Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 12.28.2004 MINUTES COUNCIL WORKSHOP DECEMBER 28, 2004 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS A Council Workshop was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Ken Olson at 6:30 p.m. on December 28, 2004. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: x Dick Fritzler x Kate Stevenson x Gay Easton Jennifer Johnson _x_ Doug Poehls x Mark Mace Daniel Dart x John Oakes OTHERS PRESENT: Sam Painter Cal Cumin Larry McCann Public Input (three-minute limit): Citizens may address the Councd regarding any item of City business not on the agenda. The duration for an individual speaking under Public Input is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the Counc# wi//not take action on any item not on the agenda. · None Public Utilities Department: · Agreement with Engineering, Inc., for the Urban Highway Pilot Program water line replacement project o Larry McCann distributed a memo of explanation to the mayor and council, and a copy is attached to these minutes. o A resolution authorizing the mayor to sign a contract with Engineering, Inc., for the provision of construction administration services for the Urban Highway Pilot Program water line replacement project within the City of Laurel will be on the January 4, 2005 council agenda. o Additional costs for any ground contamination would be presented to the council as a change order. Recreation Task Force Report · Kate Stevenson presented the Recreation Task Force report. · The Recreation Task Force has determined that the playground equipment at the city's parks does not meet code and needs to be replaced. · The proposed numbers were unavailable, but the pricing is for equipment similar to the colorful playground equipment at Graff School, which is made for city parks. · The playground systems are modular, and additional equipment could be added in the future. Council Workshop Minutes of December 28, 2004 · The estimate for playground equipment at Thomson Park is about $30,000, and more equipment could be added. · Equipment needs to be ADA accessible, and some of the equipment is suitable for wheelchairs, etc. · The para.meters need to include a curbing to contain the soft material in which the children play, and the curbing needs to be wide enough for a wheelchair or stroller to go around it. o The sofl material and the cost of installation need to be included in the project. o It is estimated to take 40 to 100 hours to install the equipment. · The parks will be done in order by size, with Thomson and Kiwanis Parks done flint. · Relocation of the tennis courts is possible. Mayor Olson stated that the task force was formed for the creation of a proposed district to allow the city to address the parks and recreation. o The swimming pool project is also tied in, as the residents of the City of Laurel indicated the need for a pool through the Needs Assessment. o This process must be done before the city can finalize a funding mechanism in order to make this a reality. Planning Board: · Procedures for subdivisions o Cai Cumin distributed information regarding procedures for subdivisions, and a copy is attached to these minutes. o Cai reviewed the procedures for subdivisions with the council. · Abstaining from voting: When required? Can one be required to vote? o Sam Painter distributed information regarding the rules of council debate and the ethical requirements for legislators, and a copy is attached to these minutes. o Sam stated that Ken Weaver says a council person can never abstain from voting. o Sam's opinion is that it is nearly never, as a council person could abstain when there is a conflict of interest. · Basically, council persons are under the same ethical obligations as the legislators for the State of Montana. · The law provides that if a council member has a direct financial interest in the subject matter of the item being considered, that information needs to be divulged to the rest of the council members. · The council person has to put it on the record that he/she has a personal interest in the subject, but that does not give an automatic right to abstain from the vote, and that is only one part of it. · The second part is whether the direct financial interest would influence the vote or make it impossible for the council person to be a neutral decision maker. · Legislators present their case to a committee, which then gives a decision on whether or not they should abstain. · The city council does not have such a committee. · Council members need to ask the mayor and the city attorney for an opinion whether or not to abstain. 2 Council Workshop Minutes of December 28, 2004 · Unless there is a personal financial interest, 99.99 percent of the time, a council member would have to vote. · As elected members of the council, there is an affirmative duty to participate in matters before the council. · It is difficult to abstain unless a member is getting a financial benefit from the item. · Sam advised the council to divulge any problem to him or the mayor, and if needed, it would be put on the record when the item is being discussed. · Alderwoman Stevenson asked if this also covered the planning board and other committees. · Sam stated that the ethical requirements basically cover boards and councils and all of the positions. · Montana Code basically says a member must divulge a personal financial interest on the record and then must participate unless they have a ruling from the Committee on Ethics saying that it would influence their ability to be a neutral decision maker. · Alderman Mace asked if it is also because there are a certain amount of elected officials versus a planning board where there are a varying number depending on the hearing. · Sam did not find anything specific saying there are problems with city councils not having enough members to get a super majority vote, as it has not come up in Montana. · Sam gave an example of a city in Alabama where the city council cannot do any activities because its members keep abstaining. o They have a big problem because the people are not abstaining for the proper reasons, but are abstaining to abstain so they are not in controversy. o An elected leader does not have that ability. o Members are elected to represent their populations and are expected to vote. · Alderman Mace mentioned that in small cities like Laurel, everybody has a day time job. · There is a real estate person on the planning board that sells lots within the city. · Sam stated that because they sell lots does not get them out of the vote unless they are personally receiving some money and cannot make a neutral decision. · Alderman Fritzler stated that the city council is an elected position, and he questioned if it is absolute for boards, commissions, and committees the same way it applies to elected officials on the city council. · Sam stated that the law basically says elected or appointed, and appointed members are under the same ethical statute. · Mayor Olson distributed copies of the council rules of procedure to the council. 3 Council Workshop Minutes of December 28, 2004 · He explained that a quorum might not be present at the council meeting on February 1st. · According to the council procedures, if the council desires, it may by unanimous declaration set the time for a decision (LMC 2.10.080). · If the council wants the opportunity to vote with a full council, it could bring that forward at the January 18th meeting and state the mason for changing the normal voting time. · Upon unanimous decision of the council members in attendance, the council has the authority to set the meeting for the proper time to vote when the majority of the council would attend. · Alderman Easton asked that it be discussed at the next meeting after determining which council members would attend or be absent. CTEP application - Public hearing at council meeting on January 4, 2005 o The public hearing for the CTEP project is being advertised. · This is a generalized public hearing for CTEP applications fi-om people in Laurel. · The advertisement for the hearing indicated all eligible project categories and provides the time when people can come forward for projects. · It is not a one project hearing, but it is a hearing for projects. o Alderman Oakes asked to make some comments about subdivisions. · John read and distributed copies of the statement. · A copy is attached to these minutes. o Mayor Olson mentioned that a notice of the intent to create SID No. 111 is being advertised and letters will be sent to the property owners impacted by the SID. · January 14th is the last day for protest of the sidewalk SID. Executive Review: · Appointment to Historical Board o Dr. Don Woemer, the city's current appointment, is term limited and cannot be reappointed. o Dr. Woemer has an enthusiastic interest in that facet and would be great to serve again. o Mayor Olson asked for suggestions for an individual to serve on that board. o Alderwoman Stevenson asked regarding the scheduled meeting time for the Historical Board, and Mayor Olson will find out the information. Resolutions: · Resolution - Agreement with Engineering, Inc. Announcements: · None th · Attendance at the January 4 council meeting. · All present will attend. 4 Council Workshop Minutes of December 28, 2004 Other items · Resolution for transfer of city surplus property to School District No. 7-70 to be used as part of the new middle school construction project. o Mayor stated that the important part of the resolution is "that the City Council hereby supports the middle school project and intends to transfer ownership of the properties to School District No. 7-70 upon the negotiation and mutual acceptance of certain terms and conditions of the transfer required by both parties." o Mayor Olson, Sam Painter, and Alderman Easton recently met with Roger Heimbigner and Josh Middleton. o The school district requested an affirmation from the city regarding the land so the school district could go forward to their architects. o The ditches and fencing are issues that can be resolved. o The school district requested documented wording that the city would support their project, which is provided in the resolution. o Mayor Olson stated that it is just further proof of the city's commitment to the cooperative effort for the middle school. · At the meeting, Josh Middleton extended an invitation for a couple of the council membem to participate in a joint city/school interfacing to be a liaison between the project and the council. o Aldermen Easton and Poehls offered to participate. · Dr. Ken Weaver has been contacted regarding having a council retreat on Saturday, February 12th. o Mayor Olson asked the council to inform him of their attendance at the retreat. · Secretary will e-mail the council members regarding attendance. o Council retreat agenda · Council protocols, an explanation of the rights of the city concerning annexations, and a goat-setting session will be on the retreat agenda. · Contact the mayor with any additional agenda items. The council workshop adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cindy Alien 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. 5 To: Mayor and City Council From: Larry McCarm, Public Utilities Director Date: December 28, 2004 Re: Urban Highway Pilot Program Background: We applied for the Urban Highway Pilot Program in December 2001. In 2002 we were notified that we were successful with our application and MDT would be meeting with us on the project. At about the same time we were actively involved in the 8a~ avenue project with MDT. MDT selects engineering firms by sending out invitations and selecting from those invitations the firms that will do the engineering on their projects for a period of years. In oar early meetings with MDT they determined Engineering lan would be the engineering firm for both 8th Ave and the Urban Highway Pilot Program. As we moved forward on the Urban Highway Pilot Program the project was reduced in s~ze from curb, gutter and s~de walk along Mmn Street from 1 Ave to 8 Ave to curb gutter and sidewalk along Main Street from 1st Ave to 3rd Ave. In 2002 The City Council approved replacing the water line in Main from 1st Ave to 3r~ Ave. This was being done because the project includes 12 feet of paving along the new curb. The paving would be over a water line that we have experienced a number of leaks on. An estimated cost brought forward for approval was $89,000.00. In April of th/s year as the Highway Department was getting documents ready for bid they decided not to include our water line in their project. Although Engineering Inc had completed a major part of the design for the water line MDT did not want the water line project in their contract. In meetings with both MDT and Engineering Inc it was determined MDT would include language that caused their contractor to walt until the water line was complete, if it is not the same contractor. Also during design of the water line and actual on site engineering it was realized that their may be a ground contamination problem. Engineering Inc has calculated the estimated cost if contamination is encountered at $22,600.00. This cost would have to be paid by the City, but would be reimbursed by the State of Montana Underground tank program. Two resolutions will be brought forward 1. Authorizing the Mayor to sign agreement with Engineering Inc for engineering services on the water design and installation cost $10,823.50. 2. Authorizing the expenditure of $22.600.00 for contaminated soil removal to be reimbursed to the City by the Underground Tank program. With the additional cost of Engineering design and installation over site the costs are estimated to be $90,709.96 or $1,709.96 more than original approved cost of $89,000.00. The cost for contaminated soil puts us well above the 89,000.00, but those costs will be reimbursed. Built into the cost estimates is $12,104.70 in contingency funds. (onsullisg Engin0els 0nd L0nd Su:vey01s t4-Dec-O~ co~sffu¢~oa cst 04003 01 Engineer's Estimate of Probable Cost l~or Main Street - Laurel - 1st to 3rd To Remove Existing 203 mm (8-inoh) Waterline and Replace with a 205 mm (I 2-inch) North side of Main Street in Laurel, Montana from ] st Avenue to 3rd Avenue ALL ITEMS ARE COMPLETE IN PLACE ITEM EST NO. QTY. UNIT DESCRIPTION UNIT PP,/CE TOTAL PP-.I C E Water Line improvements 101 UN Fame Account I~, $22,600.00 /I UN = $22,600.00 25 mm (1-in) Water Sen/Ice ( includes Saddle, Tap, Pipe, Corp. 102 IC EA Stop~ Curb Slop wilh Box and VWe) ~ $950.00 / EA = $9+500.00 51 mm (2-in) Water Sewlce ( includes Saddle, Tap, Pipe, Carp. 103 I EA S~op, Cu~bStop~thl~axandW'/e~ ~ $1,500.00 / EA = $1,500.00 104 I LS Tempora~WaterSemice ~ $2,500.00 Ii LS = $2,500.0u 105 3 FA. Cormeetion152mm(6-in) ~ $750.00 II EA = $2,250.00 106 2 FA. 305 mm (12.int x 395 mm I12-in) X152 mm (6-1n) Tee ~ $850,00 IlEA = $1~700.5u 107 1 EA Fire HydranlAssembty ~ $2,250.00 i EA = $2,250.0u Connect to ExisUng 203 mm (&-in) Water Main with 305 mm (12- 108 1 EA In) X 203 mm (&-in) Raducer (~ $1.0~0.06 IlEA -- $t,009.00 Connect to existing 305mm (12-in) Water Main with 305mm (12- 10g I EA In)Coupler t~ $1,000.00 II EA = St,00D,00 110 37 M2 Insulation (~ $25.00 /I M2 = $915,0u 111 18 M ~'aterMain-152mm(6-in)-Cg00Pms ~ $85.00 1~ M = $1,547.00 112 224 M /',/ater Main - 305 mm (12-in) - C900 Pros ~ $110.00/I M $24,640.00 113 20 M3 Impor[edSeckfill ~ $10.00 /IM3 = $200.00 114 2 EA 152 mm (&.in) X 22,5-de,qree bend ~ $250.00 /lEA= $500.00 115 2 EA ~05 mm (12-in) X 22,5-de,qree band ~ $350.0011 EA $700.0u 116 2 EA 152 mm (&.in) Gate Valve ~ $750,00 EA = $1,500,0u 117 3 EA 305 mm (12-in) Gate Valve ~ $1,000.00 EA = $3,000.0u 118 244 M2 Temporary Street Resteration ~ $9.00 M2 = $2,196.0u 119 40 M2 Permanent Street Restoration .. ~ $30.00 M2 Subtotat - Water Line/mprovements = $86,698.00 Total Construction Costs Traffic Control (4%) Mobilization and Insurance Contingency (18%) Total Cost of Project Construction = $80,698.00 = $3,227.92 = $6,455~84 $~12,104.70 $102,486.45 Exhibit "1" ENGINEERING SERVICES ;LAUREL, MT S-Apr-04 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION '~,~ o~ ~^c,uw~ Main Street - 1Bt Ave to 3rd Ave Waterline Replacement KIRK SPALDING, P,E, ITEMS/TASK/MATERIALS ENGINEERING SERVICES ~~ ~ ~ ~ PRE.CONSTRUCTION I PROJECT MANAGEMENT PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE I HRS. $ 95.00 $ 95,00 comespoadence, billln,q ~,nd [m,'oicss PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 3 HRS, $ 75.00 $ 225.00 pre-biddecumenl.preperat[on F:'ROJECTADMINISTRATOR 6 HRS, $ 55.00 $ 330.00 2 PREBID MEETING ~ROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 3 HRS. $ 75.00 $ 225.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 3 HRS. $, 55,130 $ 3,ONSTRUC'nON MANAGER 3 Has. $ 65,00 $ '[95.00 3 PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING :'ROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 2 HRS. $ 75.0s $ 150.00 PROJECTADMINISTRATOR 2 Has, $ 5§.00 $ 110.00 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 2 Has. $ 65.00 $ 130.00 SUBTOTAL ~ ZONSTROCTION MANAGE~IBm 1 CONSTRUCTION SURVEY PROPE~IONAL LAND SURVEYOR 2 HRS. $ 76.00 $ 2oMAN GPS CREWvsGPS Station 18 HRS. $ 115.00 $ 2,070.00 STAFF SURVEYOR 2 HRS, $ c=0.00 $ 120.00 2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 16 HRS. $ 65.00 $ 1~040.00 inspect[on, testln~l.efo, INSPECTOR 72 HRS. $ 48.00 $ 3,456.00 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 2 HRS, S 75.00 $ 150.00 3 PROJECTWALKTHROUGH PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 3 HRS, I $ 75.00 $ 225.00 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 3 HRS. I $ 65.00 $ 195.00 SUBTOTAl. I $ 7,468.00 CLOSEOUT 1 PREPARE AS-BUILTS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 11 HRS. $ 75.Q0 $ ENGINEERING TECHNIC[AN HRS, $ 54.00 $ 324.00 SUBTOTAL S 3~.00 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES: 1 MILEAGE inspection 200 MI $ 0,40 ; $ 30,00 sur~,ey crew' 50 MI $ 0.65 $ 32.50 2 SURVEY & INSPECTION SUPPLIES 1 LS $ 50.00 $ 50.00 3 COPIES, PRINTS, ETC. copies of plans & specs to contractors for bidding 1 LS $ 150.00 $ 150.00 mlsc copies 1 LS $ 50.00 $ 50,00 as-buitis ceples 24" x 38" 20 EA $ 1,45 $ 29,00 4 GEOTECHNICAL 1 LS $1.000.00 $ 1,000.00 compaction Jesting SUBTOTAL $ 1.3g'Ls0 Page 1 o1' 1 The Laud Subdivision Process Laurel, Montana December 2004 GENERAL Subdivision oversight is the single major regulatory device available to local governments to guide land development and community growth, and in MCA 76-3-101 et seq., (the 1973 Legislature's Montana Subdivision and Platting Ac0 requires local governments to adopt, administer, and enforce subdivision regulations~to include prohibition of same in areas unsuitable for development. During the same session, the Legislature changed the Sanitation in Subdivisions Act to require developers to have water and sewer plans reviewed and approved by the State Department of Health and Human Services. In 1993 the Legislature made further changes to the subdivision law: -the 20-acre definition of subdivision was raised to 160 acres -the "occasional sale" provision was deleted -the family conveyance exemption was clarified to a one-time only transfer in each county to each member of the immediate family -the 8 public interest criteria were reduced to 5 primary review criteria The 1995 Legislature: -inserted a "protection of private property rights" into the "purpose" statement -exempted minor subdivisions ~om the park dedication requirement -implemented a detailed formula for calculating park dedication requirements -prevented local governments t~om denying a subdivision solely on the basis of educations considerations -allowed a subdivider to sue the governing body for damages ifa decision was made "arbitrarily or capriciously" Subsequent changes at the state level have included that subdivision must comply with the adopted Growth Management Plan. Single most important benefit of subdivision regulation is the safety and welfare of the community--including lot buyers. However, everyone benefits: homebuyers, business owners, emergency agencies, bankers and real estate firms, schools, private utilities, and developers. But primarily it is the local taxpayer who benefits. Unreviewed developments, poorly designed roads, sewage systems, unstable fill, and similar facilities must be repaired, rebuilt, or upgraded to acceptable standards of health and safety---at taxpayer expense. DEFINITION "Subdivision" (76-3-103(15) MCA) means a division of land or land so divided that it creates one or more parcels contaln/ng less than 160 acres that cannot be described as a one-quarter aliquot part ora US government section, exclusive of public roadways, in order that the title to or possession of the parcels may be sold, rented, leased, or otherwise conveyed and includes any resubdivision and further includes a condominium or area, regardless of its size, that provides or will provide multiple space for recreational camping vehicles or mobile homes. "Minor Plat" (76-3-609 MCA) is a subdivision containing five or fewer parcels of land in which proper access has been provided to all lots and in which there is not any land to be dedicated to the public for parks. -must be reviewed and acted on within 35 days -does not require a public hearing -does not require an environmental assessment -subsequent subdivisions from a tract of record must be reviewed as a major subdivision "Preliminary Plat" (76-3-102 (11) MCA) means a neat and scaled drawing of a proposed subdivision showin~ the layout of streets, alleys, lots, blocks, and other elements ora subdivision that furnish a basis for review by a governing body. "Final Plat" (76-3-103 (5) MCA) means the final drawing of the subdivision and dedication required by the Subdivision and Platting Act to be prepared for filing for record with the County Clerk and Recorder and containing all elements and requirements set forth in the Subdivision and Platting Act. PROCESSS A landowner desiring to subdivide his land is required to meet with the City-County Planner and the Director of Public Works, if in the City, and with the Planner if solely in the County at a "Preapplication Meeting." This meeting makes sure the subdivider is familiar with the regulations and what is expected of him/her. Usually the subdivider will have some sort of sketch which reflects the planned layout of the development; this can be simple and made on the hack of an envelope. The developer is also informed of requirements for needed data such as the environmental impact assessment, a traffic accessibility study, or other information needed by the decision makers to evaluate the proposal. The subdivider usually hires a surveyor or engineer/surveyor to prepare the desired layout in the form of a preliminary plat. Twenty-four co. pies of the plat and all accompaniments are submitted to the Public Works Office Clerk onthe 15~ofthe month (ifa m/nor plat) orthe first of the month for a major plat. A public hearing is advertised (for major plats) and the plats axe distributed to City-County Planning Board members, the City Planner, Public Works, utility companies, County Health, and other appropriate agencies for review and feedback to the Planning Board Secretary prior to the Planning Board Meeting. The Planning Board holds a public hearing, if required, and makes a recommendation on the preliminary plat to the appropriate local governing body. The local government reviews the recommendation, the plat presentation, public comments from the hearing, and makes a decision. The decision can be to deny, approve, or approve with conditions. If approved, the approval is good for three years and can be extended. The conditions under which the preliminary plat is approved are binding, and neither the developer or the local govern/rig body can change or ~dd to the conditions without going through the whole process again. At the same time or subsequently, the developer will submit the plat to the State Department of Health and Human Services for review and approval of the plat and the provisions for water, sewer, solid waste, and storm water disposal services. The latter services must be approved prior to approval of the final plat. A subdivision plat located in the County and not planning to annex to Laurel is reviewed and approved by the County Commissioners after consideration of the recommendation of the City- County Planning Board. A subdivision annexing to the City can concurrently go through the subdividing and annexing process at the same time. City Ordinance also allows the property being annexed and subdivided be zoned R7500 or whatever zone is requested by the developer. At the preliminary plat stage, the submission of information includes a detailed description of what is planned on the site, how it is to be built, and when it is to he completed. The docment that describes this is the Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA). Most subdividers will, atter approval of the preliminary plat, proceed with construction of the required streets, water, sewer, etc. They could post a bond for the improvements and proceed with the filing of the final plat, but the cost of the bond is more than the cost of the improvement. Developers can also set up special improvement districts as one method of paying for such services. Even though developers can proceed to develop their property atter receiving approval of the preliminary plat, they cannot sell any lots in the subdivision or transfer title to any land therein~ unless it is escrowed until f'mal plat approval. An overall site plan for land may be approved as a preliminary plat. The developer can then, with approval of the City or County, develop only a portion thereof. This is common but more paperwork imensive. The final plat is prepared and presented with all final documents, such as the SIA and title report, and submitted to the City. The title report is reviewed by the City Attomey and the planner reviews the conditions for approval of the preliminary plat. Approval of the final plat should be by resolution. A separate resolution may be required for any annexation involved, and an ordinance needs to be prepared for any zone changes. All of the latter (plat, zoning, and annexation) only become effective on the filing of the final plat for record in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Yellowstone County. LAUREL-YELLOWSTONE CITY-COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Outline of Preliminary Subdivision Plat Application Process (1/1/96) (For complete instructions, see Title 16, Subdivisions, of the Lat~rel City Code) 1. Prior to submission of plat documents, meet with the City Planner or other designated representative of the Planning Board to go over plans and requirements. 2. Provide 24 copies of the plat and all related documents to the City Engineer's Office in Laurel on or before the 15th day of the month along with the required review fee ($100 for minor plats; for larger plats, check with the City Engineer's Office). 3. Preliminary plat form and contents: a. All plats shall be neatly drawn in a professional manner. b. A title block indicating the quarter section(s), section, township, range, principal meridian, and county of the subdivision. The title of the plat shall contain the words "plat" and "subdivision." In the case ofre-subdividon, ac0py of the existing plat with the proposed re-subdivision superimposed. c. All plats to be filed as an addition to the City shall note such in the title. d. Name of owners and names of developers and engineer or surveyor. e. All plats shall conform to one of the following two sizes: 18x24 or 24x36 inches. f. Date, north arrow, and a bar scale. g. Vicinity sketch. h. Contour lines of not more than two foot intervals, to sea level datum. i. The approximate location of all section comers or legal subdivision corners of sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary. j. Names of adjoining property owners, SUbdivision, and zoning. k. Location of all existing physical features, such as structures, ditches, rock outcroppings, etc., on the land and adjoining property affecting the plat. 1. The proposed location, name, and dimensions of streets, alleys, and easements and street centerline curve radii. m. Suggested street addresses for each lot in conformance with the adopted street address plan. n. Tentative finish grades for each street shall be indicated by spot elevations. o. Proposed layout of water distribution system, sanitary sewer system, storm sewer system, location of nearest available utilities, and proposed connection location. p. The net and gross acreage of plan and the areas of each individual lot. q. The location of the proposed lot and blocks and lot and block numbers. r. A schedule of the plat and a text including the delineation of the phased development and site data including number of residential lots, typical lot areas, acres of parks, etc. s. A delineation of the existing zoning and, ifa mixture of uses is proposed, a delineation of proposed zoning boundaries and specified uses. t. Sites, if any, for multi-family dwellings, shopping centers, churches, industry, or non-public uses exclusive of single-family dwellings. u. The location and size of the proposed park or the statement that cash-in-lieu of park land is proposed. v. Location of streams, lakes, swamps and land subject to flooding, and a meander line shown established not less than twenty feet back from the ordinary high water mark of such waterways. w. Draft of protective and restrictive covenants or architectural design standards, if any. x. A draft copy of the corporate structure, i.e., homeowners' association, if any. y. Noxious weed management plan. 4. Prepare two copies (only) of the findings of fact (see attached) for submittal with the preliminary plat. C35prelimia 10.050 item for discussion and vote on a subse- quent agenda. As a general rule no matter of significant interest to the public should be decided upon by the council without prior notice to the public as a scheduled agenda item of thc council. 7. Adjournment B. The order of business may be adjust- ed by consent of the council. (Ord. 98-1 § 2 (part), 1998) *Cogent i~ms a~ thoro upon which ~1~ ~iding o~cer conside~ no discussion should be necess~y. However, at the be~nn~ag ~ each meeting any ~o~noa member may ~q~st for the lmtpose of di~o~ic~ p~or to a sel~mte yom on the item(s). The p~siding officer should schedule such discus- sion ~ v~e lo, owing nd~tlon ~ the consent ngend~ 2.10.060 Rules of cotmdl debate. Council debate shall proceed in accor- dance with the fonowing rides: A. Every member desiring to speak shall address ~be presiding officer, and upon rec- ogull/on, shall confine himself/herself to the question under debate, avoiding abusive and indecorous language. B. A member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking urdess it is to call him to order, or as herein otherwise provided. If a member, while speaking is cailed to order, sbe/he shall cease speaking untU the question of order be determined, and, if in order, he/sh~ shail be punnitted to proceed. C. Orde~ofmtatiouinmatters of debate or discussion shall be at ti~ discretion of the presiding officer. D. A motion to recomider any action taken by thc council, may bc made ouly on the day such actiou was taken or at the next meeting of the council. Such a motion shaU be made by a member of the prevailing. side, but may be seconded by any member; ~~ o~~Odebatable and requires a simple r adoption. y member of the council who has st as defined by thc laws of the ontana (Tiilc 2, Chapter 2, MCA) or as advised by thc city attorney shall not panicipate in the debat~ nor vote in that matter nor seek to in~uence the vote of members of the council. Any council member attempting to so participate may be c~nsored by a majority vote of thc remain- ing members of thc city council. ("Cen- sored'' is defined as a formal resolut/ou of thc legislative body reprimanding a member for specified conduct. It is an official repri- mand or condemnation.) F. If thc presiding officerofthe council has an interest as defined by the code of ethics previously adopted or as established by the laws of the state of Montana or as advised by the city attorney, he shall addi- tionally yield the chair to a member of the council during the course of debate and decision concerning ~he issue in which he G. Afar a motion, duly made and sec- onded, by the council, no person shall ad- dress the council without first securing the permission of the presiding officer. (Ord. 9S-1 § 2 (pan), 1998) 2.10.070 Presentaion to the council (not a public hearing). The general manner in which the council handles items other than public hearings shall be as follows: A. The presiding officer presents the item to the council along with a brief sum- mary of the matter for discussion, with or without recommendation. B. For purpose of clarification, council members, after recognition by the presiding 29 ~ ~s) 2-2-1..12. Ethical requirements for legislators. Monna Code Annotated 2003 Page 1 of 1 Previous Section - MCA Contents - Part Contents . ,Se, arch ~ Help - Next Section 2-2-112. Ethical requirements for legislators. (1) The requirements in this section are intended as rules for legislator conduct, and violations constitute a breach of the public trust of legislative office. (2) A legislator has a responsibility to the legislator's constituents to participate in all matters as required in the rules of the legislature. A legislator concerned with the possibility of a conflict may briefly present the facts to the committee of that house that is assigned the determination of ethical issues. The committee shall advise the legislator as to whether the legislator should disclose the interest prior to voting on the issue pursuant to the provisions of subsection (5). The legislator may, subject to legislative rule, vote on an issue on which the legislator has a conflict, after disclosing the interest. (3) When a legislator is required to take official action on a legislative matter as to which the legislator has a conflict created by a personal or private interest that would directly give rise to an appearance of impropriety as to the legislator's influence, benefit, or detriment in regard to the legislative matter, the legislator shall disclose the interest creating the conflict prior to participating in the official action, as provided in subsections (2) and (5) and the rules of the legislature. In making a decision, the legislator shall consider: (a) whether the conflict impedes the legislator's independence of judgment; (b) the effect of the legislator's participation on public confidence in the integrity of the legislature; (c) whether the legislator's participation is likely to have any significant effect on the disposition of the matter; and (d) whether a pecuniary interest is involved or whether a potential occupational, personal, or family benefit could arise from the legislator's participation. (4) A conflict situation does not arise from legislation or legislative duties affecting the membership of a profession, occupation, or class. (5) A legislator shall disclose an interest creating a conflict, as provided in the rules of the legislature. A legislator who is a member of a profession, occupation, or class affected by legislation is not required to disclose an interest unless the class contained in the legislation is so narrow that the vote will have a direct and distinctive personal impact on the legislator. A legislator may seek a determination from the appropriate committee provided for in 2-2-135. History: En. 59-1708 by See. 8, Ch. 569, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 59-1708; amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 562, L. 1995. http ://data. opi.state.mt.ns/bills/mca/2/2/2-2-112 .htm 12/28/2004 SOLID FOUNDATIONS SUBDIVISION This development is not for the typical low income residents. This development is much more middle class version of affordable housing available for people such as nurses, firefighters, teachers and other reasonably well paid families. What troubles me is the vague goal that affordable housing is allowed to take president over other considerations. Such as urban design. Housing policy decisions can be made and reversed every few years; urban design decisions are permanent or as permanent as any thing can be. What I am trying to say is this; "Urban design and affordable housing are two different issues. I live in the Village Subdivision (which is a good example of bad urban design) there are no alleys. This design brings ever thing to the front of the property (vehicle parking, excess vehicle parking, storage buildings, garbage cans and a multitude of other items.) A Homeowners Association is not very effective at policing this type activity. Too many of the members have some of these items and can intimidate the other members who might object. Laurel's city ordinance isn't much better; the code enforcement officer will not act until a complaint is made. There has been many complaints made about properties in the Village Subdivision but as you can see if you drive though many of the properties are an eye sore. John Oakes.