O c
� _ ...I E L cV iu
`~ a O c 0 CI •
a O s o
, V O O a •
4j a a
31. � O = m ...=
O � 0U 4Zt Z°
aCL QJ
.
E
i
i . O >. 0
a- �o�
> 0 E eS
4) t C Qj 4 0,
4
Oftrie
_ � a a o
a