The URL can be used to link to this page

I1c. Resolution 5908 - Cottage Gardens Preliminary PlatPlanning Department 201 111 Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 wNsiv.kalisnell.com/planning REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: Jarod Nygren, Senior Planner SUBJECT: KPP-18-09 — Cottage Gardens Preliminary Plat MEETING DATE: January 7, 2019 BACKGROUND: Bruce Wiederspiel is requesting permission for major subdivision approval of 11.8-acres into 37 single-family residential lots, open space and city streets. The area to be subdivided was previously approved for a major subdivision known as Cottage Gardens, which has since expired. The property is undeveloped grasslands and immediately adjacent city single-family residential development. The application was reviewed in accordance with Section 28.2.06 of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. The property is located at 575 and 645 Three Mile Drive. The property can be legally described as Tract IA and Tract 1AC in the SW4 and SE4 of Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. The Kalispell Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing December 11, 2018, to consider the preliminary plat request. Staff presented staff report KPP-18-09 providing details of the proposal and evaluation. Staff recommended that the Planning Board adopt the staff report as findings of fact, and recommend to the Council that the preliminary plat request be granted, subject to the 19 listed conditions. During the public comment portion of the hearing, a representative of the applicant spoke in favor of the request. There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed and a motion was presented to adopt staff report KPP-18-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Cottage Gardens be approved. A brief board discussion concluded that the request was appropriate, and the motion passed unanimously on roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve Resolution 5908, a resolution approving a request from Bruce Wiederspiel for major subdivision Preliminary Plat KPP-18-09, a preliminary plat with 19 conditions of approval, located in Tract IA and Tract IAC in the SW4 and SE4 of Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time. ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 5908 December 11, 2018, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes Staff Report Application Materials & Maps c: Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.5908 A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 1A AND 1AC IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, Bruce Wiederspiel, the prospective owner of the certain real property described above, has petitioned for approval of the Subdivision Plat of said property; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on December 11, 2018 on the proposal and reviewed Subdivision Report #KPP-18-09 issued by the Kalispell Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat of Cottage Gardens Subdivision subject to certain conditions and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kalispell at its regular Council Meeting of January 7, 2019, reviewed the Kalispell Planning Department Report #KPP-18-09, reviewed the recommendations of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission, and found from the Preliminary Plat, and evidence, that the subdivision is in the public interest. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the Findings of Fact contained in Kalispell Planning Department Report #KPP-18-09 are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact of the City Council. SECTION 2. That the application of Bruce Wiederspiel for approval of the Preliminary Plat of Cottage Gardens Subdivision, Kalispell, Flathead County, Montana is hereby approved contingent upon approval of Ordinance No. 1818 on second reading and subject to the following conditions: Conditions: 1. The development of the site shall be in substantial compliance with the application submitted, the site plan, materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the preliminary plat as approved by the city council. 2. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 3. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department for review and approval a storm water report and an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current city standards for design and construction. Storm sewer mains shall be located within the right-of-way of the paved road surface. Prior to final plat, a certification shall be submitted to the public works department stating that the drainage plan for the subdivision has been installed as designed and approved. 4. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction an erosion/sediment control plan for review and approval and a copy of all documents submitted to Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the General Permit for Storm Water Discharge Associated with Construction Activities. 5. The developer shall submit water and sanitary sewer plans, applicable specifications, and design reports to the Kalispell Public Works Department and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for concurrent review, with approval of both required prior to construction. Water and sewer mains shall be located entirely within the right-of-way of the paved road surface. 6. The developer shall submit the street design to the Kalispell Public Works Department for review and approval prior to construction. Street designs shall meet the city standards for design and construction. 7. Mountain Vista Way shall have an east -west pedestrian crossing between Lots 2 and 37. Cottage Way shall have an east -west pedestrian crossing between Lots 24 and 29. This is in addition to the pedestrian crossings shown on the submitted plans. A minimum 20-foot landscape buffer zone shall be established as shown on the preliminary plat. The 20-foot buffer zone shall include a paved bike and pedestrian path 10-feet wide, comply with AASHTO standards for bike and pedestrian paths, and integrate into the existing path along Three Mile Drive. The buffer strip shall also include landscaping. These improvements shall be coordinated with the Kalispell Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments. 9. Prior to final plat, a letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or a proper bond has been accepted for unfinished work. 10. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto Three Mile Drive. If any improvements are necessary at the intersection of the roadways, these improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the MDT prior to final plat and MDT shall so certify this in writing to the city. 11. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final plat. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be obtained stating that the required easements are being shown on the final plat. 12. The following statement shall appear on the final plat: "The undersigned hereby grants unto each and every person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, providing or offering to provide telephone, telegraph, electric power, gas, cable television, water or sewer service to the public, the right to the joint use of an easement for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of their lines and other facilities, in, over, under, and across each area designated on this plat as "Utility Easement" to have and to hold forever." Developer's Signature 13. Prior to filing the final plat, a letter from the US Postal Service shall be included stating the Service has reviewed and approved of the design and location of the mail delivery site. The mail delivery site shall be installed or bonded for prior to final plat. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall also be included in the preliminary and final engineering plans to be reviewed by the Public Works Department. The mail delivery site shall not impact a sidewalk or proposed boulevard area. 14. A 310 permit shall be obtained from the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation — Conservation District Bureau, for any disturbances/and or improvements adjacent to Spring Creek. 15. A homeowner's association (HOA) shall be formed and established for the common area prior to final plat. The HOA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas including the storm water pond, riparian area, park and trail along Three Mile Drive. 16. A letter shall be obtained from the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the landscape boulevards of the streets serving the subdivision. The approved landscape plan shall be implemented or a cash in lieu payment for installation of the street trees and groundcover be provided to the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Department. 17. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 18. All utilities shall be installed underground. 19. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. SECTION 3. Upon proper review and filing of the Final Plat of said subdivision in the office of the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder, said premises shall be a subdivision of the City of Kalispell. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019. Mark Johnson Mayor ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING December 11, 2018 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Board members present were: Doug Kauffman — acting president for KZC-18-05, Rory Young — acting president for KA-18-07, Kurt Vomfell, Joshua Borgardt and Ronalee Skees. Chad Graham & George Giavasis were absent. Jarod Nygren, Tom Jentz and PJ Sorensen represented the Kalispell Planning Department. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Skees moved and Young seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the November 13, 2018 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. PUBLIC COMMENT None. BOARD MEMBER SEATED Young recused himself; he is a representative for Kalispell North Town Center KZC-18-05 — KNTC ZONE CHANGE A request from the Stillwater Corporation to amend the City of Kalispell zoning map. The requested zone map amendment is located entirely within the Kalispell North Town Center Planned Unit Development (previously known as The Glacier Town Center PUD). STAFF REPORT Jarod Nygren representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Reports #KZC-18-05. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KZC-18-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that 9.4 acres of land within Kalispell North Town Center Development currently zoned R-3 (residential) be zoned B-2 (general business) on the Kalispell Zoning Map. BOARD DISCUSSION None. PUBLIC HEARING Debbie Street — 1400 Rose Crossing — concerned with public safety and increase in accidents that increased traffic on Rose Crossing might bring. Mike Fraser — 690 N Meridian #103 — concerned with overall traffic impact MOTION Skees moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KZC-18-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that 9.4 acres of land within Kalispell North Town Center Development currently zoned R-3 (Residential) be zoned B-2 (General Business) on the Kalispell Zoning Map. BOARD DISCUSSION Skees asked staff if there is anything we as a city can do on a county road like Rose Crossing to address safety concerns. Nygren reminded the board that the city has certain traffic standards that have to be met in order for applications to be reviewed so traffic safety and concerns are all being looked at. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD MEMBER RE -SEATED Young re -seated. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2018 Pagel BOARD MEMBER SEATED Kauffman recused himself; he is a representative for Bruce Wiederspiel. KA-18-07 — COTTAGE GARDENS Bruce Wiederspiel is requesting permission to annex a 1-acre property into the KPP-18-09 — COTTAGE GARDENS City of Kalispell with an initial zoning of R-3 and major subdivision approval for a 37-lot single-family subdivision. STAFF REPORT Jarod Nygren representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Reports #KA-18-07 & KPP-18-09. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KA-18-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be R-3 (Residential). Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KPP-18-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat Cottage Gardens be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. PUBLIC HEARING Doug Peppmeier — 450 Corporate Dr. — representative for applicant offered to answer any questions and noted that the applicant agrees with the staff report. MOTION — KA-18-07 Vomfell moved and Borgardt seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-18-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be R-3 (Residential). BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — KPP-18-09 Vomfell moved and Skees seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPP-18-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat Cottage Gardens be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD MEMBER RE -SEATED Kauffman re -seated. OLD BUSINESS Nygren updated the board about the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan NEW BUSINESS Board member Ronalee Skees advised the board and staff that she will be absent for the January 2019 through the April 2019 meetings. The board agreed that a replacement would not need to be found. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:45pm. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Kalispell Planning Board will be on Tuesday, January 8, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. and is located in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, 201 1" Ave East. Chad Graham Kari Hernandez Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2018 Page 12 President APPROVED as submitted/amended: Recording Secretary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2018 Page 13 COTTAGE GARDENS REQUEST FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL STAFF REPORT #KPP-18-09 KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT November 30, 2018 A report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a major subdivision preliminary plat to create 37 single- family residential lots and common area. A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for December 11, 2018, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The planning board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bruce Wiederspiel is requesting a major subdivision approval of 11.8-acres into 37 single-family residential lots, open space and city streets. The area to be subdivided was previously approved for a major subdivision known as Cottage Gardens, which has since expired. The application will be reviewed in accordance with Section 28.2.06 of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations A. Petitioner: Bruce Wiederspiel 2782 Columbia Falls Stage Road Columbia Falls, MT 59912 Technical Assistance: TDH Engineering 450 Corporate Drive, Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property is located a 575 and 645 Three Mile Drive. The property can be legally described as Tract lA and Tract 1AC in the SW4 and SE4 of Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. C. Size: Total: Lots: Roads/ Streets Common Area: 11.8 acre 5.4 acres 2.5 acres 3.9 acres 1 E. F. G. Existing Land Use and Zoning: The subject property has remnants of an old single-family ranch home with the remainder being undeveloped farmland and wetland at the eastern boundary along Spring Creek. The 1-acre portion of the property is under Flathead County jurisdiction and is part of the West Valley Zoning District, or West Valley Overlay (WVO), which is currently zoned AG-80, Agricultural. The AG-80, Agricultural, a zoning has an 80-acre minimum lot size requirement. The purpose of the AG-80 Zoning District is to protect and preserve agricultural land for the performance of a wide range of agricultural functions. It is intended to control the scattered intrusion of uses not compatible with an agricultural environment, including, but not limited to, residential development. Remnants of the single-family home and appurtenant facilities located on the property will be removed prior to construction. The remaining portion of the property is within city limits and zoned R-3 (Residential). The Kalispell Zoning Regulations state that the intent of the R-3 zoning district is "to provide areas for urban residential development. This district should have good thoroughfare access, and be in proximity to community and neighborhood facilities, i.e., schools, parks, shopping areas, etc. Development within this district must be served by all public utilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential or urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map." Adjacent Land Uses: North: Single-family residence and Spring Creek East: Single-family homes on large tracts and Spring Creek South: Single-family homes and Three Mile Drive West: Single-family residence (including townhouses) Adjacent Zoning: North: City R-3 and County SAG-5 East: County AG-8-WVO South: City R-3 West: City R-2/PUD General Land Use Character: The area can be described as a transitional area with city residential development to the north, west and south of the project site. The residential densities vary greatly in the area as it continues to develop from rural residential and agriculture uses to urban residential uses. City annexations and subsequent residential development along Three Mile Drive has 2 I I. A. transitioned that corridor into a more urban land use. City subdivisions along Three Mile Drive include Mountain Vista, Spring Creek Estates, Cottonwood Park, Blue Heron, Empire Estates and Aspen Creek, which have all developed in close proximity of the proposed development. Aspen Knoll, Two Mile Tracts, Big Sky Homesites and Hillcrest Terrace are larger lot county residential subdivisions that have developed along Two Mile in close proximity to the proposed development to the south. The area clearly has a residential demand based off of the land use pattern in the area and the proposed use would be considered a continuation of that pattern which has taken advantage of the increased services in the area, including water, sewer and the bypass. Utilities and Public Services: City water and sewer mains are both located within Mountain Vista Estates to the north and west. When developed, the developer will be required to pay the cost for the utility extensions. The design and sizing of water and sewer extensions will be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to development of the site. Sewer: City of Kalispell Water: City of Kalispell Refuse: Private Electricity: Flathead Electric Cooperative Natural Gas: Northwestern Energy Telephone: CenturyLink Schools: School District 1, West Valley Elementary Fire: City of Kalispell Police: City of Kalispell REVIEW AND FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT Effects on Health and Safety: Fire: The property would be considered to be at low risk of fire because any building constructed within the subdivision would be built in accordance with the International Fire Code and have access which meets city standards. The property does not have steep slopes or woody fuels. Hydrants will be required to be placed in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and approved by the Fire Chief. Flooding: Flood Insurance Rate Map, panel number 30029C 1805J shows the entire subdivision to be outside of the 100-year floodplain. Access: Access is provided by Mountain Vista Way to the north, an improved local street and Three Mile Drive to the south, an improved arterial road. 3 B. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat: There are no known big game wintering ranges, migration routes, nesting areas, wetlands, or important habitat for rare or endangered species per the Kalispell Growth Policy environmental considerations maps. There will be a 3.9-acre common area/open space parcel at the eastern boundary of the subject property. The common area will conserve valuable wildlife habitat and potential wildlife corridor as it will be maintained in its natural state adjacent Spring Creek. C. Effects on the Natural Environment: Surface and groundwater: The subdivision will be served by public water and sewer thereby minimizing any potential impacts to groundwater. According to the geotechnical report, groundwater was not encountered onsite. The site is not within a designated 100-year floodplain per the Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 30029C 1805J. Drainage: Curbs and gutters will be installed and storm management plan will have to be developed to address the runoff from the site. There is no city storm drain system in the area so the storm water will need to be managed onsite using detention methods. A preliminary storm water design has been submitted for the development showing a detention pond within the open space area that will outfall into Spring Creek. The drainage plan will have to comply with the City of Kalispell standards and standards and designed by a professional engineer. A condition of approval requires that a homeowner's association be created for the maintenance of the common area which would include the common area drainage easements. As part of the storm easement areas the association will be required to mow the area to reduce fire hazard and reduce spread of noxious weeds. Lastly, the developer is required to submit for review to the Kalispell Public Works Department an erosion/sediment control plan for review and approval. These plans provide for managing storm water on the site and include stabilizing the construction site through an approved revegetation plan after site grading is completed. D. Effects on Local Services: Water: Water to the subdivision will be provided by the City of Kalispell. The applicant will extend water service to the property from Mountain Vista Way to the north. The water system for the subdivision will be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department as part of the development of the subdivision. There is adequate capacity within the city's water system to accommodate this subdivision. Sewer: Sewer to the subdivision will be provided by the City of Kalispell. The applicant will extend sewer service to the property from Mountain Vista Way to the north. The sewer system for the subdivision will be reviewed and S approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department as part of the development of the subdivision. There is adequate capacity within the city's sewer system to accommodate this subdivision. Access and Roads: The subdivision main entrance will be off of Three Mile Drive, an improved arterial roadway via Mountain Vista Way. Mountain Vista Way will be extended through the subdivision and connect to Mountain Vista Way within an already platted subdivision adjacent the subject property to the north. Cottage Way will also be constructed as a loop road within the subdivision providing access. A traffic study was prepared by Abelin traffic services. The traffic study projects the subdivision will create an additional 349 new daily vehicle trips at full build -out. As proposed, the traffic study indicates that the residential subdivision would not create any new roadway capacity problems in the area. Schools: The property is within the boundaries of School District # 1 and West Valley Elementary. The school district could anticipate an additional 18 school aged children from the subdivision. This number takes into account home school education options and private school options as well as those attending public facilities. This subdivision would have a potential impact on the district. Section 76-3-608(1) of the Montana Code Annotated states that the governing body may not deny approval of a proposed subdivision based solely on the subdivision's impacts on educational services. Parks and Open Space: The state and local subdivision regulations have parkland dedication requirements of or cash in lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of .03 acres per dwelling unit. Accordingly, the parkland requirement for the subject property would be 1.11 acres. The subdivision includes 3.9-acres of common area/open space, of which 1.12-acres will can be developed with recreational amenities. The remaining 2.78-acres is riparian wetland adjacent Spring Creek and will remain as undeveloped open space. Police: This subdivision is in the jurisdiction of the City of Kalispell Police Department. The department can adequately provide service to this subdivision. Fire Protection: Fire protection services will be provided by the Kalispell Fire Department. The department can adequately provide service to this subdivision. Additionally, the road network to the subdivision provides adequate access for fire protection. Fire station 62 is located approximately 3.4 miles away providing good response time. 5 Solid Waste: Solid waste will be handled by a private disposal company. There is sufficient capacity within the landfill to accommodate this additional solid waste generated from this subdivision. Medical Services: Ambulance service is available from the fire department and ALERT helicopter service. Kalispell Regional Medical Center is approximately 2.5 miles from the site. E. Effects on Agriculture and agricultural water user facilities: The subject property is in an urbanized area with a majority of the property lying within city limits, and adjacent to city water and sewer. There will be no impact to agriculture facilities in this case, as the property has not been used for agriculture for years and is surrounded by development in all directions. No impact to water user facilities are anticipated since the property will be served by a public water system. F. Relation to the Kalispell Growth Policy: The Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map designates this area as Suburban Residential development, which anticipates primarily single-family with a density of not to exceed 4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision has a density of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. The density is in compliance with the anticipated density in the area and the proposed residential use of single- family is anticipated. G. Compliance with Zoning: Provided the county 1-acre AG-80 (WVO) portion of the development is annexed, the entire property is located within the R-3 (Residential) Zoning District. The Kalispell Zoning Ordinance describes the intent of these districts as: "to provide areas for urban residential development. This district should have good thoroughfare access, and be in proximity to community and neighborhood facilities, i.e., schools, parks, shopping areas, etc. Development within this district must be served by all public utilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential or urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map." All of the lots shown on the preliminary plat meet or exceed the minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet and minimum 50-foot lot width requirement. H. Compliance with the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: This subdivision request complies with provisions of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. 9 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-18-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat Cottage Gardens be approved, subject to the conditions listed below: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL C'nnHitinnc- 1. The development of the site shall be in substantial compliance with the application submitted, the site plan, materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the preliminary plat as approved by the city council. 2. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 3. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department for review and approval a storm water report and an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current city standards for design and construction. Storm sewer mains shall be located within the right-of-way of the paved road surface. Prior to final plat, a certification shall be submitted to the public works department stating that the drainage plan for the subdivision has been installed as designed and approved. 4. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction an erosion/ sediment control plan for review and approval and a copy of all documents submitted to Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the General Permit for Storm Water Discharge Associated with Construction Activities. 5. The developer shall submit water and sanitary sewer plans, applicable specifications, and design reports to the Kalispell Public Works Department and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for concurrent review, with approval of both required prior to construction. Water and sewer mains shall be located entirely within the right-of-way of the paved road surface. 6. The developer shall submit the street design to the Kalispell Public Works Department for review and approval prior to construction. Street designs shall meet the city standards for design and construction. 7 7. Mountain Vista Way shall have an east -west pedestrian crossing between Lots 2 and 37. Cottage Way shall have an east -west pedestrian crossing between Lots 24 and 29. This is in addition to the pedestrian crossings shown on the submitted plans. 8. A minimum 20-foot landscape buffer zone shall be established as shown on the preliminary plat. The 20-foot buffer zone shall include a paved bike and pedestrian path 10-feet wide, comply with AASHTO standards for bike and pedestrian paths, and integrate into the existing path along Three Mile Drive. The buffer strip shall also include landscaping. These improvements shall be coordinated with the Kalispell Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments. 9. Prior to final plat, a letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or a proper bond has been accepted for unfinished work. 10. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto Three Mile Drive. If any improvements are necessary at the intersection of the roadways, these improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the MDT prior r to final plat and MDT shall so certify this in writing to the city. 11. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final plat. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be obtained stating that the required easements are being shown on the final plat. 12. The following statement shall appear on the final plat: "The undersigned hereby grants unto each and every person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, providing or offering to provide telephone, telegraph, electric power, gas, cable television, water or sewer service to the public, the right to the joint use of an easement for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of their lines and other facilities, in, over, under, and across each area designated on this plat as "Utility Easement" to have and to hold forever." Developer's Signature 13. Prior to filing the final plat, a letter from the US Postal Service shall be included stating the Service has reviewed and approved of the design and location of the mail delivery site. The mail delivery site shall be installed or bonded for prior to final plat. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall also be included in the preliminary and final engineering plans to be reviewed by the Public Works Department. The mail delivery site shall not impact a sidewalk or proposed boulevard area. 0 14. A 310 permit shall be obtained from the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation — Conservation District Bureau, for any disturbances/and or improvements adjacent Spring Creek. 15. A homeowner's association (HOA) shall be formed and established for the common area prior to final plat. The HOA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas including the storm water pond, riparian area, park and trail along Three Mile Drive. 16. A letter shall be obtained from the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the landscape boulevards of the streets serving the subdivision. The approved landscape plan shall be implemented or a cash in lieu payment for installation of the street trees and groundcover be provided to the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Department. 17. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 18. All utilities shall be installed underground. 19. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed - free mix immediately after development. M PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE MONTANA Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planni M MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: FEE ATTACHED $5,625.00 Major Subdivision (6 or more lots) $1,000 + $125/lot Major Subdivision Resubmittal $1,000 For each original lot unchanged add $10/lot For each lot redesigned/added add $125/lot Mobile Home Parks & Campgrounds (6 or more spaces) $1,000 + $250/space (5 or fewer spaces) $400 + $125/space Amended Preliminary Plat Amendment to Conditions Only $400 base fee Re -configured Proposed Lots Base fee + $40/lot Add Additional Lots or Sublots Base fee + $125/lot Subdivision Variance $100 (per variance) Commercial and Industrial Subdivision $1,000 + $125/lot SUBDIVISION NAM: COTTAGE GARDENS OWNER(S) OF RECORD: Name APEX I LLC Mailing Address _ City SEATTLE 10 E ROANOKE ST, STE 8 State WA Phone p 98102 TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL PARTICIPANTS (Surveyor/Designer/Engineer, etc): Name & Address DOUG PEPPPMEIER, TDH ENGINEERING, 450 COORPORATE DRIVE STE 101, KALISPELL, MT Name & Address RICAHRD J SWAN, TDH ENGINEERING, 450 COORPORATE DRIVE STE 101, KALISPELL, MT Name & Address DOUG KAUFFMAN, TDH ENGINEERING, 450 COORPORATE DRIVE STE 101, KALISPELL, MT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: Property Address 575 & 645 THREE MILE DRIVE, KALISPELL MT 59901 Assessor's Tract No(s) 0033140, 0625101 Lot No(s) TRACTS 1A, & 1AC 1/4 Sec SW & SE Section 02 Township 28N Range 22W GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBDIVISION: Number of Lots or Rental Spaces 37 Total Acreage in Subdivision 11.760 1 Total Acreage in Lots 5.366 AC Minimum Size of Lots or Spaces 0.138 AC Total Acreage in Streets or Roads 2.137 AC Maximum Size of Lots or Spaces 0.187 AC Total Acreage in Parks, Open Spaces and/or Common Areas 3.839 AC PROPOSED USE(S) AND NUMBER OF ASSOCIATED LOTS/SPACES: Single Family 37 Townhouse Mobile Home Park Duplex Apartment Recreational Vehicle Park Commercial Industrial Planned Unit Development Condominium Multi -Family Other APPLICABLE ZONING DESIGNATION & DISTRICT CITY OF KALISPELL R-3 RESIDENTIAL ESTIMATE OF MARKET VALUE BEFORE IMPROVEMENTS $500,000 IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED: Roads: Gravel Paved X Curb X Gutter X Sidewalks X Alleys Other X Water System: Individual Multiple User Neighborhood Public X Other Sewer System: Individual Multiple User Neighborhood Public X Other Other Utilities: Cable TV X Telephone X Electric X Gas X Other X Solid Waste: Home Pick Up X Central Storage Contract Hauler Owner Haul Mail Delivery: Central X Individual School District: KALISPELL, DITRICT #5 Fire Protection: Hydrants X Tanker Recharge Fire District: CITY OF KALISPELL Drainage System: INLETS WITH PIPING TO ONSITE TREATMENT STRUCTURES PROPOSED EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL: "BEST MANGMENT PRACTICES" SILT FENCE, WATTLES, ETC. VARIANCES: ARE ANY VARIANCES REQUESTED? NO (yes/no) If yes, please complete the information below: SECTION OF REGULATIONS CREATING HARDSHIP: EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP THAT WOULD BE CREATED WITH STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE(S) TO STRICT COMPLIANCES WITH ABOVE REGULATIONS: 2 PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED BELOW: 1. Will the granting of the variance be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties? 2. Will the variance cause a substantial increase in public costs? 3. Will the variance affect, in any manner, the provisions of any adopted zoning regulations, Master Plan or Growth Policy? 4. Are there special circumstances related to the physical characteristics of the site (topography, shape, etc.) that create the hardship? 5. What other conditions are unique to this property that create the need for a variance? M Authentisign ID: F9FFBCD7-DF2D-4CBF-A779-6F1DBF1D2AB1 APPLICATION CONTENTS: The subdivider shall submit a complete application addressing items below to the Kalispell Planning Department at least thirty five (35) days prior to the date of the Planning Board meeting at which it will be heard. 1. Completed preliminary plat application. 2. 4 copies of the preliminary plat. 3. One reproducible set of supplemental information. (See Appendix A of Subdivision Regulations for the city where the subdivision is proposed.) 4. One reduced copy of the preliminary plat not to exceed 11" x 17" in size. 5. Electronic copy of the application materials, including the preliminary plat, either copied onto a disk or emailed to planninm%kalispell.com (Please note the maximum file size to email is 20mg) 6. A bona fide legal description of the subject property and a map showing the location and boundaries of the property. 7. Application fee based on the schedule on page 1 of this application and made payable to the City of Kalispell. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury and the laws of the State of Montana that the information submitted herein, on all other submitted forms, documents, plans or any other information submitted as a part of this application, to be true, complete, and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Should any information or representation submitted in connection with this application be untrue, I understand that any approval based thereon may be rescinded, and other appropriate action taken. The signing of this application signifies approval for the Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during the approval and development process. i— Authenfis!ch UNawI rt Saadatoat, memo nc 10128/2018 10198/9n18 5.4B 99 PM MIST (Applicant) (Date) .19 MOUNIAI\\II AN SL MAN ISI0N-Pll-\SGI I.OT 1.07 Z 1.07 3 101' J LCYP 3 1.0'1 G � LO I. 7 1 8 - - —IMa $-------- --- - — , r ye owe ci 1 I I� I er �Ih l In` m o /I J �, � Z m m a _-- — D _ (A p p _ am ' v 1` --- -" -0 QC Z Q �m rn / , ; Z m O Cy I�✓ai -' O�� i ! ---- `-- _ ---- ` i I ' m m �^ m I. 1 - ---- - = pcn " { Irc m -1 cn D Q z Z ® ®� t/ mm� o O (/l 1I c� cn Q � A Z m ire / Z - D } ---- %/ " 0 15 11 1 tPldlp,Ipn , _ a R - d Z 3g; P"ono r > to ag a Q 'a� m a 8 g or s Z �o�a b m m z $� s� m g �D �r D Im mm —i _ z s f a£ a a a zm Fm o Fi.gi � m O T ` z W I <3 r D mm u'(Dv �°z cn ODmM n � Zm =O m °om = 0C � r c, D0 Cc: ID z Zm= m�2 C m �O� n � m m = p I— 4cnD ll D �O-; -ul { m cn kmo � ��m o o mpg Eny0 D v 4 D °off z -� m o�> 0 m D X DNZ v Z 0 g o N1'09'Sf'�w 390.19' y �O� � OAO 0.N @ nB.N' Y� Y 6].18' 50.0�' SO.OD' rw 50.00' 30.00' S0.00' ObZ 's rr ' �„ S wp DLO �?c0 4 s u OJ �. sra s9w us'.R8 4' '1.Is $ 7 STH ��-•g ssu'ww 29ss9• Fi �rp ISM VISTA WAY a ssu•ww f1a1r ssu•4ow 91.4s' m.1t a a8 r gO v8 yE my $may P� po gF of eP°�.d tt^,y 8 t �f 'S ^,• a atO ao 8 a y er0 za' PE-�.��:� o'0b g0 8'dZ6�1 !g_�� xruo24 9z11• SanCD • o g N w Sj O n yy 9e'3oa& Z r x y>>s Lp &g a P2 1.1 '°ter z m as N -u C z ss4s•1ow e9.0 � •r°D p ,� ? s� c1 a Fa w .y e N —{ _ l J z O Dm m 9 S O a P'd o°,; a w '"a` a'%� LA 'bo a.�y O rssWW* 99.93• _ O = 0 g9>. Y oy ��5 = p m o, y uTI do 0 1 r ` T D �'1 Ll .9 > y ssuYOw last °n >: i-.ii? �y° @ 7N yA,' N O m -0 � ,•f,.CLC � N m Cn Z7 "s•" �`�- ssu•1ow 1sf.)a• °tfa �&,�, w 0 � m C R 31.9Y .o H V 1.W 30. r .t� 'A > A%' ---I (n > Z O > _ o mgO 8$ �N gN n a `�� p C O 8 4.3r ao` g - aW ; afO v9 Z - C L g{ SO ��= O N35'IOw 63.38' - 61.96' S0.)3' +�1 E Z SS45'10w 112Jf1' a FDi g r s O 20 CQ 2 e r $ O k Z 111 y O �� So 8 a.Ni .dam DO X C S 8 oN 8 g m= L J g a SS45'IOw Tl.M' O;a m g2' COD s.s•1ow um' z y Tcn L/{ O r^ / p—OI> vJ C �z m �Om ~• D z ;u z ry D .,./..53,.,.� D z0 F / 00665550555050505505 gL�3^8�: 4g'''' o ....... u o; '`Z $�8^ $gi r uieisu^a�sas5sasffi =a3ea = 6� oon no o'000 non oo'oo S:RB �� ; agi ir =lSa;_:8 Of O �s%ague €ee m � z W Rx€;x QA # ; 5H85500655560656556o d1-1 Pay z W $o 0000p 000000 ooppo :�, � k'Lffi73 SI 7ESE,E<S b"SSE;, 616 -m.. SyE= _ m '$�;g N m 3'•��`3 £ tv w Q ti W m Z • • abelin traffic services Prepared For: TD&H Engineering 450 Corporate Drive, Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Residential Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 406-459-1443 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Table of Contents A. Executive Summary--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 B. Project Description----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 1 Adjacent Roadways------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 TrafficData ............................................................................................ 3 Historic Traffic Data ............................................................................... 3 Planned Road Improvements................................................................3 Additional Developments----------------------------------------------------------------------4 Levelof Service ..................................................................................... 4 VehicleSpeed Data------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 D. Proposed Development .............................................................................. 5 E. Trip Generation and Assignment................................................................6 F. Trip Distribution------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 G. Traffic Impacts Outside of the Development...............................................8 H. Impact Summary & Recommendations....................................................11 List of Figures Figure 1 — Proposed Development Site...................................................................2 Figure 2 — Proposed Development-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Figure 3— Trip Distribution ....................................................................................... 8 List of Tables Table 1 — Historic Traffic Data ................................................................................. 3 Table 2 — 2018 Level of Service Summary ..............................................................5 Table 3— Trip Generation Rates ............................................................................. 6 Table 4 — Projected LOS Summary with Development...........................................9 Table 5 — Future Traffic Generation from Planned Area Developments..................9 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Cottage Gardens - DRAFT Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cottage Gardens residential development is a 11.7-acre/37-lot project located north of Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, Montana. At full build -out, the project would produce up to 349 new daily vehicle trips. As proposed, the Cottage Gardens residential development alone would not create any new roadway capacity problems in this area. However, continued development plans on adjacent properties may create congestion at some locations. Ultimately Three Mile Drive will be at or near capacity with the planned developments in this area. It is recommended that the developers restrict eastbound left -turn movements into the project from Three Mile Drive or develop a designated left -turn lane at the approach to accommodate future traffic volumes. It is also recommended that MDT and the City of Kalispell create a new traffic monitoring site west of the bypass on Three Mile Drive to help identify future design needs for the corridor. The City should also work with MDT to develop a plan to decrease the speed limit on this section of Three Mile Drive as roadway volumes in this area increase. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This document studies the possible effects on the surrounding road system from a proposed residential development north of Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, Montana. The document provides information regarding possible traffic impacts in the area and identifies mitigation efforts that the development may require. The development would include up to 37 single-family residential units. C. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed development property currently consists of a 11.7-acre parcel of land located north of Three Mile Drive just east of the existing Mountain Vista Estates subdivision. The property currently consists of an open farm field adjacent to Spring Creek and one existing single-family home. The surrounding area is comprised of a mix of residential developments and undeveloped properties on the west side of the City of Kalispell. The Kalispell Bypass is located 3/4 miles east of the site. See Figure 1 for a location map of the proposed development. Adjacent Roadways Three Mile Drive/Farm to Market Road (5-424) is a two-lane minor arterial roadway which extends towards the west and north from the City of Kalispell and is maintained by MDT. The road contains several 90 degree curves along section lines. Three Mile Drive Abelin Traffic Services 1 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana has a paved width of 28 feet and currently carries 7,500 east of Stillwater Road (Abelin Traffic Services 2018). The roadway is connected with the Kalispell bypass at an overpass east of Stillwater Road. The posted speed limit on Three Mile drive is 55 MPH west of the bypass. The route currently has a pedestrian trail along the south side of the road adjacent to the Spring Creek Estates subdivision just south of the proposed development property. Heavens Peak Drive provides access to the Mountain Vista Estates development to the north of Three Mile Drive and the Spring Creek Estates subdivision south of Three Mile Drive. The road intersects with Three Mile Drive 1,800 feet east of Spring Creek Road and has a paved width of 30 feet with adjacent sidewalks. The intersection with Three Mile Drive currently has left -turn lanes installed for both eastbound and westbound traffic. Mountain Vista Way is a local road that extends along the north side of the Mountain Vista Estates subdivision. The road connects to Farm to Market Road 1,200 feet north of Three Mile Drive. The road has a paved width of 30 feet with separated sidewalks. Camp Cook Avenue is a local roadway that extends south from Three Mile Drive and provides access to the Spring Creek Estates subdivision. The roadways has a paved width of 30 feet with sidewalks on both sides of the road. The intersection with 3 Mile Drive is controlled with Abelin Traffic Services 2 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana an approach channelization which restricts left -turn traffic from entering Camp Cook Avenue from the east. Left- and right -turn exits are allowed at the intersection. Traffic Data In October of 2018 Abelin Traffic Services (ATS) collected traffic data at area intersections to evaluate current operations characteristics. These counts included peak -hour turning movement counts and daily traffic volume counts. The peak -hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of Three Mile Drive with Camp Cook Avenue and Heavens Peak Drive. Additional data from the 2018 traffic impact studies prepared by WGM Group for the Meadows Edge and Rockwood Ranch developments was also used for the traffic impact analysis. The raw data collected for this project was adjusted for seasonal variation in accordance with the data collected from MDT's annual count station located on US Highway 2 west of Kalispell (Station A-24). This count station data indicated that data collected in October is approximately 110% of the AADT (Average Annual Daily Traffic) volume in this area. The raw traffic data is included in Appendix A of this report. Historic Traffic Data Abelin Traffic Services obtained historic traffic data for Three Mile Drive from the Montana DOT. This data is presented in Table 1. The traffic data history for Three Mile Drive and farm to Market Road indicate that traffic volumes on these sections of road have not increased significantly in the past ten years. Table 1 - Historic Traffic Data Location 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Three Mile Dr. W of Garlan St 5,830 5,930 5,910 5,980 5,850 5,680 5,350 6,160 5,988 5,358 #15-7B-029 S-424 N of Mtn Vista Way - - - - - - - 3,720 2,613 2,629 #15-7B-030 S-424 S of West Reserve 2,250 2,090 2,080 2,100 2,070 2,120 2,080 2,470 2,229 2,242 #15-7B-031 Planned Road Improvements The 2006 Kalispell Area Transportation Plan predicts that traffic volumes on Three Mile Drive may reach 22,000 VPD by 2030, which is well beyond the functional capacity of a Abelin Traffic Services 3 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana two-lane roadway. The plan recommends widening Three Mile Drive from Spring Creek Road to Meridian Road to meet the future traffic demands. This reconstruction is not currently scheduled with the City of Kalispell. The details of this project from the transportation plan are as follows: MSN-29 Three -Mile Drive (W. Springcreek Road to Meridian Road) Problem: Existing and future development pressures will result in future traffic capacity issues. There is also a lack of turn bays into the developing areas. Recommendation: It is recommended to plan for, design and reconstruct Three -Mile Drive to a three -lane urban minor arterial standard to include widened pavement (including one travel lane in each direction), bike lanes on each side, curb and gutter, boulevard, sidewalk, and appropriate turn bays (or center two-way, left -turn lane) at the major intersections. Estimated Cost: 53,450,000 Additional Developments A variety of developments are currently planned for Three Mile Drive west of the proposed Cottage Gardens development site. These projects include the Rockwood Ranch PUD which is a 211-lot residential subdivision located south of Three Mile Drive and east of Spring Creek Road. The project has been in the planning phase since 2017 and it is not known when the project may proceed. The Meadows Edge development is a 110-acre mixed use residential development which will include 171 single-family homes, 151 townhomes, and some commercial property. The project is planned for full buildout by 2023. The City of Kalispell has requested some additional details regarding the traffic impacts from the proposed commercial properties, but this information is not currently available. Data from the March 2018 traffic impact study prepared for these projects was used in the future traffic modeling for the Cottage Garden project. The developers are currently in discussions with MDT and the City of Kalispell to possibly eliminate the curve in the roadway at the intersection of Three Mile Drive and Farm to Market Road/Springcreek Road and develop a traffic controlled intersection to serve future traffic demands. Due to the fact that the future operations at this intersection will be largely controlled by the adjacent developments and the planned redesign of the intersection, the specific operations of this intersection was not analyzed for this report. Level of Service Using the data collected for this project, ATS conducted a Level of Service (LOS) analysis at area intersections. This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) - Special Report 209 and the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 7.5. Intersections are graded from A to F representing the average delay that a vehicle entering an intersection can expect. Typically, a LOS of C or better is considered acceptable for peak -hour conditions. Abelin Traffic Services 4 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Table 2 shows the existing 2018 LOS for the AM and PM peak hours without the traffic from the proposed developments. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C. The table shows that all of the existing intersections in this area are currently operating within acceptable limits. Information from the 2017 Rockwood Ranch traffic impact study indicated that the traffic operations at the two signalized intersections at Three Mile Drive and Kalispell bypass currently function at LOS B & C with considerable reserve capacity. No additional analysis was performed for these intersections with this report. Table 2 — 2018 Level of Service Summary AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay Sec. LOS Delay Sec. LOS Farm to Market Road & Mountain Vista Way 10.5 B 9.9 A Three Mile Drive & Heavens Peak Drive* 11.5/13.7 B/B 11.8/19.9 B/C Three Mile Drive & Camp Crook Avenue 10.9 B 11.1 B *North bound/Southbound LOS & Delay. Vehicle Speed Data During the October data collection period ATS collected vehicle speed information on Three Mile Drive to determine if traffic is adhering to the current posted speed limit of 55 MPH through this section. The location selected for this study was just east of Meadows Lane. Vehicle speed data was collected at this location for 24-hours. The data collected at the site indicates an ADT volume of 6,187 VPD at this location, an average speed of 47.5 MPH, and an 85t' percentile speed of 53.4 MPH. Generally it is appropriate to post a speed limit on a roadway at or near the 85t' percentile speed. The fact that the 85t' percentile speed is below the posted speed limit and the average vehicle speed is well below the speed limit suggests that the traffic volumes, roadside environment, and approach density on Three Mile Drive are beginning to decrease the free -flow vehicle speeds in this area. As this area continues to develop it will eventually become necessary to adjust the speed limit (decrease) to bring it in line with traffic flow patterns. D. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development to be constructed on this site includes 11.7 acres of land located north of Three Mile Drive which would be developed into a 37 unit residential subdivision. The existing residential home on Lot 27 will not remain. Access to the Cottage Gardens development would be provided through a new approach onto Three Mile Drive 700 feet east of Heavens Peak Drive Abelin Traffic Services 5 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana and a secondary connection to Mountain Vista Way to the north and west. The project would eliminate an existing farm approach and an existing residential approach in favor of the single new approach onto Three Mile Drive in the same area. The visibility from the proposed approach locations is unrestricted. The development will have 30-foot interior roadways with sidewalks on both sides to match the adjacent residential areas. The Cottage Gardens development plan is shown in Figure 2. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2021. E. TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT ATS performed a trip generation analysis to determine the anticipated future traffic volumes from the proposed developments using the trip generation rates contained in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Tenth Edition). These rates are the national standard and are based on the most current information available to planners. A vehicle "trip" is defined as any trip that either begins or ends at the development site. ATS determined that the critical traffic impacts on the intersections and roadways would occur during the weekday morning and evening peak hours. According to the ITE trip generation rates, at full build -out the development would produce 29 AM peak hour trips, 37 PM peak hour trips, and 368 daily trips. See Table 3 for detailed trip generation information. Table 3 - Trip Generation Rates AM Peak Total AM PM Peak Total PM Hour Trip Peak Hour Trip Peak Weekday Total Ends per Hour Trip Ends per Hour Trip Trip Ends Weekday Land Use Units Unit Ends Unit Ends per Unit Trip Ends Single -Family 37 0.74 27 0.99 37 9.44 349 F. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The traffic distribution and assignment for the proposed subdivision was based upon the existing ADT volumes along the adjacent roadways and peak -hour volumes. It is expected that the primary entrance will be through the main connection to Three Mile Drive to the south. A smaller proportion of drivers would use Mountain Vista Way and Heavens Peak Drive the west. Most drivers will then proceed towards Kalispell and to distribute onto the surrounding road network as shown on Figure 3. Abelin Traffic Services 6 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Figure 2 — Proposed Cottage Gardens Development Abelin Traffic Services 7 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana 20 Figure 3 — Peak -Hour Trip Distribution 20% Mountain Vista Way �a C Z Cottage o Gardens L Development a Site 5% LL 2 75% 5% 5% Three Mile Drive G. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT 70% Using the trip generation and trip distribution numbers, ATS determined the future Level of Service for the area intersections. The anticipated intersection LOS with the proposed development is shown in Table 4. This analysis includes the projected traffic from the other planned developments in this area. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C of this report. The table indicates that the construction of the Cottage Gardens development will not cause any roadway capacity problems in this area. The Cottage Gardens development alone would increase traffic volumes on Three Mile Drive by 4% from current 2018 conditions and will account for only for 2% of the traffic on this roadway by 2023. While the project would increase traffic volumes on Mountain Vista Way, this increase in traffic would be largely offset by existing traffic from the Mountain View Estates subdivision using the approach for the Cottage Gardens instead of using Heavens Peak Drive. The only location that may experience higher levels of intersection delay with the proposed developments in this area is the intersection of Three Mile Drive with Heavens Peak Drive. This intersection may experience higher than desirable levels of peak -hour vehicle delay for southbound left -turning traffic, but would not likely have sufficient traffic to warrant a higher level of traffic control (i.e. a traffic signal). If the intersection of Three Mile Drive and Stillwater Road/Farm to Market Road (1,600 feet to the west) is ultimately reconstructed with a modern roundabout then drivers from the Mountain View Estates would be able to turn right exiting the development onto Abelin Traffic Services 8 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Three Mile Drive and then use the roundabout to perform a U-turn and continue toward Kalispell. This would decrease the amount of southbound left -turning traffic at the intersection and correct the LOS issue. Traffic from the Cottage Gardens development would increase the projected volumes at this intersection by only 0.4%. Table 4 — Projected Level of Service With Developments AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Farm to Market Road & Mountain Vista Way* 10.9/12.8 B/B 10.3/12.2 B/B Three Mile Drive & Heavens Peak Drive* 14.0/18.3 B/C 14.6/33.4 B/D Three Mile Drive & Camp Crook Avenue 14.8 B 19.4 C Three Mile Dr. & Cottage Gardens Approach 12.8 B 13.2 B *Eastbound/Westbound or Northbound/Eastbound Minor Approach LOS & Delay. With the proposed developments in this area Three Mile Drive will be at or near the capacity of a two-lane road in the near future. The existing traffic volume on Three Mile Drive west of the Kalispell bypass is 6,000-7,000 VPD. The total expected traffic generation from the planned developments in this area are shown in Table 5. Although not all of the traffic from these projects will use Three Mile Drive, much of this traffic in this area will be funneled onto Three Mile Drive until additional routes are developed such as Four Mile Drive to the north or Two Mile Drive to the south. Table 5 — Future Traffic Generation from Planned Area Developments Development Daily Generated Traffic (VPD) Meadows Edge 2,720 Rockwood Ranch 1992 Cottage Gardens 368 Total Generated Traffic 5,080 In general the capacity of a two-lane road is 10,000 to 12,000 VPD. Three lane roads generally have a capacity of 18,000 to 20,000 VPD. With the three proposed developments in this area, much of Three Mile Drive east of Stillwater Road will carry between 9,000 and 12,000 VPD and will be at or near the capacity of the two-lane sections of this roadway. At this time it would be valuable to plan for the eventual reconstruction of Three Mile Drive as recommended in the 2006 Kalispell Area Transportation Plan (MSN-29). In order to prepare for the future traffic volume growth on Three Mile Drive, it is recommended Abelin Traffic Services 9 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana that the developers of the Cottage Gardens project configure their roadway approach to account for the eventual reconstruction of Three Mile Drive. The location of the Spring Creek just east of the proposed development site may also influence the future reconstruction plans for Three Mile Drive by prevent the development of any additional approaches along the north side of Spring Creek Road from the proposed Cottage Gardens access location to Meadows Lane to the east, limiting the locations of any future roadway approaches in this area. The developers should implement one of two options for the new approach onto Three Mile Drive: 1. Develop the approach onto Three Mile Drive to prevent left -turn movements into the project site from the west. This would be similar to the approach taken for the intersection of Three Mile Drive with Camp Cook road just east of the proposed Cottage Gardens entrance location. 2. Develop a left -turn lane for the new approach location. Although this approach will generally not experience high levels of traffic, if a public intersection is intended at this location for future use, a left -turn lane should be installed to accommodate future traffic volumes. It should also be noted that the proposed approach location is located within the marked lane -shift on Three Mile Drive for the Heavens Peak Drive intersection. It is likely that MDT would not allow a pubic roadway approach to cross the marked lane shift in its current configuration and may require a separated left -turn lane based on lane geometry. There is currently 700 feet between the proposed approach location and Heavens Peak Drive and any left -turn lane for the new approach would likely require shortening the westbound left -turn lane for Heavens Peak Drive. While shortening turn -lanes is not ideal it can be implemented if necessary. If and when the speed limit is lowered on Three -Mile drive through this section, the required left -turn deceleration distance will be lowered for the Heavens Peak Drive intersection, likely providing sufficient room for a left -turn lane at the new Cottage Gardens approach. It is also recommend that MDT or the City of Kalispell add an additional annual traffic monitoring site to Three Mile Drive west of the Kalispell Bypass. Currently there is no historic traffic volume data available that is representative of this section of roadway. The only exiting traffic volume monitoring station of this area are on Three Mile Drive east of the bypass and on Farm to Market Road to the north. These two locations suggest an ADT volumes on these roadways of 2,000- 5,000 VPD in this area. The traffic data collected by ATS in 2018 suggests that Three Mile Drive currently carries over 7,000 VPD west of the bypass. With the potential growth in this area it would be extremely valuable to begin annual monitoring of traffic volumes along this section to help monitor traffic patterns and direct roadway reconstruction planning efforts. As this area continues to develop it is likely that the existing 55 MPH speed limit on Three Mile Drive will have to be decreased. The speed study conducted by ATS indicated that the majority of the traffic in this area is already beginning to travel at speeds lower than the posted speed limit. (See Section C of this report). The set speed limit on this roadway will also define the design characteristics of any intersection turning lanes. It is recommended that the City of Kalispell work Abelin Traffic Services 10 November, 2018 Cottage Gardens Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana with MDT to develop a plan for lowering the speed limit on this section of Three Mile Drive in conjunction with the planned developments, likely traffic volumes increases, and roadway reconstruction plans in this area. Any changes to the speed limit on Three Mile Drive must be approved by MDT. H. IMPACT SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS As proposed, the Cottage Gardens residential development alone would not create any new roadway capacity problems in this area. However, continued development plans on adjacent properties may create congestion at some locations. Ultimately Three Mile Drive will be at or near capacity with the planned developments in this area. It is recommended that the developers restrict eastbound left -turn movements into the project from Three Mile Drive or develop a designated left -turn lane at the approach to accommodate future traffic volumes. It is also recommended that MDT and the City of Kalispell create a new traffic monitoring site west of the bypass on Three Mile Drive to help identify future design needs for the corridor. The City should also work with MDT to develop a plan to decrease the speed limit on this section of Three Mile Drive as roadway volumes in this area increase. Abelin Traffic Services 11 November, 2018 APPENDIX A Traffic Data CMetrt .J�c Sewice,5 93U S. caie SExeet Helena, MT 59601 File Name : HeavenAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 10/24/2018 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted HEAVEN 3 MILE HEAVEN 3 MILE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds npp T-1 Right Thru Left Peds App T-i Right Thru Left Peds TAPP T-1 Right Thru Left Peds App T-1 nL Total 07:30 AM 1 0 11 0 12 5 30 6 0 41 1 0 3 0 4 1 65 0 0 66 123 07:45 AM 1 0 13 0 14 8 36 8 0 52 2 0 2 0 4 1 70 1 0 72 142 Total 2 0 24 0 26 13 66 14 0 93 3 0 5 0 8 2 135 1 0 138 265 08:00 AM 0 0 15 0 15 4 24 9 0 37 4 0 1 0 5 2 77 0 0 79 136 08:15 AM 2 0 12 0 14 7 28 7 0 42 2 0 3 0 5 3 72 1 0 76 137 Grand Total 4 0 51 0 55 24 118 30 0 172 9 0 9 0 18 7 284 2 0 293 538 Apprch % 7.3 0 92.7 0 14 68.6 17.4 0 50 0 50 0 2.4 96.9 0.7 0 Total % 0.7 0 9.5 0 10.2 4.5 21.9 5.6 0 32 1.7 0 1.7 0 3.3 1.3 52.8 0.4 0 54.5 CMetrt q�ac Sewice,5 S. ueie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : heavenpm Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 10/23/2018 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted HEAVEN 3 MILE HEAVEN 3 MILE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds Ann-T w Right Thru Left Peds Ann-T w Right Thru Left Peds Ann-T w Right Thru Left Peds Ann-Tmai Int. Total 04:45 PM 1 0 11 0 12 17 47 18 0 82 4 0 1 0 5 1 49 0 0 50 149 Total 1 0 11 0 12 17 47 18 0 82 4 0 1 0 5 1 49 0 0 50 149 05:00 PM 0 0 5 0 5 19 78 30 0 127 5 0 2 0 7 2 41 0 0 43 182 05:15 PM 1 0 15 0 16 18 67 24 0 109 4 0 0 0 4 1 37 1 0 39 168 05:30 PM 0 0 8 0 8 12 69 20 0 101 6 0 2 0 8 2 32 0 0 34 151 Grand Total 2 0 39 0 41 66 261 92 0 419 19 0 5 0 24 6 159 1 0 166 650 Apprch % 4.9 0 95.1 0 15.8 62.3 22 0 79.2 0 20.8 0 3.6 95.8 0.6 0 Total % 0.3 0 6 0 6.3 10.2 40.2 14.2 0 64.5 2.9 0 0.8 0 3.7 0.9 24.5 0.2 0 25.5 Station ID : 3 MILE Last Connected Device Type : Unic-L Info Line 1 : ATS Version Number: 1.50 Info Line 2 : Unicorn #6 Serial Number: GPS Lat/Lon : Number of Lanes : 1 DB File: 3 MILE.DB Posted Speed Limit: 0.0 mph Lane #1 Configuration # Dir. Information Volume Mode Volume Sensors Divide By 2 Comment 1. ALL Normal Axle Yes Lane #1 Basic Volume Data From: 16:00 - 10/23/2018 To: 09:59 - 10/25/2018 Date DW 0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 Total 102318 T 682 840 537 355 203 175 71 45 2908 102418 W 31 19 11 16 32 86 266 687 590 391 410 458 504 565 523 627 730 772 554 346 285 154 93 38 8188 102518 T 27 18 18 14 35 72 227 660 588 429 2088 Month Total: 58 37 29 30 67 158 493 1347 1178 820 410 458 504 565 523 627 1412 1612 1091 701 488 329 164 83 13184 Percent: 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 4% 10% 9% 6% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 5% 11% 12% 8% 5% 4% 2% 1% 1% ADT: 29 19 15 15 34 79 247 674 589 410 410 458 504 565 523 627 706 806 546 351 244 165 82 42 8140 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Total Percent DW Totals: 0 0 2908 8188 2088 0 0 Weekday (Mon -Fri) : 13184 100% # Days: 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 ADT : 7534 ADT : 0 0 8724 8188 5011 0 0 Weekend (Sat -Sun) : 0 0% Percent : 0% 0% 22% 62% 16% 0% 0% ADT : 0 Centurion Basic Volume Report Printed_ 11/05/18 Page 1 Station_ SMILE SPEED Data From: 12 15 - 1012512018 To: 14.29 - 10/26/2018 Station ID :SMILE SPEED Last Connected Device Type : Unic-L Info Line 1 : ATS Version Number: 1.41 Info Line 2 : Unicorn # 2 Serial Number: 91434 GPS Lat/Lon : Number of Lanes : 2 DB File: WILE SPEED.DB Posted Speed Limit: 0.0 mph Lane Configuration # Dir. Information Vehicle Sensors Sensor Spacing Loop Length 2. WB Axle -Axle 10.0 ft 4. EB Axle -Axle 10.0 ft Axle Class Summary: (DEFAULTS) #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 Description Lane Cycle Cars 2A-4T Buses 2A-SU 3A-SU 4A-SU 4A-ST 5A-ST 6A-ST 5A-MT 6A-MT Other Error Total Total Count: #2. 53 1909 1069 0 10 47 11 19 19 19 62 10 15 14 3257 #4. 5 1998 1163 0 23 59 4 17 35 19 82 4 18 19 3446 58 3907 2232 0 33 106 15 36 54 38 144 14 33 33 6703 Percents: #2. 2% 59% 33% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 49% #4. 0% 58% 34% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 1% 1% 2% 0% 1% 1% 51% 1% 58% 33% 0% 0% 2% 0% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% Speed Class Summary: (DEFAULTX) #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 0.0- 20.0- 25.0- 30.0- 35.0- 40.0- 45.0- 50.0- 55.0- 60.0- 65.0- 70.0- 75.0- 80.0- 85.0- 19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total Total Count: #2. 4 2 14 40 129 470 1240 1017 275 32 12 1 0 1 1 5 14 3257 #4. 4 6 24 105 338 965 1282 586 98 12 2 1 2 0 0 2 19 3446 8 8 38 145 467 1435 2522 1603 373 44 14 2 2 1 1 7 33 6703 Percents: #2. 0% 0% 0% 1% 4% 14% 38% 31% 8% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 49% #4. 0% 0% 1% 3% 10% 28% 37% 17% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 51% 0% 0% 1% 2% 7% 21% 38% 24% 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Avg, 50, 67, 85 : #2. 48.3 48.9 51.4 54.2 Pace (pace %) : 45.0 - 54.9 69.3% Days & ADT : #2. 1.1 3006 #4. 45.3 46.2 48.3 51.8 40.0 - 49.9 65.2% #4. 1.1 3181 46.8 47.5 49.7 53.4 45.0 - 54.9 61.5% 1.1 6187 Centurion Class Summary Report Printed: 11105118 Page 1 APPENDIX B Traffic Model tage Gardens Development ffic Model sting 15 Min Peak Hour 0 4J L 7 202 t 4- 0 4 r 26 i Vista 0 J h 0 0 t 100 0 Z 3 sting 15 Min 10.5 B Farm to Market Peak Hour 9.9 A 0 40 L 6 107 l 4- 0 3 4 r 9 i Vista 0 J h 0 0 t 149 0 Z 8 11.5/13.7 B/B 4 4: L 32 0 j 4- 144 52 y t 32 4 1 h 8 280 t 0 4 Z 8 Heavens Peak 4 40 L 76 0 j 4- 312 52 y t 120 4 1 h 8 164 t 0 8 Z 20 0 ♦i L 0 0 y 4- 208 0 1 340 y 11.8/19.9 B/C 236 11 L U 4- 508 10.9 B 4- 208 340 41 4 4 Z 111* 64 Camp Cook 11.1 B 4- 508 236 �i 8 4 Z 24 Farm to Market I Heavens Peak (Camp Cook )ttage Gardens Development -affic Model )ckwood Ranch to Generated Traffic VI Peak Hour � L 4 1 4— r Itn Vista J �1 t 12 Z 1�% L 1 4- 9 4 r J h 22 t Z � Farm to Market )ckwood Ranch to Generated Traffic A Peak Hour 1�% L 14 j 4- 4 r Itn Vista J 41 � t Z � E? j 4— 25 r J h 17 t Z � IJ L i 4- 9 «� L yr 44- J h J 22 t 22 Z � Heavens Peak j 4— 25 r J 41 17 t Z � 0 40 L :♦ 4- 25 J 17 4- 9 22 Z h � Camp Cook 4- 25 17 h Z � Farm to Market I Heavens Peak I Camp Cook ttage Gardens Development Wic Model �adows Edge e Generated Traffic A Peak Hour 2 4J L 55 j 4- yr :n Vist< 8 1 h 13 t 15 47 Z j 4- 38 l 4- 38 1: L t 4 V. 4 4- 38 4- 38 Ale 1 h * h 1 134 h 134 t 134 t 134 Z Z � Z Farm to Market I Heavens Peak (Camp Cook �adows Edge e Generated Traffic I Peak Hour 8 40 L 32 j 4- 0 4 r :n Vist< 5 1 h 49 0 t 57 27 Z 0 j 4- 138 j 4- 138 �: L y t y t y 4- 138 4- 138 Mile 1 41 1 41 1 78 41 78 t 78 t 78 Z Farm to Market I Heavens Peak I Camp Cook )ttage Gardens Development -affic Model to Generated Traffic VI Peak Hour 4J L 4 1 4- 1 r Itn Vista J h � t Z IJ L 1 4- 2 yr1 J h 1 � t Z �► 0 Farm to Market to Generated Traffic VI Peak Hour IJ L 3 1 4- 4.6 r Itn Vista J h � t Z 4 20% 1 5% 1 0 1 4J L 1 4- 2 yr 0 J 41 1 � t Z � Heavens Peak 3 20% 4.6 �J L i 4— Farm to Market 5% 1 1 1 4j L i 4 1 116r 1 J 41 2 t Z Heavens Peak IN 7 OUT 20 75% 15 5 2 4J L 5 14 y 4- 1 J IN 23 OUT 14 75% 11 17 1 ♦0 L 16 9 :♦ 4- 2 J 4- 5 14 h Z � Camp Cook 4- 16 9 h Z � Camp Cook ttage Gardens Development Wic Model 2023 Growth Factor 1.05 tal Projected Traffic A Peak Hour 2 4i L 11 271 1 4- 0 6 r 27 :n Vist 8 J h 13 0 t 132 47 Z 03 10.9/12.8 B/B Farm to Market tal Projected Traffic I Peak Hour 8 40 L 9 158 1 4- 0 8 y r 9 :n Vist 5 J h 49 0 t 221 27 Z 8 14.0/18.3 B/C 5 /: L 34 0 1 4- 200 2 /: L 5 55 4 r 34 14 4 4- 265 5 J 41 8 1 J 451 It 0 513 4 Z 64 8 10.3/12.2 B/B Heavens Peak 5 4: L 80 0 1 4- 492 55 y t 126 5 J h 8 269 t 0 8 Z 90 21 14.6/33.4 B/D 1 40 L 16 9 y 4- 696 2 J 343 14.8 B 19.4 C 12.8 B 4- 270 527 *i 4 4 Z e 67 Camp Cook 4- 712 362 41 8 4 Z 0 25 Farm to Market I Heavens Peak I Camp Cook 13.2 B APPENDIX C LOS Calculations HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mountain Vista & Farm Mar Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/4/2018 East/West Street Mountain Vista Road Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Farm to Market Road Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - Existing Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes .!41J.4-1- U A 11 1 f`Yt Major Street North -South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 10 11 12 7 8 9 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 Number of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LR TR LT Volume (veh/h) 26 7 100 3 4 202 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 4.13 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 37 4 Capacity, c (veh/h) 692 1468 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.2 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.5 7.5 Level of Service (LOS) B A Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.5 0.2 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:19:05 AM MtnVistaAM.xtw HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mountain Vista & Farm Mar Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/4/2018 East/West Street Mountain Vista Road Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Farm to Market Road Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour - Existing Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes .!41J.4-1- U A 11 1 f`Yt Major Street North -South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 10 11 12 7 8 9 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 Number of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LR TR LT Volume (veh/h) 9 6 149 8 3 107 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 4.13 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 17 3 Capacity, c (veh/h) 754 1396 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.1 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 9.9 7.6 Level of Service (LOS) A A Approach Delay (s/veh) 9.9 0.2 Approach LOS A Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:20:13 AM MtnVistaPM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Heavens Peak & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Heavens Peak Time Analyzed AM Peak- Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes 1 Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L132 U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR L LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 4 280 4 32 8 0 8 52 0 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 4.13 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 2.23 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 4 32 16 56 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1394 1273 568 468 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.12 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.6 7.9 11.5 13.7 Level of Service (LOS) A A B B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.1 1.2 11.5 13.7 Approach LOS B B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:16:01 AM HeavenAM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Heavens Peak & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Heavens Peak Time Analyzed PM Peak- Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes 1 Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L176 U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR L LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 4 164 8 120 8 0 20 52 0 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 4.13 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 2.23 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 4 120 28 56 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1165 1399 559 298 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.19 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.7 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.1 7.8 11.8 19.9 Level of Service (LOS) A A B C Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.2 1.8 11.8 19.9 Approach LOS B C Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:17:57 AM HeavenPM.xtw HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Camp Cook & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Camp Cook Time Analyzed AM Peak- Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration TR T LR Volume (veh/h) 340 4 208 4 64 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 68 Capacity, c (veh/h) 682 v/c Ratio 0.10 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.3 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.9 Level of Service (LOS) B Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.9 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:13:33 AM Ca m pCookAM.xtw HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Camp Cook & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2018 North/South Street Camp Cook Time Analyzed PM Peak- Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration TR T LR Volume (veh/h) 236 4 508 8 24 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 32 Capacity, c (veh/h) 626 v/c Ratio 0.05 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.1 Level of Service (LOS) B Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.1 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 10:14:49 AM CampCookPM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mountain Vista & Farm Mar Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/4/2018 East/West Street Mountain Vista Road Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Farm to Market Road Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes .!41J.4-1- U A 11 1 f`Yt Major Street North -South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U LIR U L T R U L T R Priority 10 11 12 71U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 8 1 47 27 13 132 3 6 271 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 4.13 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 62 44 14 7 Capacity, c (veh/h) 672 507 1252 1425 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.9 12.8 7.9 0.1 7.5 0.0 Level of Service (LOS) B B A A A A Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.9 12.8 0.8 0.2 Approach LOS B B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:22:27 AM MtnVistaAMwith.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mountain Vista & Farm Mar Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/4/2018 East/West Street Mountain Vista Road Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Farm to Market Road Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour - With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes .!41J.4-1- U A 11 1 f`Yt Major Street North -South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 10 11 12 7 8 9 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 5 1 27 9 1 9 49 221 8 8 158 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 4.13 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 37 21 54 9 Capacity, c (veh/h) 718 520 1384 1305 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.3 12.2 7.7 0.4 7.8 0.1 Level of Service (LOS) B B A A A A Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.3 12.2 1.6 0.4 Approach LOS B B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:23:14 AM MtnVistaP Mwith.> tw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Heaven Peak & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Heavens Peak Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes 1 Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L134 U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR L LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 5 451 4 34 8 0 8 55 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 4.13 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 2.23 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 5 34 16 60 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1328 1100 415 330 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.18 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.7 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.7 8.4 14.0 18.3 Level of Service (LOS) A A B C Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.1 1.1 14.0 18.3 Approach LOS B C Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:19:22 AM Heave nAMw it h.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Heaven Peak & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Heavens Peak Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes 1 Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR L TR LTR LTR Volume (veh/h) 5 269 8 126 492 80 8 0 21 55 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 4.13 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 2.23 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 5 126 29 60 Capacity, c (veh/h) 996 1280 404 186 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.32 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.3 0.2 1.3 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.6 8.1 14.6 33.4 Level of Service (LOS) A A B D Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.2 1.5 14.6 33.4 Approach LOS B D Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:21:34 AM Heave nP Mwith.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Entrance 1 & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Entance 1 Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT IR LR Volume (veh/h) 1 513 15 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 1 17 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1288 385 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.04 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.8 14.8 Level of Service (LOS) A B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.0 14.8 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:16:49 AM EntranceAMxtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Entrance 1 & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Entance 1 Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U LIR U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT LR Volume (veh/h) 2 343 9 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 2 10 Capacity, c (veh/h) 882 261 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.04 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh) 9.1 19.4 Level of Service (LOS) A C Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.1 19.4 Approach LOS C Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:18:05 AM EntrancePMxtw HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Camp Cook & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Camp Cook Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration TR T LR Volume (veh/h) 528 4 270 4 67 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 71 Capacity, c (veh/h) 530 v/c Ratio 0.13 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.5 Control Delay (s/veh) 12.8 Level of Service (LOS) B Approach Delay (s/veh) 12.8 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:14:39 AM CampCookAMwithxtw HCS7 Two -Way Stop -Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Camp Cook & 3 Mile Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction City of Kalispell Date Performed 11/2/2018 East/West Street 3 Mile Drive Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Camp Cook Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev. Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Cottage Gardens Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration TR T LR Volume (veh/h) 360 4 712 8 25 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 6.43 6.23 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 33 Capacity, c (veh/h) 473 v/c Ratio 0.07 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.2 Level of Service (LOS) B Approach Delay (s/veh) 13.2 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2018 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.5 Generated: 11/5/2018 11:15:37 AM CampCookPMwith.xtw mum Three _ Y C4 COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION KALISPELL, MT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT JOB NO. K18-072 NOVEMBER 2018 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 November 5, 2018 TD& Engineering y O City of Kalispell - Planning Department Attn: Jarod Nygren 201 1 st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Jarod, The following document is meant to address the the Cottage Gardens Subdivision Preliminary responses can be seen below in bold -italic text. PART I — PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com Environmental Assessment pertaining to Plat Application. The TD&H comment The subject project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. SW 114, SE 114, Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West. The site is currently undeveloped and once supported a single- family residence on the total 11.7 acres. The preliminary plat application will be for a 37 lot subdivision to be serviced by City of Kalispell water and sewer utilities. A preliminary Lot Layout and additional parcel information is included in Appendix A. 1. Surface Water A. Any natural water systems such as streams, rivers, intermittent streams, lakes or marshes (also indicate the names and sizes of each). • Spring Creek runs through the northeastern corner of the project and south along the eastern border of the subject property. A preliminary Lot Layout drawing is included in Appendix A. B. Any artificial water systems such as canals, ditches, aqueducts, reservoirs, and irrigation systems (also indicate the names, sizes and present uses of each). • There are no artificial water systems located within the property. Three Mile Drive has roadside ditches and a culvert allows Spring Creek to pass under the road. A preliminary Lot Layout drawing is included in Appendix A. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 2 C. Time when water is present (seasonally or all year). Spring Creek maintains a flow of water throughout the year. A Stream Stats flow data and characteristics report is included in Appendix C. D. Any areas subject to flood hazard, or in delineated 100 year floodplain. • The subject property is not located within the floodplain. A map of the flood area delineation can be found in Appendix C. E. Describe any existing or proposed stream bank alteration from any proposed construction or modification of lake beds or stream channels. Provide information on location, extent, type and purpose of alteration, and permits applied for. • No stream bank alterations will be proposed with this subdivision. The existing access will be maintained for access to the park area. 2. Groundwater A. The minimum depth to the water table or to the historic water table and identify dates when depths were determined. What is the location and depth of all aquifers which may be affected by the proposed subdivision? Describe the location of known aquifer recharge areas which may be affected. Test pit logs can be found in Appendix B. Groundwater was not encountered during the site investigation. Adjacent well and stream data is provided in Appendix C. B. Describe any steps necessary to avoid depletion or degradation of groundwater recharge areas. • The proposed subdivision will be served by City of Kalispell water utilities and therefore will not any impact to groundwater recharge areas. 3. Topoaraphv, Geoloav and Soils A. Provide a map of the topography of the area to be subdivided, and an evaluation of suitability for the proposed land uses. On the map identify any areas with highly erodible soils or slopes in excess of 15% grade. Identify the lots or areas affected. Address conditions such as: i Shallow bedrock ii Unstable slopes iii Unstable or expansive soils iv Excessive slope MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 3 • The subject property received preliminary plat approval for a similar subdivision layout in 2007. A proposed lot layout is included in Appendix A. The east slopes of the property are greater than 15% but have established vegetative cover to minimize erosion. The proposed lot layout will preserve this vegetative buffer along Spring Creek. B. Locate on an overlay or sketch map: Any known hazards affecting the development which could result in property damage or personal injury due to: a. Falls, slides or slumps -- soil, rock, mud, snow. b. Rock outcroppings c. Seismic activity. d. High water table • A proposed lot layout is included in Appendix A. C. Describe measures proposed to prevent or reduce these hazards. No hazards fitting the descriptions in item 3B above have been noted on the property. D. Describe the location and amount of any cut or fill more than three feet in depth. Indicate these cuts or fills on a plat overlay or sketch map. Where cuts or fills are necessary, describe plans to prevent erosion and to promote vegetation such as replacement of topsoil and grading. • The proposed development does not include any cut or fill areas greater than three feet from existing ground elevations through preliminary design. 4. Vegetation A. On a plat overlay or sketch map: i. Indicate the distribution of the major vegetation types, such as marsh, grassland, shrub, coniferous forest, deciduous forest, mixed forest. • The subject property is primarily grassland with a small timber stand in the southeast corner of the lot. A vegetation map exhibit is included in Appendix A. ii. Identify the location of critical plant communities such as: a. Stream bank or shoreline vegetation b. Vegetation on steep, unstable slopes c. Vegetation on soils highly susceptible to wind or water erosion d. Type and extent of noxious weeds MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 4 No critical plant communities or noxious weeds were noted as present on the subject property. A vegetation map exhibit is included in Appendix A. B. Describe measures to: i. Preserve trees and other natural vegetation e.g. locating roads and lot boundaries, planning construction to avoid damaging tree cover. The site does not support many trees however those along Spring Creek at the toe of the slope will remain through development. Trees located in the southeast corner of the lot will be removed to develop lots in that area. Protect critical plant communities e.g. keeping structural development away from these areas, setting areas aside for open space. • No critical plant communities were noted as present on the subject property. iii. Prevent and control grass, brush or forest fires e.g. green strips, water supply, access. • The development will be almost entirely developed into single family residential lots. The park land area will be maintained by the HOA. CCR's will dictate an acceptable level of landscaping and maintenance to prevent potential for fire. iv. Control and prevent growth of noxious weeds • The project will be responsible to develop an acceptable weed management plan to be maintained by the developer and HOA. Requirements to stabilize any disturbed area during construction will be included in the civil drawings and specifications. 5_ Wildlife A. Identify species of fish and wildlife use the area affected by the proposed subdivision. • White-tailed deer frequent this and all adjoining areas despite residential development, as is common in many developed areas on the outskirts of Kalispell. Pheasants are also prevalent within the proposed development. No other major species are suspected to frequently use the subject property. B. On a copy of the preliminary plat or overlay, identify known critical wildlife areas, such as big game winter range, calving areas and migration routes; riparian habitat and waterfowl nesting areas; habitat for rare or endangered species and wetlands. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 5 • The subject property is not known to support critical big game winterage range, calving areas, migration routes, riparian habitat, waterfowl nesting areas, or habitat for rare and endangered species. C. Describe proposed measures to protect or enhance wildlife habitat or to minimize degradation (e.g. keeping buildings and roads back from shorelines; setting aside wetlands as undeveloped open space). The area within and around the broad swale of Spring Creek presents the most viable wildlife habitat. This area is less suitable for development and will be designated as common or green space. This designation is intended to preserve the natural state of the area for riparian area and reduce the developments impact on the local habitat. Some improvements may be necessary to be used by residents such as a walking path, picnic tables, or benches. 6. Land Use A. Describe the existing historical use of the site. • The site supports a single family residence but no known historical use to note on or near the property. B. Describe any comprehensive plan recommendations and other land use regulations on and adjacent to the site. Is zoning proposed? Is annexation proposed? Annexation into the City is proposed for a one acre parcel located in the southwest corner of the property. There are no known land use regulations on or adjacent to the site. An Annexation and Zoning Application has been submitted as part of the Preliminary Plat Subdivision Application. Current zoning for the 1 acre parcel is AG-80-WVO and R-3 is proposed which is consistent with the rest of the property. C. Describe the present uses of lands adjacent to or near the proposed development. Describe how the subdivision will affect access to any adjoining land and/or what measures are proposed to provide access. • Much of the adjacent property is developed into similarly structured single- family residential subdivisions like the proposed Cottage Gardens. The proposed lot layout will not affect access to the surrounding areas however there will be increased traffic to the newly proposed subdivision. A traffic impact study (TIS) is attached as a separate document for more information. D. Describe the basis of the need for the subdivision. How much development of a similar nature is, or is not, available in the area? MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 6 • Several similar subdivisions exist near the proposed project however many of the other developments are nearly built out. This allows the proposed Cottage Gardens Subdivision to provide more capacity for similar conditions/proximity to the city and its infrastructure. E. Describe any health or safety hazards on or near the subdivision (mining activity, high voltage lines, gas lines, agricultural and farm activities, shooting ranges, septage disposal operations, etc.) Any such conditions should be accurately described and their origin and location identified. No known health or safety hazards are located on or near the proposed subdivision. High voltage power lines are present in the subdivision neighboring to the west. F. Describe any on -site uses creating a nuisance (unpleasant odor, unusual noises, dust, smoke, etc.). Any such conditions should be accurately described and their origin and location identified. • There are no on -site uses existing or proposed to create a nuisance. PART II - SUMMARY OF PROBABLE IMPACTS 1. Effects on Agriculture A. Is the proposed subdivision or associated improvements located on or near prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance as defined by the Natural Resource Conservation Service? If so, identify each area on a copy of the preliminary plat. • Per the Natural Resource Conservation Service, only 3% of the site is comprised of prime farmland classified soil. A copy of the NRCS Soil Survey Report is included in Appendix D. B. Describe whether the subdivision would remove from production any agricultural or timber land. • The site is not currently used for agriculture or timber production and thus would not remove land from either contribution. C. Describe possible conflicts with nearby agricultural operations, e.g., residential development creating problems for moving livestock, operating farm machinery, operating septage disposal sites, maintaining water supplies, controlling weeds or applying pesticides; agricultural operations suffering from vandalism, uncontrolled pets or damaged fences. The proposed development will not impact nearby agricultural operations negatively. The adjacent land has been developed into similar residential subdivisions. D. Describe possible nuisance problems which may arise from locating a subdivision near agricultural or timber lands. • N/A - The subdivision is not located near agricultural or timbered lands. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 7 E. Describe effects the subdivision would have on the value of nearby agricultural lands. • N/A - The subdivision is not located near agricultural or timbered lands. 2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities A. Describe conflicts the subdivision would create with agricultural water user facilities, e.g. residential development creating problems for operating and maintaining irrigation systems, and whether agricultural water user facilities would be more subject to vandalism or damage because of the subdivision. No agricultural water user facilities are located near the subdivision and therefore the project will not create an impact for maintenance or vandalism. B. Describe possible nuisance problems which the subdivision would generate with regard to agricultural water user facilities, e.g. safety hazards to residents or water problems from irrigation ditches, head gates, siphons, sprinkler systems, or other agricultural water user facilities. • No agricultural water user facilities are located near the subdivision and therefore the project will not create an impact. 3. Effects on Local Services A. Indicate the proposed use and number of lots or spaces in each: • 37 Residential, single family lots • 1 Common green space/park area B. Describe the additional or expanded public services and facilities that would be required of local government or special districts to serve the subdivision. • Water and sewer main extensions will be extended through the development to service each lot. The main extensions will be owned and operated by the City of Kalispell. Describe additional costs that would result for services such as roads, bridges, law enforcement, parks and recreation, fire protection, water, sewer and solid waste systems, schools or busing, (including additional personnel, construction, and maintenance costs). • The development would require coverage for many services such as road maintenance, law enforcement, fire protection, etc., however; the newly created lots should offset these costs through the individual taxes they incur and service utilization fees. More information for property taxes is included in Appendix E. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 8 ii. Who would bear these costs, e.g. all taxpayers within the jurisdiction, people within special taxing districts, or users of a service? • Infrastructure for the development will be installed at the developer's expense. Maintenance costs will be managed through taxes within the jurisdiction or billed directly for services utilized. iii. Can the service providers meet the additional costs given legal or other constraints, e.g. statutory ceilings on mill levies or bonded indebtedness? • Service providers were contacted by letter however no correspondence had been received at the time of this environmental assessment. Copies of the Agency Coordination Letters that were mailed care included in Appendix F. iv. Describe off -site costs or costs to other jurisdictions may be incurred, e.g. development of water sources or construction of a sewage treatment plant; costs borne by the municipality. • No off -site costs or costs to other jurisdictions are anticipated as part of this subdivision. Any increased cost for operation of the existing lift station proposed to service the development would be offset by the service fees received from the newly created lots. C. Describe how the subdivision allows existing services, through expanded use, to operate more efficiently, or makes the installation or improvement of services feasible, e.g. allow installation of a central water system, or upgrading a rural road. The land is currently undeveloped and will allow for feasible expansion of services through the area. D. What are the present tax revenues received from the unsubdivided land? i. By the County ii. By the municipality if applicable iii. By the school(s) • The unsubdivided land is currently assessed for $5,163.16 in taxes for the last fiscal year. A summary of the tax history has been included in Appendix E. E. Provide the approximate revenues received by each above taxing authority if the lots are reclassified, and when the lots are all improved and built upon. Describe any other taxes that would be paid by the subdivision and into what funds. • Similar lots in the area are taxed on average $3,071.38 per lot per year, based on the 37 lots proposed the property will generate an estimated $108,477.90 in additional tax revenue. F. Would new taxes generated from the subdivision cover additional public costs? MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 9 • The estimated taxes are perceived to be adequate to offset operation and maintenance costs for the proposed subdivision infrastructure based on current city growth policy projections. Funding for the water and sewer utilities will be assessed through usage fees and metered services. G. How many special improvement districts would be created which would obligate local government fiscally or administratively? Are any bonding plans proposed that would affect the local government's bonded indebtedness? • No special improvement districts are proposed to be created as part of this development to obligate administration. 4. Effects on the Historic or Natural Environment A. Describe and locate on a plat overlay or sketch map known or possible historic, paleontological, archaeological or cultural sites, structures, or objects that may be affected by the proposed subdivision. • No historic, paleontological, archaeological or cultural sites, structures, or objects are present or foreseen to be affected by the proposed subdivision. B. How would the subdivision affect surface and groundwater, soils, slopes, vegetation, historical or archaeological features within the subdivision or on adjacent land? Describe plans to protect these sites. Surface and groundwater entities will be managed and protected from the subdivision through the use of pretreatment structures within the stormwater management system. Any disturbed areas of the site will require stabilization as part of the construction documents. No historic or archaeological features are known to reside within the subject property. Would any stream banks or lake shorelines be altered, streams rechanneled or any surface water contaminated from sewage treatment systems, run-off carrying sedimentation, or concentration of pesticides or fertilizers? • No stream bank alterations are proposed as part of this development. ii. Would groundwater supplies likely be contaminated or depleted as a result of the subdivision? • It is unlikely the groundwater supplies would be contaminated or depleted as a result of the subdivision. Water and irrigation services would be made through the city utilities as well as sewer instead of public wells and subsurface sewage treatment. iii. Would construction of roads or building sites require cuts and fills on steep slopes or cause erosion on unstable, erodible soils? Would soils be contaminated by sewage treatment systems? MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 10 • No road or building sites require large cut or fill construction to cause erosion on unstable soils. Construction activities will be managed with BMP's to protect against soil sediment and erosion control issues. iv. Describe the impacts that removal of vegetation would have on soil erosion, bank, or shoreline instability. • Streambanks along Spring Creek will remain undisturbed as riparian zones. Any disturbed areas of the site will require stabilization as part of the construction documents. v. Would the value of significant historical, visual, or open space features be reduced or eliminated? • No historical features exist on site however open space will be greatly reduced with the creation of residential lots. vi. Describe possible natural hazards the subdivision could be subject to, e.g., natural hazards such as flooding, rock, snow or land slides, high winds, severe wildfires, or difficulties such as shallow bedrock, high water table, unstable or expansive soils, or excessive slopes. • The subject property is outside the mapped 100-year floodplain and does not have any terrain influences to produce a rock or land slide. No other natural hazards are perceived to be an issue with the proposed subdivision. C. How would the subdivision affect visual features within the subdivision or on adjacent land? Describe anticipated efforts to visually blend the proposed development with the existing environment, e.g. use of appropriate building materials, colors, road design, underground utilities, and revegetation of earthworks. The project will blend nicely with its surrounding areas based on the density of lots within the subdivision to match that of surrounding developments. The roadways will provide boulevard buffers to allow for tree planting and offer a less congested feel within the subdivision. All utilities will be installed underground to limit visible obstructions. The area surrounding Spring Creek will remain undisturbed to maintain the riparian area and provide green space. 5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat A. Describe what impacts the subdivision or associated improvements would have on wildlife areas such as big game wintering range, migration routes, nesting areas, wetlands, or important habitat for rare or endangered species. • White-tailed deer frequent this and all adjoining areas despite residential development, as is common in many developed areas on the outskirts of Kalispell. No other major species are suspected to frequently use the subject property. The subject property is not known to support critical big game winterage range, calving areas, migration routes, riparian habitat, waterfowl nesting areas, or habitat for rare and endangered species. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 11 B. Describe the effect that pets or human activity would have on wildlife. • It is possible pets and human activity may reduce the frequency in which wildlife visit the property. White-tailed deer frequent this and all adjoining areas despite residential development, as is common in many developed areas on the outskirts of Kalispell. 6. Effects on the Public Health and Saf A. Describe any health or safety hazards on or near the subdivision, such as natural hazards, lack of water, drainage problems, heavy traffic, dilapidated structures, high pressure gas lines, high voltage power lines, or irrigation ditches. These conditions, proposed or existing, should be accurately described with their origin and location identified on a copy of the preliminary plat. • No, health or safety hazards exist on or near the subdivision, such as natural hazards, lack of water, drainage problems, heavy traffic, dilapidated structures, high pressure gas lines, high voltage power lines, or irrigation ditches. B. Describe how the subdivision would be subject to hazardous conditions due to high voltage lines, airports, highways, railroads, dilapidated structures, high pressure gas lines, irrigation ditches, and adjacent industrial or mining uses. • The subdivision lies along the flight path to Glacier International Airport and could host potential risk for its location. High voltage power lines extend through the subdivision to the west. No other hazards are perceived to be an issue based on existing conditions. C. Describe land uses adjacent to the subdivision and how the subdivision will affect the adjacent land uses. Identify existing uses such as feed lots, processing plants, airports or industrial firms that could be subject to lawsuits or complaints from residents of the subdivision. • The surrounding areas are almost entirely comprised of single-family residential subdivisions of similar density. The subdivision lies along the flight path to Glacier International Airport but should not cause any obstruction to its operations. D. Describe public health or safety hazards, such as dangerous traffic, fire conditions, or contamination of water supplies that would be created by the subdivision. The design of the subdivision will be in effort to eliminate any potential health or safety risks per the City of Kalispell Standards and Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Water and sewer services will be provided through individual services from an new main extension through the development. Stormwater management and landscaping should help reduce the possibility of wildfire as well as manage runoff to prevent pollution of the local groundwater. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 12 PART III - COMMUNITY IMPACT REPORT 1. Education and Busing A. Describe the available educational facilities that would serve this subdivision. This subdivision would be serviced by West Valley School District #1 and Flathead High School District. A map of the school districts is included in Appendix E. B. Estimate the number of school children that will be added by the proposed subdivision. Provide a statement from the administrator of the affected school system indicating whether the increased enrollment can be accommodated by the present personnel and facilities and by the existing school bus system. If not, estimate the increased expenditures that would be necessary to do so. Based on census data and population estimates for Flathead County, a household would contain approximately 2.5 persons. Based on this information and assuming 2 adults and 0.5 school aged children per household the proposed subdivision would generate an estimated 18.5 additional students for the surrounding school districts once fully developed. See Appendix E for census backup data. 2. Roads and Maintenance A. Estimate how much daily traffic the subdivision, when fully occupied, will generate on existing streets and arterials. • A traffic impact study is attached as a separate document for more information regarding daily traffic volume for the proposed subdivision. B. Describe the capability of existing and proposed roads to safely accommodate this increased traffic. • A traffic impact study is attached as a separate document for more information regarding traffic capacities for the surrounding area with the proposed subdivision. C. Describe increased maintenance problems and increased cost due to this increase in volume. • Snow plowing and street sweeping maintenance would be most impacted by the addition of nearly 1,500 LF or roadway through the development. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 13 D. Describe proposed new public or private access roads including: i. Measures for disposing of storm run-off from streets and roads. ii. Type of road surface and provisions to be made for dust. iii. Facilities for streams or drainage crossing (e.g. culverts, bridges). iv. Seeding of disturbed areas. The new public access roadway through the development will be constructed per the City of Kalispell Standards for an "Urban Local" street. This detail will provide for 14 FT travel lanes and standard curb roadways with a 9 FT boulevard to separate the 5 FT wide sidewalk. All new roadways and private driveways will be paved to help mitigate any potential for dust or erosion events. A culvert will be used to preserve the drainage along Three Mile Drive under the proposed roadway approach. Any disturbed areas of the site will require stabilization as part of the construction documents. E. Describe the closing or modification of any existing roads. N/A - No roads are proposed to be closed or modified as part of this development. F. Explain why road access was not provided within the subdivision, if access to any individual lot is directly from arterial streets or roads. • N/A - All lots within the subdivision will have access provided from the proposed public roadway. G. Is year-round access by conventional automobile over legal rights -of -way available to the subdivision and to all lots and common facilities within the subdivision? Identify the owners of any private property over which access to the subdivision will be provided. Year-round access by conventional automobile over legal rights -of -way will be available to the subdivision. No vehicle access will be provided through the park area designation along Spring Creek. H. Estimate the cost and completion date of the system, and indicate who will pay the cost of installation, maintenance and snow removal. • The developer is responsible for construction costs however the maintenance and snow removal would be the responsibility of the City of Kalispell. Costs for ongoing maintenance and snow removal will be recovered through applicable taxes for each developed lot. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 14 3. Water, Sewage, and Solid Waste Facilities A. Briefly describe the water supply and sewage treatment systems to be used in serving the proposed subdivision, e.g. methods, capacities, locations. • Water services will be supplied through a main extension of the City of Kalispell Public Water Utility. Sewer waste will be conveyed through the new main extension to an existing lift -station as part of the Kalispell Wastewater Treatment Plant System. B. Provide information on estimated cost of the system, who will bear the costs, and how the system will be financed. • The developer is responsible for construction costs however the maintenance and operation would be the responsibility of the City of Kalispell. Costs for ongoing maintenance will be recovered through applicable taxes for each developed lot and usage fees. C. Where hook-up to an existing system is proposed, describe estimated impacts on the existing system, and show evidence that permission has been granted to hook up to the existing system. • All service connections will be made to a new main extension for both water and sewer. Coordination is ongoing in efforts to determine the capacity of the existing lift station. 37 three bedroom houses would produce 11,100 gpd for sizing purposes based on residential design flows in MDEQ Circular-4. D. All water supply and sewage treatment plans and specifications will be reviewed and approved by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and should be submitted using the appropriate DEQ application form. • The project will be designed in acoordance with the Kalispell Public Works Department Standards for Design and Construction as well as applicable MDEQ Circulars. E. Describe the proposed method of collecting and disposing of solid waste from the development. • Solid waste will be provided by Evergreen Disposal pick-up and transfer services to the Flathead County Landfill. F. If use of an existing collection system or disposal facility is proposed indicate the name and location of the facility. • The Flathead County Landfill is located at 4098 US-93, Kalispell, MT 59901. A exert from the Flathead County Solid Waste District Strategic Plan is included in Appendix E. MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 15 4. Fire and Police Protection A. Describe the fire and police protection services available to the residents of the proposed subdivision including number of personnel and number of vehicles or type of facilities for: Fire protection -- is the proposed subdivision in an existing fire district? If not, will one be formed or extended? Describe what fire protection procedures are planned? The proposed subdivision is within the West Valley Fire District #1. The development will provide fire hydrants in coordination with Kalispell Public Works Standards, Kalispell Fire Department and West Valley Fire District #1. A map is included in Appendix E to detail the response route. ii. Law Enforcement protection —is the proposed subdivision within the jurisdiction of a County Sheriff or municipal policy department The development will be within Kalispell city limits for police coverage as well as the Flathead County Sherriff. A map is included in Appendix E to detail response route. B. Can the fire and police protection service needs of the proposed subdivision be met by present personnel and facilities? If not, describe the additional expenses that would be necessary to make these services adequate, and who would pay the costs? • Letters were sent to applicable fire and law enforcement offices and no responses have been received at the time of this assessment. 5. Parks and Recreation Facilities A. Describe park and recreation facilities to be provided within the proposed subdivision and other recreational facilities that will serve the subdivision. • 3.87 acres of the site will remain for park designation consisting of 1.62 acres of Spring Creek riparian area and 2.25 acres of green space of the 11.7 acres total. B. List other parks and recreation facilities or sites in the area and their approximate distance from the site. • The development will be located directly across the street from public tennis courts as well as less than 2,000 ft from a local playground. The subdivision will also provide access to the bike path system that extends from the US-93 Bypass. C. If cash -in -lieu of parkland is proposed, state the purchase price per acre or current market value (values stated must be no more than 12 months old). MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA November 5, 2018 PAGE NO. 16 • N/A -park land will be designated. 2.25 acres of park land of the 11.7 acres total is 19 % and greater than the 11 % required by Flathead County Subdivision Regulations. 6. Payment for Extension of Capital Facilities A. Indicate how the subdivider will pay for the cost of extending capital facilities resulting from expected impacts directly attributable to the subdivision. • The subdivision will be financed through the developer's bank for construction of the development. If you have any questions, comments, of need any additional information, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, AlltAa�4� Wil Goodpaster El Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING " CA�/ 1h) // Dv Unique Realty Developer, Inc., Bruce Wiederspiel Applicant Doug Peppmeier PE Regional Office Manager TD&H ENGINEERING MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA APPENDIX A PROPERTY INFORMATION AND PROPOSED LAYOUT C3 Two m Nl �a �B'IPIPMlii1S PEI 1PMIl11S StillwaterlRd, It 3 A r I r y t.. Vs fi ■ O 1 - � 5 s I •�*,sd,'� al,1eo' °a a J' o �t a v I � Meadows Ln S MeadowsaJ_ ^ • o° t dw I D�PAve O . t I tJ I � � r� • Pine Draw AVP spr,�,9creek - -7 I�Pyp c !oa ` ® E I � r al Pqy HflD�Cu y�l CD IA '- Pd 4—bulxlS M r 1111091 W111N Flathead County Interactive Mapping System: Detailed Parcel Information FLATHEAD COUNTY GIS KALISPELL, MONTA A GIS Home I Downloadable Data I Help I Contact Us General Parcel Data Tract Id: 2822X02-XXX-1AC Assessor: 0625101 Geocode: 07396502401030000 Approximate GIS Acreage: 10.7 City: KALISPELL Subdivision Name: NA Owner: APEX 1 LLC Address: (M) 10 E ROANOKE ST STE 8 SEATTLE WA 98102 Owner: APEX 1 LLC Address: (P) 575 THREE MILE DR KALISPELL MT 59901 Certificates of Survey Tract Land: CS 9981.tif Tract Land: CS 10887.1if Subdivision RTMT/BLA: None available Subdivision Plats None available School Districts School District Name: WEST VALLEY School District Number: 1 High School District: FLATHEAD Kalispell Elementary District: NA Commissioner District: Precinct Number: House District: Senate District: Kalispell Ward Number: Fire District: Water & Sewer District Neighborhood Plan: County Zoning District: County Zoning Use: Whitefish Zoning: Kalispell Zoning: Columbia Falls Zoning: Voting Districts 3 31 8 4 1 Water, Sewer and Fire Districts NA NA Zoning Districts West Valley Neighborhood Plan NA NA NA R-3 NA http://maps.flathead.mt.g ov/i ms/Parcel I nformation.aspx'?X=238912.19122630463&Y=451488.5552211058 1 /1 IiIFj 111 Flathead County Interactive Mapping System: Detailed Parcel Information } f,%'UFI1.i" W' �. f. k FLATHEAD COUNTY GIS KALISPELL, MONTANA GIS Home I Downloadable Data I Help I Contact Us General Parcel Data Tract Id: 2822X02-XXX-1A Assessor: 0033140 Geocode: 07396502401010000 Approximate GIS Acreage: 1.0 City: NA Subdivision Name: NA Owner: APEX I LLC Address: (M) 10 E ROANOKE ST STE 8 SEATTLE WA 98102 Owner: APEX I LLC Address: (P) 645 THREE MILE DR KALISPELL MT 59901 Certificates of Survey Tract Land: None available Subdivision RTMT/BLA: None available Subdivision Plats None available School Districts School District Name: WEST VALLEY School District Number: 1 High School District: FLATHEAD Kalispell Elementary District: NA Voting Districts Commissioner District: 3 Precinct Number: 31 House District: 8 Senate District: 4 Kalispell Ward Number: NA Water, Sewer and Fire Districts Fire District: WEST VALLEY Water & Sewer District: NA Zoning Districts Neighborhood Plan: West Valley Neighborhood Plan County Zoning District: WESTSIDE County Zoning Use: AG-80 WVO Whitefish Zoning: NA Kalispell Zoning: NA Columbia Falls Zoning: NA http://maps.flathead.mt.g ov/i ms/Parcel I nformation.aspX?X=238848.13234423773&Y=451444.32242588734 1 /1 Soo' 46' 33"W 662, 57 :f _ NQO°31IJE I I zoo` O 3 N �ep111 1 foe'ele 5 � I y F yu F V m In F w 4 .J w w a -z 4 O Q � a a w w �* 1`� •• '�P �'� e M��s 11< fit. a __ lVik �J o 'eji Cam•, c¢z =' zz Qa sF m am 'mq o ,.7 Y g U W d X w ¢ c a w¢ � O C - e W aQ w w a i o x S .. a � z GG O w max .a z mo oF'. E+ a tr� p i �a x O na7 O w Qp �. •'• 3 m .t p 10, a�tin:� N acai 5 x�r= '• .b ,.. G , ' C Ina.. In C •Il 3 C O W rUil o: m 1325.14 .y N b 1323.07 ' --+� 661 , 53 _7 N 6hJ.J� -- 1�.:.. NJO°34'5 la ll 1 F' NJO°41 E � \ �m J M 1322.03 6.13' " Q� 2 F Si `• °w s � ❑ o a slo Or z a O O OW y19 � 6 � 4G a, m 0 o z V wu1 W F 4 N ,•;aaeG� a c 'I. s o am w I C m =Up w V) w _ Q .^ f & t Z m Z w O 0 G. n e C 5 87 u 4b W �' r• o z m i C N C I =r + '<.. �N w ID F w z O Omi• 0❑ C S O O W F s 3 W ' a :5 .+ u IS W el UOmw I U O •' SOT s a F O W � pr; ww IYw w "LF 1w E=7Oi F [�+F c❑ Ftyp Ca., a O FaF-�Imr �^ E- 0 top �Fw 6 z 0 iFp C e a 0. 0 C Q P F F 7 6 M sO W 0. wm ow ands s 3, F- FtFi GSW T rno yNrp.a r C Y❑ m o x F z W W x a F F. ppmppapp F W m3 6.a M3 w� iU-:CO E O �� m I• �wox u:❑.. � < maaw s�Z 3w w O 3 O z Y iUr G 1:. C T. O 3 •'• m :C VOI 7 a C 3 '`+-' S❑ Q Q q F L .. Ws fF/) fi x❑ [7 (T O N[ F a Z U'r WCoo F �3 'o- w z Ga O 5 O a �' N O r°i, W F opt oodFo'wo o fix� Or_ co F F m w w w CC i✓ psp oo G. .. F. a 'O F U ¢ F w z'CFpdpU Im Im a'• w W a0� Di u w O EON �pp; W VWmEF.. (r/c1 4-4C�zx 7_ on• Fw xm o FOaC7�_1 aCC Ow�a. msaWla�' W FpZ�Q-7 �oO FQ^' wa CMZ w O WOwoV O WUa am > m F W� Q W U cWj z m to .. O z �• I" t a 2 0 .Fs z.e DCq• P�o prom OC z EE.. U ai a a m a m g� Ei C 0.w O a T O W a ao p F. m9Ul 1-C "zGF 3 W 3'^ w[L � W wO w � O (L�, W ! F [ t F C O G 'wt C F •A FJ LZs1 rwL t- o :1 2 0. G O [( F F" o :.-• 3 -y 'r tW.. rr .I a ) �Gw. •r J �� rFn zwO �� m 1w, tCsl' V f0/l ` U G4277 F4.: YJ (Cf] C�Wi p& �: � ¢, F' .: ,� ;; C�Y.7 •r=CJ] 4,tt1 p 4: ; a S �] � '.+��i ¢ I r] trt O F F rOn F F F F w r E F � a F ❑ � wci 7 R W O v =C Y O � i n u �] F F d w a :J � ❑ .. _. V; F •.� G GQ M C C tr. o w . oi E. In F. n .. V '- C C)In Q W i r w w _ a . Sy f...G • :• F o c F J + v / Z O r) Z O CU CD Z_ A/ _ / X W Z�aw Q�cw z qw , o w p zi xa ¢r w Y a o aJo"� aJm o Na O� o oa �a m o 3 a i�owWaz Wma} } o Z r U W O F, X K O S N m OY ~ Z W O a M a F O O Z O Owm Zw�F Ow YUI J O �O il�z II �N F O O O d~OU z�O WO Q �o ww �� z WU Cam U Z W ul� O UI N t/1 UI� �(~/1 O ZF U Z Z Z >w0 oo,rrr Y OJ Fw F ? F Oww x�000Q Ow w p Z� Z Z Z LL Zppfnz UU MDc p Zm Q� — Oa �Z OS O O O OZ Q Z p Z U j 2 Z x F p w 3 z N D Z } O K Z K K K K wul w w wry wp o wc� < m> m mz min mw w> yw dw o� aam a as a a� a �¢ Now w~ w wo w� w} I mw m m, m' mo a p a— UlU In 1I10 NU lll� P n M c li 6 r< ro m GQS . - - - - s S Z, �R�G -- / 0 Ei) III / I - w Q N 'Z Q w Z �OZ � W 0C/)� LL Q OD O =wU 0 < W w0�- Q LL ~ W L.L O r W � 0 QC/)� W C/) W � O N W N W H Z O<if �C/)O W w Z H 2 00 Z_ D a Q O P W Z U~O O 0 w Q Z NQN U/ W J W U/ w ��< z� Qo z L � mp �Q mew ag< > m< op a w w W Y w �L zr QN p zz ' ozw oi. a wa mop -M �> dVi ( o da-i U ? F. p1A QY ww5 dU n ode w ��a w z 0 N coCV) --- CY ' C Cl) o \ \ N V Ai \ 0M p \ I �w "--- ----ED cl)_— i �A N o 00 � + N o 7 N o 1 1 � i —j 11 EDI J� 1 �� v, SD _ ' �I � I N o O� I �M� ' LNL d ' < r p J o i a \\i Nw \ ' O� F- 00 o� a \ � dmm J r i N o v '' 1 CO 6 i °� 0. L — A 0 p % V N M o 3 LNL o r L O / ~g p 0p O�_ J 1 L L_ �s 3 O ~ p p J c� I L — — — — —L �a I 3 O 0 p I � � a I 1� o0 a 1 � r I 04 p % — v J i u � w z Q Q N Q � Z WOZ O Q U O�H LL QO� = O w U �/ J v O Q w z � O W 2 Q �-LL wLL Cn � _C w w G N� 0 G LL ` ) w W r) C3 3: 06 SON V�/JN � W W Q w Z W rO< v� J �( T V 2 H H �U)O W w Z H � 00 N Z_ D a 0O`=^ v ) P W Z 2 O u LU o o I o 0 J �o,o �oo o ' o o Qo3 ov'o /PN 4q,r,3 9 Z —� ,68'119 M„O ,Ob'ZL M„OL,Sb.£S O I a N o LLB 0p ti o a N o m o O O o o m J o o o o cs J U o o� Q �� ,8£'Zll M„OI,Sb.£S oo' a,2L.OS .99'l9 0 ,8£'99 M„O L, Sb. w m Q cov z LO Z£� Of No No a o Nora O O NN O O O N c0 Jo O mm9p C: Z J M M SS ,06'l ,9l'817 ,00'0Z 19'1S m,OC s.9 y - N, 5ry2 � ,£L-lSL M„OI,Sb.£S ono' r O 7' - �M O •yF' cj � N �, N r o K a m U U lal U ,L9'80l M„ OI,Sb.£S Vf z S'L a C'') 13 II ,OC r M (n No - r d 08 a a tih g6' t= o m J pMOi(mj vj M ?�s 11 v mk�oti �4oC o' OQ o a O A Jm C< paw w Lo F, o Q 6o !°0N o 9y� o m o 0 0 FO L6 m 20 p0 N `�o N o 02 w �n oci S0 0, O r OO0 �� P O O !n N i[J N oaa�� r 00 Of O •6£`6 o�n�m O ro o r a v= Nrn v m II II � 'y '�� 6�cA m m -o.1 m O M a a: aka .o wa�UU N a Z2 9y9 F n 09.8S a m Op O �2 f W in O M o Op N ifnl M m o S O N N r o •8�.08 �� m ~ ,ll'Z6 3„Z0,££.LN a z 'k �6. Oo �� ^� 0 61 J 1O O Iml 2gZ _ c�9 J m �� o i N .OB �o n sI o U o O 8ZS a 'hn' O w s ,�9 m �., l0 N N 6 9F� U 8 • Z•OZN rn Ma w �m �o S2 .y1� oo �nN pry `� N" ° O dm w O O w O O Oo o coos io,b l'S£ ,9b'16 M„Ob,ZZRs m ,bl'Sll M„Ob,ZZTS oomm® � a o N06 (n dh�IIo 5 �O Np o AVAA` iSIn Nl` iNnoN II II m� itiN�Na a II n�llNo - N OM F ��Jao o J < r 0 C ,6S'99Z M„Ob,ZZSS o ro M v (\ �" LU w LU y , LU 0 ) LO v _. M - N 3030 W 0- - , ' ' 0 LU n - 3035 A SITE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION U a ¢� SURFACE: Native Grasses SURFACE ELEVATION: 3,028.4 feet SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 m = z w O¢ w M 3:U) w a 2 w 0 MOISTURE CONTENT • = MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, appears loose, dark brown, dry — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Silty SAND with Gravel, appears medium dense, light brown, dry, +/ 30% subangular to subrounded gravel to 3" Silty SAND with Gravel (Glacial Till), relatively dense, light yellowish brown, dry, +/- 40% subrounded to subangular gravel to 3", +/- 15% cobbles to 8" _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sandy SILT with Gravel (Glacial Till), relatively dense, light yellowish brown, +/- 40% subrounded to subangular gravel to 3", +/- 15% cobbles to 8" - Very dense below 4.5 feet 1.0 -- 2.4 4.0 5.7 0 G G 1.5 G 3 G 4.5 G 6 7.5 9 10.5 ° ° a o Bottom of Test Pit RAFT Ground water not encoun- tered LEGEND Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content Plastic Limit Groundwater Level In -Situ Water Content T, Grab/composite sample Liquid Limit T Plaslicity IndeX GNP = Granular and Nonplastic Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries maybe gradual or transitio al. LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1 Cottage Gardens Logged by: Terry Stonehocker, PE Excavated by: Murphy's Excavating John Deere 50G Mini -Excavator October 25 2018 K18-072-001 TD&" THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. — F ! NGIN EEWNG x o 'SUL'FAN"s Figure No. � Sheet 1 of 1 U a ¢� SURFACE: Native Grasses SURFACE ELEVATION: 3,040.1 feet SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 m = z w O¢ w M � w a 2 U) w 0 MOISTURE CONTENT • = MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 74 VL TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, appears loose, dark brown, dry — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Silty GRAVEL with Sand (Glacial Till), appears very dense, light yellowish brown, dry, +/- 50% hard and soft subangular to subrounded gravel to 3", +/- 15% hard subrounded cobbles, +/ 5% hard subrounded boulders to 2' Slightly moist and light "bluish" yellow brown below 3.3 feet. 1.0 -- 5.0 0 G 1.5 3 G 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5 Bottom of Test Pit RAFT Ground water not encoun- tered _L L L LEGEND Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content Plastic Limit Groundwater Level In -Situ Water Content T, Grab/composite sample Liquid Limit T Plaslicity Index GNP = Granular and Nonplastic Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries maybe gradual or transitio al. , LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2 Cottage Gardens Logged by: Terry Stonehocker, PE Excavated by: Murphy's Excavating John Deere 50G Mini -Excavator October 25 2018 K18-072-001 TD&' THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. I— F ! NGIN EEWNG x O SUL'FAWS Figure No. Sheet 1 of 1 U EL ¢o SURFACE: Native Grasses SURFACE ELEVATION: 3,022.4 feet SOIL DESCRIPTION � 0 m = z w O¢ w M � w ~i a 2 � U) w 0 MOISTURE CONTENT • = MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, appears loose, brown, dry — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Silty SAND, appears medium dense, light yellowish brown, slightly moist�_ qu=3.5- 4.5tsf SILT, appears medium dense, light yellowish brown, moist qu=4.5tsf ---------------------- Silty SAND, appears loose to medium dense, yellowish brown, moist qu=2.0tsf Poorly -Graded SAND, appears loose, olive brown, moist 1.0 -- 2.2 2.9 -- 4.6 7.8 0 G G 1.5 G 3 4.5 G 6 7.5 9 10.5 K-X: 01 Bottom of Test Pit RAFT Ground water not encoun- tered tered iLLL LEGEND Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content Plastic Limit Groundwater Level In -Situ Water Content T, Grab/composite sample Liquid Limit n Plasticity Index GNP = Granular and Nonplastic Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3 Cottage Gardens Logged by: Terry Stonehocker, PE Excavated by: Murphy's Excavating John Deere 50G Mini -Excavator 6ctobOT 25 2018 K18-072-001 ,�,�&OLYR—M, THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. �r+cLv�:etuNc ConsuLiAiYrS aoe`uaH Ka`�o"` a"`A Figure No. Sheet 1 of 1 U a ¢� SURFACE: Native Grasses SURFACE ELEVATION: 3,007.4 feet SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 m = z w O¢ w M w a 2 U) w 0 MOISTURE CONTENT • = MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 FILL: Poorly -Graded GRAVEL with Sand, appears loose, brown,s btl_rnoist-------------- Silty SAND, appears loose, light brown, dry Poorly -Graded SAND with Silt, appears loose, light brown, moist SILT, appears loose, yellowish brown, very moist, +/ 50% very strong mottles to 2" ---------------------- Poorly-Graded SAND, appears loose, light brown, moist Silty SAND, appears loose, yellow brown, very moist, 25% very strong dark mottles 0.4 0.9 2.6 4.0 -- 7.0 7.5 0 G G 1.5 3 G 4.5 G 6 G 7.5 9 10.5 y •:r.i:j.z: Y,'I•' Y�I•' j Y Y• I• Y' ✓'I•Y•I I' i isYs.x• j: Y:.•Y'. j: Bottom of Test Pit J11AFT Ground water not encoun- tered LEGEND Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content Plastic Limit Groundwater Level In -Situ Water Content T, Grab/composite sample Liquid Limit T Plaslicity IndeX GNP =Granular and Nonplastic Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil t s. Actual boundaries maybe gradual or transitio al. LOG OF TEST PIT TP-4 Cottage Gardens Logged by: Terry Stonehocker, PE Excavated by: Murphy's Excavating John Deere 50G Mini -Excavator October 25 2018 K18-072-001 TD&� THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. cF NGu;xt�Etstt�c x o pBUL'fAH7'SW. Figure No. Sheet 1 of 1 U a ¢� SURFACE: Native Grasses SURFACE ELEVATION: 3,020.6 feet SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 m = z w O¢ w M w a 2 U) w 0 MOISTURE CONTENT • = MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 TOPSOIL: Silty SAND, appears loose, brown, dry ---------------------- Sandy SILT, appears medium dense to dense, light yellowish brown, dry — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - Silty SAND, appears loose, light brown, moist 0.5 2.5 2.9 0 1.5 3 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5 V - Bottom of Test Pit RAFT Ground water not encoun- tered LEGEND Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content Plastic Limit Groundwater Level In -Situ Water Content T, Grab/composite sample Liquid Limit T Plaslicity Index GNP = Granular and Nonplastic Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries maybe gradual or transitio al. LOG OF TEST PIT TP-5 Cottage Gardens Logged by: Terry Stonehocker, PE Excavated by: Murphy's Excavating John Deere 50G Mini -Excavator October 25 2018 K18-072-001 TD&" THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. — F ! NGIN EEWNG x o 'SUL'FAN"s ME — Fire No. � Sheet 1 of 1 will l III I i IIIIIIIIIIII��I �� Illlllllllllllp I �� I (IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �� 14uluullllllu I � I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II / Illllllllpllll I �' IIIIIIIIIIIIIUI I $1 � � �' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I #99 � � ,Illllllplllllll COS- �.�'L- ___--- ifSr �lpjlllj Il � /��- - - 41 'C,i --_--- _-_----.�� wl�ll iER� / / 1 p ___ I / 1 11 -------/� wv---------- M Q / Ill l I I I I I IIII I II / I p_ IIIIIIIIIIII I � }�IIIIIIII IIII ,III111111 / I I ylllllllll / III ,, illlllillll � I // �Illllllll� I I JJIIIIIIIII I I I 4111111111 I I l IIIIIIIlI jl �IIIIIIIl Illlllll �/ IIIIIIII jllllllll I I Il AllllI1l I APPENDIX C SPRING CREEK INFORMATION 10/24/2018 StreamStats StreamStats Report Region ID: MT Workspace ID: MT20181024185627253000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 48.21155,-114.36034 Time: 2018-10-24 12:56:02 -0600 Basin Characteristics Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit CONTDA Area that contributes flow to a point on a stream 22.1 square miles PRECIP Mean Annual Precipitation 19.65 inches FOREST Percentage of area covered by forest 70.4 percent SLOP50_30M Percent area with slopes greater than 50 percent from 30- 0.5 percent meter DEM. https://streamstats.usgs.gcr4ss/ 1/5 10/24/2018 StreamStats Peak -Flow Statistics Parameters WRegion Basinc2o155o19F] Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit CONTDA Contributing Drainage Area 22.1 square miles 0.6 2470 PRECIP Mean Annual Precipitation 19.65 inches 14.6 62.1 FOREST Percent Forest 70.4 percent 20.4 99.1 Peak -Flow Statistics Flow ReportWRegionBasinc2o155o19F] PII: Prediction Interval -Lower, Plu: Prediction Interval -Upper, SEp: Standard Error of Prediction, SE: Standard Error (other -- see report) Statistic Value Unit PH Plu SEp 1.5 Year Peak Flood 34.6 ft"3/s 13.9 86.2 59.4 2 Year Peak Flood 48.4 ft"3/s 20.1 117 56.5 2 33 Year Peak Flood 55.7 ft"3/s 23.3 133 55.7 5 Year Peak Flood 92.2 ft"3/s 40 213 53.4 10 Year Peak Flood 133 ft"3/s 58.1 304 52.8 25 Year Peak Flood 185 ft"3/s 80.5 424 53.2 50 Year Peak Flood 230 ft"3/s 98.2 539 54.2 100 Year Peak Flood 280 ft"3/s 117 669 56 200 Year Peak Flood 334 ft"3/s 136 821 58 500 Year Peak Flood 405 ft"3/s 158 1040 61.4 Peak -Flow Statistics Citations Sando, Roy, Sando, S.K., McCarthy, P.M., and Dutton, D.M.,2016, Methods for estimating peak -flow frequencies at ungaged sites in Montana based on data through water year 2011: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019-F, 30 p. (http://dx.dol.org/10.3133/sir2Ol55019F) Low -Flow Statistics Parameters WRegionLowFlowcLS2o155019GI Parameter Min Max Code Parameter Name Value Units Limit Limit CONTDA Contributing Drainage Area 22.1 square 6.4 2520 miles SLOP50_30M Slopes_gt_50pct_from_30m_DEM 0.5 percent 1.87 67.5 https://streamstats. usg s.g Wss/ 215 10/24/2018 StrearnStats Low -Flow Statistics Disclaimers WRegion LowFlowGLS2015 5019G] One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors Low -Flow Statistics Flow Report W Region LowFlow GLS2015 5019G] Statistic 7 Day 10 Year Low Flow Low -Flow Statistics Citations Value Unit 0.546 ft"3/s McCarthy, P.M., Sando, Roy, Sando, S.K., and Dutton, D.M.,2016, Methods for estimating streamflow characteristics at ungaged sites in western Montana based on data through water year 2009: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019-G, 19 p.(http://dx.dol.org/10.3133/sir20155019G) Seasonal Flow Statistics Parameters W Region LowFlow GLS2015 5019G] Parameter Min Max Code Parameter Name Value Units Limit Limit CONTDA Contributing Drainage Area 22.1 square 6.4 2520 miles SLOP50_30M Slopes_gt_50pct_from_30m_DEM 0.5 percent 1.87 67.5 Seasonal Flow Statistics Disclaimers WRegionLowFlowGLs20155019G] One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors Seasonal Flow Statistics Flow Report W Region LowFlow GLS2015 5019G] Statistic Jul_to_Oct_14_Day_5_Yr_Low_Flow Seasonal Flow Statistics Citations Value Unit 0.893 ft"3/s McCarthy, P.M., Sando, Roy, Sando, S.K., and Dutton, D.M.,2016, Methods for estimating streamflow characteristics at ungaged sites in western Montana based on data through water year 2009: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019-G, 19 p.(http://dx.dol.org/10.3133/sir20155019G) https://streamstats.usgs.gWss/ 3/5 10/24/2018 StrearnStats Flow -Duration Statistics Parameters W Region Annual MeanDur2015 5019G] Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units CONTDA Contributing Drainage Area 22.1 square miles SLOP50_30M Slopes_gt_50pct_from_30m_DEM 0.5 percent Flow -Duration Statistics Disclaimers WRegion Annual MeanDur20155019G] Min Max Limit Limit 6.4 2520 1.87 67.5 One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors Flow -Duration Statistics Flow Report WRegion Annual MeanDur20155019G] Statistic Value Unit 20 Percent Duration 3.37 ft"3/s 80 Percent Duration 0.978 ft"3/s Flow -Duration Statistics Citations McCarthy, P.M., Sando, Roy, Sando, S.K., and Dutton, D.M.,2016, Methods for estimating streamflow characteristics at ungaged sites in western Montana based on data through water year 2009: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019-G, 19 p.(http://dx.dol.org/10.3133/sir20155019G) Annual Flow Statistics Parameters W Region Annual MeanDur2015 5019G] Parameter Min Max Code Parameter Name Value Units Limit Limit CONTDA Contributing Drainage Area 22.1 square 6.4 2520 miles SLOP50_30M Slopes_gt_50pct_from_30m_DEM 0.5 percent 1.87 67.5 Annual Flow Statistics Disclaimers WRegion Annual MeanDur20155019G] One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors Annual Flow Statistics Flow Report W Region Annual MeanDur2015 5019G] https://streamstats.Lisgs.gcr4ss/ 4/5 10/24/2018 StreamStats Statistic Value Unit Median Annual Flow 2.05 ft"3/s Mean Annual Flow 2.82 ft"3/s Annual Flow Statistics Citations McCarthy, P.M., Sando, Roy, Sando, S.K., and Dutton, D.M.,2016, Methods for estimating streamflow characteristics at ungaged sites in western Montana based on data through water year 2009: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019-G, 19 p.(http://dx.dol.org/10.3133/sir20155019G) USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated, all data, meta data and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. USGS Software Disclaimer: This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use. USGS Product Names Disclaimer: Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Application Version: 4.2.1 https://streamstats.usgs.go4ss/ 5/5 10/24/2018 Montana's Ground -Water Information Center (GWIC) I Site Report I V.11.2018 MONTANA WELL LOG REPORT Other Options This well log reports the activities of a licensed Montana well driller, serves as the Go to GWIC website official record of work done within the borehole and casing, and describes the Plot this site in State Library Digital Atlas amount of water encountered. This report is compiled electronically from the Plot this site in Google Maps contents of the Ground Water Information Center (GWIC) database forthis site. View scanned well log_(7/27/2009 3:38A4 PM) Acquiring water rights is the well owner's responsibility and is NOT accomplished bythe filing of this report. Site Name: FLINT ALLE N GWIC Id:141624 DNRC Water Right: 89177 Section 1: Well Owner(s) 1) FLINT, ALLEN (MAIL) 555 THREE MILE DR KALISPELL MT 59901 [12/15/1993] Section 7: Well Test Data Total Depth: 80 Static Water Level: 18 Water Temperature: Air Test * 50 gpm with drill stem set at_feet for 1 hours. Section 2: Location Time of recovery_ hours. Township Range Section Quarter Sections Recovery water level _feet. 28N 22W 2 SWI/< SEI/< Pumping water level 50 feet. County Geocode FLATHEAD Latitude Longitude Geom ethod Datum * During the voe// test the discharge rate shall be as uniform as 48.213311-114.360038 TRS-SEC NAD83 possible. This rate may or may not be the sustainable yield of the Ground Surface Altitude Ground Surface Method Datum Date wne//. Sustainable yield does not include the reservoir of the vi e/l casing. Addition Block Lot Section 8: Remarks Section 3: Proposed Use of Water DOMESTIC (1) Section 4: Type of Work Drilling Method: ROTARY Status: NEW WELL Section 5: Well Completion Date Date well completed: Wednesday, December 15, 1993 Section 6: Well Construction Details There are no borehole dimensions assigned to this well. Casino From To 17816 Diameter Wall Thickness Pressure Rating Joint Type -2 STEEL There are no completion records assigned to this w ell. Annular Space (Seal/Grout/Packer) Cont. From To Description Fed? 0 1181BENTONrrE Section 9: Well Log Geologic Source 111ALVM -ALLUVIUM (HOLOCENE) From To Description 0 1 TOPSOIL 1 18 CLAY SAND 18 71 CLAY SAND WATER 711 76 CLAY GRAVEL 76 80 GRAVEL WATER Driller Certification Al work performed and reported in this well log is in compliance with the Montana well construction standards. This report is true to the best of my knowledge. Name: Company: STINGER WELL DRILLING License No: WWC-325 Completed 12/15/1993 http://mbmggWc.n tech.edtYsglser\erM1/reports/SiteSummaryasp?gWcid=141624&agency=mbmg&regby=M& 1/1 10/24/2018 Montana's Ground -Water Information Center (GWIC) I Site Report I V.11.2018 MONTANA WELL LOG REPORT Other Options This well log reports the activities of a licensed Montana well driller, serves as the Go to GWIC website official record of work done within the borehole and casing, and describes the Plot this site in State Library Digital Atlas amount of water encountered. This report is compiled electronically from the Plot this site in Google Maps contents of the Ground Water Information Center (GWIC) database forthis site. View scanned well log_(7/27/2009 3:39:00 PM) Acquiring water rights is the well owner's responsibility and is NOT accomplished bythe filing of this report. Site Name: MEADOWS GARMEN GWIC Id: 82696 Section 1: Well Owner(s) 1) MEADOWS, GARMEN (MAIL) N/A KALISPELL MT 59901 [12/06/1972] Section 7: Well Test Data Total Depth: 200 Static Water Level: 90 Water Temperature: Air Test * Section2: Location 20 gpm with drill stem set at_feet for 10 hours. Township Range Section Quarter Sections Time of recovery_ hours. 28N 22W 2 SWI/< SEI/< Recovery water level —feet. County Geocode Pumping water level 160 feet. FLATHEAD Latitude Longitude Geomethod Datum 48.213311-114.360038 TRS-SEC NAD83 *During the vine// test the discharge rate shall be as uniform as Ground Surface Altitude Ground Surface Method Datum Date possible. This rate may or may not be the sustainable yield of the vine//. Sustainable yield does not include the reservoir of the vine// Addition Block Lot casing. Section 3: Proposed Use of Water DOMESTIC (1) Section 4: Type of Work Drilling Method: ROTARY Status: NEW WELL Section 5: Well Completion Date Date well completed: Wednesday, December 06, 1972 Section 6: Well Construction Details There are no borehole dimensions assigned to this well. Casino From To 119816 Diameter Wall Thickness Pressure Rating Joint Type 0 STEEL There are no completion records assigned to this w ell. Annular Space (Seal/Grout/Packer) There are no annular space records assigned to this well. Section 8: Remarks Section 9: Well Log Geologic Source 112ALVM - ALLUVIUM (PLEISTOCENE) From To Description 0 20 BROWN SANDY CLAY 20 100 BROWN CLAY 100 160 GRAVEL & CLAY 1601 200 SAND & GRAVEI Driller Certification All work performed and reported in this well log is in compliance with the Montana well construction standards. This report is true to the best of my knowledge. Name: Company: BILLMAYER DRILLING License No: WWC-5 Completed 12/6/1972 http://mbmg g W c.n tech.edtYsq lser\erM1/reportsISiteSummaryasp?gv icid=82696&ag ency=mbmg &req by= M& 1/1 10/24/2018 Montana's Ground -Water Information Center (GWIC) I Site Report I V.11.2018 MONTANA WELL LOG REPORT Other Options This well log reports the activities of a licensed Montana well driller, serves as the Go to GWIC website official record of work done within the borehole and casing, and describes the Plot this site in State Library Digital Atlas amount of water encountered. This report is compiled electronically from the Plot this site in Google Maps contents of the Ground Water Information Center (GWIC) database forthis site. View scanned well log_(7/27/2009 3:35:26 PM) Acquiring water rights is the well owner's responsibility and is NOT accomplished bythe filing of this report. Site Name: MEYERS MARK& GENEVIEVE GWIC Id: 82695 Section 1: Well Owner(s) 1) MEYERS, MARK AND GENEVIEVE (MAIL) 47 W CALIFORNIA KALISPELL MT 59901 [10/09/1984] Section 7: Well Test Data Total Depth: 186 Static Water Level: 121 Water Temperature: Air Test * Section 2: Location 40 gpm with drill stem set at_feet for 3 hours. Township Range Section Quarter Sections Time of recovery_ hours. 28N 22W 2 SE/4 SWI/< Recovery water level —feet. County Geocode Pumping water level 170 feet. FLATHEAD Latitude Longitude Geomethod Datum 48.213311-114.365449 TRS-SEC NAD83 *During the bine// test the discharge rate shall be as uniform as Ground Surface Altitude Ground Surface Method Datum Date possible. This rate may or may not be the sustainable yield of the vine//. Sustainable yield does not include the reservoir of the vine// Addition Block Lot casing. Section 3: Proposed Use of Water DOMESTIC (1) Section 4: Type of Work Drilling Method: AIR ROTARY Status: NEW WELL Section 5: Well Completion Date Date w ell completed: Tuesday, October 09, 1984 Section 6: Well Construction Details There are no borehole dimensions assigned to this well. Casino From To Diameter Wall Thickness Pressure Rating Joint Type -2 179 6 STEEL 177 186 5 STEEL Completion (Perf/Screen) From To 118615 Diameter # of Openings Size of Openings Description 177 3/16X4 SLOT PFS Annular Space (Seal/Grout/Packer) There are no annular space records assigned to this well. Section 8: Remarks Section 9: Well Log Geologic Source 112ALVM - ALLUVIUM (PLEISTOCENE) From To Description 0 8 BROWN SANDY SILT 8 16 BOULDERS IN TAN SILT 16 50 COBBLESTONES & GRAVEL IN TAN CLAY 501 132 CLAYBOUNDANGULARGRAVEL 132 148 GRAVEL IN SILTY SANDY CLAY 148 167 GRAVEL IN BROWN SANDY SILT 167 170 BROWN SILTY CLAY 170 175 GRAVEL IN BRWON SILTY CLAY. SEEP OF WATER 1751 186 COMPACTED ANGULAR GRAVEL AND SAND. WATER. Driller Certification Al work performed and reported in this well log is in compliance with the Montana well construction standards. This report is true to the best of my knowledge. Name: Com pany: LIBERTY DRILLING & PUMP CO License No: WWC-52 Completed 10/9/1984 http://mbmggWc.n tech.edtYsglser%erM1/reportsISiteSummaryasp?gWcid=82695&agency=mbmg&reqby=M& 1/1 10/24/2018 Montana's Ground -Water Information Center (GWIC) I Site Report I V.11.2018 MONTANA WELL LOG REPORT Other Options This well log reports the activities of a licensed Montana well driller, serves as the Go to GWIC website official record of work done within the borehole and casing, and describes the Plot this site in State Library Digital Atlas amount of water encountered. This report is compiled electronically from the Plot this site in Google Maps contents of the Ground Water Information Center (GWIC) database forthis site. View scanned well log_(7/27/2009 3:39A2 PM) Acquiring water rights is the well owner's responsibility and is NOT accomplished bythe filing of this report. Site Name: GRENFELL RAYA. GWIC Id: 82698 Section 1: Well Owner(s) 1) GREN FELL, RAYA (MAIL) ROTUE 3 KALISPELL MT 59901 [01 /01 /1922] Section 2: Location Township Range Section 28N 22W 2 County Quarter Sections SW'/< SW'/< SW'/< SE'/< Geocode Section 7: Well Test Data Total Depth: 40 Static Water Level: 20 Water Temperature: Unknown Test Method * Yield 7 gpm. Pumping water level —feet. Time of recovery_ hours. Recovery water level —feet. FLATHEAD Latitude Longitude Geomethod Datum 48.21194-114.362067 TRS-SEC NAD83 *During the b1Re// test the discharge rate shall be as uniform as Ground Surface Altitude Ground Surface Method Datum Date Possible. This rate may or may not be the sustainable yield of the wne//. Sustainable yield does not include the reservoir ofthe vine 3020 LIDAR NAVD88 8/12/2015 // Addition Block Lot casing. Section 3: Proposed Use of Water DOMESTIC (1) Section 4: Type of Work Drilling Method: Status: NEW WELL Section 5: Well Completion Date Date well completed: Sunday, January 01, 1922 Section 6: Well Construction Details There are no borehole dimensions assigned to this well. There are no casing strings assigned to this w ell. There are no completion records assigned to this w ell. Annular Space (Seal/Grout/Packer) There are no annular space records assigned to this well. Section 8: Remarks Section 9: Well Log Geologic Source 111ALVM -ALLUVIUM (HOLOCENE) Lithology Data There are no lithologic details assigned to this well. Driller Certification Al work performed and reported in this well log is in compliance with the Montana well construction standards. This report is true to the best of my knowledge. Name: Com pany: License No:- te Completed 1/1/1922 http://mbmggWc.n tech.edtYsglser\erM1/reportsISiteSummaryasp?gWcid=82698&agency=mbmg&reqby=M& 1/1 APPENDIX D ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Planning Department C/ r Y O F 201 151 Ave East -�_ Kalispell, MT 59901 fl Phone: (406) 758-7940 = Fax: (406) 758-7739 110A f -�:-� www.kalispell.com-planning PRE -APPLICATION FORM Project Name: o Y�c,VM e \j i e uS1 CCU ' c�trC� Applicant/Owner: j3'etA W Phone: Email: Surveyor/Engineer: �� cuy �,1 Phone: Email: Other persons present: Location of project: k Fnv e 4 11 Z 1)r v A_ Type of development: Sw Current zoning:3 1, Growth Policy land use designation: s �,lotn�lnctn�Si G�IW�IG�1 REVIEW PROCESS REQUESTED i KMajor Subdivision ❑ Growth Policy Amendment ❑ PUD - Full Application ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Zone Change ❑ PUD - Concept Application Annexation, Initial zoning ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ PUD - Label Application Notes: A000afi,czi, atidP- R-3 ;r PY�y} EXISTING CONDITIONS Physical FeaturY'eC baUbPdG Location and size of all natural and dnvironmental features including rivers, streams, springs, pond , wetlands and lakes. Topography: Topo required on plat? Soils: Geotechnical report required? S NO YE ! NOI,��, g hcl v)'O p � Water features: Special designation? Water rights? Shown on Setbacks required? plat? YES I NO YES I NO loo l to Ic+ I I'm Designated 100-year foodplain or floodway? Seasonal high ground water: 0-5 ft (no crawl spaces/basements) 5-10 ft (no basements) YES LC -OD YES / NO 5-10 ft (no basements) 15+ ft V)d y� q 5 UJI1 f dt'kwot Floodplain Delineation Floodplain Permit Wetland Delineation Wetland Other Permit YES I YES ! VO� YES NO YES X140 ZTI l06' 50W[01� EXISTING CONDITIONS CONTINUED... Human environment: Location and size of existing structures, improvements, easements, transportation infrastructure (buildings, power lines, towers, utilities, septic systems, wells) within 100 feet of proposed subdivision Existing structures: �x�sAi,.j SFR chL4, isiJ Easements: (list type and location) Meets setback requirements? 40' X 40' building pad provided? YES/NO Abuts arteriallcollectorlby-pass: (list) �-A e— .1 ❑ Entrance Corridor Standards apply ❑ Contours on plat ❑ Noise study required? YES I NO MDT approach permit required? County encroachment permit required? City curb cut permit required? YES1NO YESl1OJ YES 1NO Existing utilities (water/sewer lines, wells, septic): ❑ Protection easement ❑ Utility removal �!r, Water rights transfer Environmental Assessment required? YES 1 PARTIAL I NO SITE PLAN INFORMATION Desian Standards RNV width [Travel surface iGrades Cul-de-sac length 'j�-Firelpolice access Snow Removal Neighborhood connectivity ❑ Alleys: - Public or Private used Utilities N ater/sewer line connections shown as/telephone/electric lines shown Fire hydrants q/Lift station(s) `RC Sidewalks Landscaping Trails `C Boulevard widths Mail delivery site fp,�treet lighting: - Dark sky compliant - Standard — City maintained - Ornamental — Privately maintained Solid waste cy'Stormwater management - Stormwater Management permit required? - Preliminary drainage report required? Other ark SITE PLAN INFORMATION CONTINUED... Parkland, Landscaping and Recreation - Park land dedication required: i✓S ❑ City park >gHOA ❑ Other 'KBoulevard landscaping D 3 maintained .K Trails ❑ Parks Maintenance District required? Ei 1 NO (�U �'d It1 d �161 Variances Subdivision Variance required? Roads ❑ Lots YESt:"D ❑ Bloc ❑ Sidewalks ❑ Other REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS Tentative submittal date to planning office: \1 S' L A QA(— S Tentative Planning Board Workshop: N Tentative Planning Board Hearing el✓ 1 Tentative City Council Workshop: Tentative City Council Action date: t�` �i `sT �• t 1 +r 1 alp Tentative effective date: hk-11 d vGi 2— obi"', M �, NOTE: Dates outlined above are for information and planning purposes only and are subject to change based on the completeness of application materials, planning board agendas, outcomes of public processes and issues raised by the public, the planning board and the city council which typically staff have no control over. Plat attached: YES I6� Date: Submitted to Site Review Committee: YES !)� Date: Pre-app form given to applicant: ffE'S 1 NO Date: ley2.5-- h Planner's Name: Planner's Signature: ( _/i1.� w' J h4,,-- Date: h/J/75'J/ m a r do id3 CD. E o 'Qp r 0 0 7. Aid - t„• IS y $ r � m` _ I I m � I 79-faMr.faa 6� fa I G-` LVIJ 1 � I 16pxJ 9-no 1 I I '�-IBnr3wg19 _ I I I r r • 5 I � IT cAt4A-F.y +I � w /L^U f m O a' - D 0 f LU) a777 „ o d � C _ � ary q - wE� — r o 44 4'pa� suan � 12 12 l q . OACr_ ! t is uo� I + � I k I t I I a I t I � I I { I € I + — I 5 I N ID Mo v rn v 0 0 oLID o O 0 O O C L y E O N _ E o � O N � C > w T 6 5 0 �_ C o_ O N p N _ � O 8 U E I= o z 0 N 1/1 N y c N O N C J � a E _ 03 If co (6 N C N O y J 0 E�o��N U C O = � � o (6 O T (00 U 6 P T O 0- O W N C O�i U N Q w O - N m (E (� o a E —0 m m O O - > O C (6 -R O m O N N Q -O (O O C O N -.0 15 o o 6 m N E .O w o N N U y E y T ' .N o � � Oo 0 m C - O - s o0 L U T E 6 O N.Q� E E o 0 6 _ -6 w o N O o a ri a ow o E U N F O O 1 C O y O O- 0 O C ` Q T O �.a a E E n E 00 O a y o E O . E 0 U N N O N � NN o IL o U o m E.0 o 2 a 0 u .N0m � 0 C N Z O o Yn O a 4 tr t t I I } r �0 u ra 9 r r Y I L I I I L r � I l I � a I p� 105IJT1� — L 1 4 E N o Mo v rn o O `r O Lo O O 0 (D 0 C m E72 N U O a C w > O w T a) O_ U 0 N O N o c a o �REo U N �Em� �z NN�Eo6 fl- a) w E. E ' A 0 N o 0 0 v, o E � E a`� uoi r a) O a) a) o m a)o d v z a) � U a) C C a) T O O L O N Z N > N O m o a E CJ O N , � O a) O U U O 15 N IL Ii O �_ O N a) E N O 0 0 N O)� N L O a) i 2 O 0 a) N U N y (6 y V O O m C 6 O _ Y o U U a) .Q a) O E � � o o as a o a a o� o n as -o o E N O p a 0 a o w o E U N O F O 1 s O �.a E a E as o E a o E E o O � :E y E N O () N oo a) ll N o O E.00 a -O T U a) C N Z'=0-o Yn O C ==IIIYII1� r r r N CD Mo V rn v CD O o 0 0 0 0 (D N m 72 m > O a C > w T m O N � O 8 E R C N N 5 � m N m E o U) 1' O@ T N N V N N 00 N O z O 'o a N O� O O U C N O 1/) U � O U ZE O O N N U� C O m m a)o o d 0 N U m C C T O O� O U N 00 Q w o— m 2- m m> S m o m m � a E U U Q a 0 m N m O N N O T a - m O 15m 0 a) N Q -2 (O O O N 6 (U m rC ) a) Ua i - a m U a) y (6 y O O m C 6 O _ N OU U U m Y m O m.Q� E a) a) m a aa) a w o a) n m o a) > N Q O N p E 2 N ~ O m o n E 0 OO O O y C) U .� N N a i U Oi 8O0 N _ _ m m O 0 LL o� _ o ° 4 o a m U 0 a E 'N N m m Z L) o Yn O e as mPcmle Comp, d Md ` \ y L \ \\ \ 2 \ / \ ) e / / R G; \ ul ƒ �7 $ ; \\ / �U)§ J ± -_ �\ \ \ } ' iz ! _� /\ \ \ LU ® m\ ]\a G(f/ $2®\ :t«A 3(+5 � ]}%a z -�j0 \ {§ r j a) _. \ u -5 =!§I - - ) m a) =§JR Z � , \ ;)0 USDA United States Department of Agriculture N RCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana October 30, 2018 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https:Hoffices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8 SoilMap................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................ 11 MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana............................................................13 Aa—Alluvial land, poorly drained................................................................ 13 Pb—Prospect loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes..................................................14 Pf—Prospect stony loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes ....................................... 15 Ta—Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes ................. 16 References............................................................................................................19 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. ( ( & & _ ocmveg _ c2veg «cveg mcvog m2veg »cveg ,a=tlTT I [I//,a=m! ƒ \ _/ o 0g \ ) E \ 0 E e ( \q3 \ ) k y \ ) \ \ j k 2 � � \ ) ® ® e § _ iLn )) E ( ) 2\ [ \ ° °� a / ziiijc § ,azi7TT \,a= m! 09CM9 OCCEV29 _ _z� «EV29 mcvcg 0MV29 »cvcg ( \ & & U) , O a) .N N U) ,� mw 2 Z N �'� mo cn a)�m2 U) a) 4 =o_ m C o 2 Q 22 3 o m o' 0 '6 a) m �p O O E a) - y E a) 6 6 .52 ��—, C U) N E E — m O C CL N y Z m E a) O EL N �`° if N `' N a m (n m E O N-0 o y O Q O O E a) `° co Q =� O O N U o� a) N O E m y 3 L U) a) N -0 U) Z co Q U) Ey um)i O Ca) a) O 3 U a) LUc O` N U) 3 E 20 w m u m Cm 0 U a) L y C y m Q a) (6 a) O Q LL O O N O E T > L O O a) 7 U >+ N = U " O � V U) E% cL m Z N - C O L a) O a) '� a) m 7 w U O N O� w '6 m C Q N m E m _ a o ` ) a)a)C� N > `�� 2 O Q2 a) N a) m o N -a2 Q U U U) Em 3 J> O N Q'E O N— fl-> Q y t-0 C 0 E Q o m m m m� Z E Q o_ a) n m a) o N O .E y Q m E H y a) > °? a) m o s a) rn m m a) m a) E o 0 (D >' p 'O C y Q a) U) a) U m m 7 ,U) '6 N Q U) ._ O '6 T -0N O- O U) C m N y a) N E o) O a) > 3 U) a) .J 3 C m m U .O � U) Q m '� o 0 L O N E Q m y .30 E a) .c N '6 y E N 0— (6 O C E m U O a O p U 0 ".' 'O O> aa) m 0 a) m (O O '6 y O c EiF m 2) C m Q a) a) 7 rn y O C) U) '6 y U C N N Q a) 7 >+ c� a) E O .yi O O o 'Q a) C ON. C 'U) C U N a) O a) O m O n-2 46 0 7 o N m m L O W E— U U) a E u) > U O Q 'O Q m L H O U) U) U) N L O t H U. U) Q y d y R O Li U R L L Q Q >. CO 0 0 L d Q 0 ° m E O m o y O a o CL O U) cn Z > ° aR N L_ y O cn cn O ° a) R m U 3) .a Q 0 R N R 0 O C p O Z WR a 19 fVn 4 � R F 5 R m W J y a a p y o o ) w o a o a y N y Q E �, R y a) C Q a o a U C > C C a) > > Q Q w 3 R 3 y O > > 2O` w o o w Q _ `o o o a R R R R y C) LL 3 3 o T -O w > = FL O o y Q o cn 0 0 o cn cn p m o R m U o U (7 (7 > R C J J Mn a) a O m m U) R a) U) U) a in U) O U) w a R ❑ R +Vy� ■ y0 ❑ u ® �ap� <> { � yp� "V `} ! o o }� �O y Q y 0 r Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Aa Alluvial land, poorly drained 2.6 20.7% Pb Prospect loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 0.4 3.0% Pf Prospect stony loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 2.8 21.7% Ta Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes 7.0 54.6% Totals for Area of Interest 12.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate 11 Custom Soil Resource Report pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana Aa—Alluvial land, poorly drained Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vnI Elevation: 2,000 to 4,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Alluvial land and similar soils: 75 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Alluvial Land Typical profile H2 - 20 to 50 inches: stratified gravelly sandy loam to silty clay loam H3 - 50 to 60 inches: stratified gravelly loamy sand to coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 5w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Overflow (Ov) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW182MT), Bottomland (R044AP801 MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit. 25 percent Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Pb—Prospect loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vrx Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Prospect and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Prospect Setting Landform: Moraines Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: loam Bw - 6 to 14 inches: gravelly silt loam Bk - 14 to 24 inches: gravelly silt loam C - 24 to 60 inches: gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Pf—Prospect stony loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vs1 Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Prospect and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Prospect Setting Landform: Moraines Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Glacial till Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: stony loam Bw- 4 to 12 inches: stony silt loam Bk - 12 to 24 inches: stony silt loam C - 24 to 60 inches: stony loam Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches) 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Ta—Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vss Elevation: 1,800 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 135 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Tally and similar soils: 30 percent Blanchard and similar soils: 30 percent Flathead and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Tally Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Outwash Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam Bw - 8 to 15 inches: fine sandy loam Bk1 - 15 to 30 inches: fine sandy loam Bk2 - 30 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained it. Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy (Sy) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW183MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Dunes Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Flathead Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Typical profile A - 0 to 24 inches: fine sandy loam Bw - 24 to 34 inches: fine sandy loam BC - 34 to 44 inches: fine sandy loam C - 44 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No 18 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ n res/d eta i I/n ati o n a I/s o i Is/?cid = n res 142 p2_0 54262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepastu re/?cid=stelprdb1043084 19 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ n res/d eta i I/so i Is/scie ntists/?cid=n res 142 p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid = n res 142 p2_05 3624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:H www.nrcs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl 42p2_052290. pdf 20 Montana Noxious Weed List Effective: February 2017 PRIORITY 1A These weeds are not present or have a very limited presence in Montana. Management criteria will require eradication if detected, education, and prevention: (a) Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) (b) Dyer's woad (Isatis tinctoria) (c) Common reed (Phragmites australis ssp. australis) (d) Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) PRIORITY 1 B These weeds have limited presence in Montana. Management criteria will require eradication or containment and education: (a) Knotweed complex (Polygonum cuspidatum, P. sachalinense, P. x bohemicum, Fallopia japonica, F. sachalinensis, F. x bohemica, Reynoutria japonica, R. sachalinensis, and R. x bohemica) (b) Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) (c) Rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) (d) Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) (e) Blueweed (Echium vulgare) PRIORITY 2A These weeds are common in isolated areas of Montana. Management criteria will require eradication or containment where less abundant. Management shall be prioritized by local weed districts: (a) Tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobaea, Jacobaea vulgaris) (b) Meadow hawkweed complex (Hieracium caespitosum, H. praealturm, H. floridundum, and Pilosella caespitosa) (c) Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum, Pilosella aurantiaca) (d) Tall buttercup (Ranunculus acris) (e) Perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) (f) Yellowflag iris (Iris pseudacorus) (g) Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum, Myriophyllum spicatum x Myriophyllum sibiricum) (h) Flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus) (i) Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartics L.) PRIORITY 2B These weeds are abundant in Montana and widespread in many counties. Management criteria will require eradication or containment where less abundant. Management shall be prioritized by local weed districts: (a) Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) (b) Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) (c) Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esu/a) (d) Whitetop (Cardaria draba, Lepidium draba) (e) Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens, Rhaponticum repens) (f) Spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe, C.maculosa) (g) Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) (h) Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) (i) St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum) Q) Sulfur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta) (k) Common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) (1) Oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare) (m) Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) (n) Yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) (o) Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) (p) Curlyleaf pondweed (Potamogeton crispus) (q) Hoary alyssum (Berteroa incana) PRIORITY 3 Regulated Plants: (NOT MONTANA LISTED NOXIOUS WEEDS) These regulated plants have the potential to have significant negative impacts. The plant may not be intentionally spread or sold other than as a contaminant in agricultural products. The state recommends research, education and prevention to minimize the spread of the regulated plant. (a) Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) (b) Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) (c) Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) (d) Brazilian waterweed (Egeria densa) (e) Parrot feather watermilfoil (Myriophyllum aquaticum or M. brasiliense) United States Department of the Interior r D.B. FISH & WILDLIFE Fish and Wildlife Service SERVICE Ecological Services Montana Field Office F o 585 Shepard Way, Suite 1 Fh Helena, Montana 59601-6287 Phone: (406) 449-5225, Fax: (406) 449-5339 ENDANGERED, THREATENED, PROPOSED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES MONTANA COUNTIES* Endangered Species Act August 4, 2017 C = Candidate PCH = Proposed Critical Habitat LT = Listed Threatened CH = Designated Critical Habitat LE = Listed Endangered XN = Experimental non -essential population P = Proposed *Note: Generally, this list identifies the counties where one would reasonably expect the species to occur, not necessarily every county where the species is listed County/Scientific Name BEAVERHEAD Common Name Status Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies' Tresses LT Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C BIG HORN Mustela nigripes Black -footed Ferret LE BLAINE Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Mustela nigripes Black -footed Ferret LE Charadrius melodus Pi in Plover LT, CH BROADWATER Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies' Tresses LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C CARBON Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT, CH Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Zapada glacier Western Glacier Stonefly P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C Page 1 of 8 County/Scientific CARTER 1 1 Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat LT CASCADE Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Calidris canutus ru a Red Knot LT Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT, CH Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C CHOUTEAU Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT CH Calidris canutus ru a Red Knot LT CUSTER Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Sterna antillarum athalassos Interior Least Tern LE Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat LT DANIELS Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT, CH DAWSON Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Sterna antillarum athalassos Interior Least Tern LE Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat LT DEER LODGE Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout LT, CH Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Calidris canutus ru a Red Knot LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C FALLON Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat LT Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT, CH FERGUS Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C Page 2 of 7 County/Scientific Name FLATHEAD Common Name Am Status Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout LT, CH Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Silene spaldingii Spalding's Campion LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT, CH Coccyzus americanus Yellow -billed cuckoo (western pop.) LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Lednia tumana Meltwater Lednian Stonelly P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C GALLATIN Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies' Tresses LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT, CH Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C GARFIELD Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon LE Grus americana Whooping Crane LE Charadrius melodus Piping Plover LT, CH Sterna antillarum athalassos Interior Least Tern LE GLACIER Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT, CH Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout LT, CH Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Lednia tumana Meltwater Lednian Stonefly P Zapada glacier Western Glacier Stonefly P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C GOLDEN VALLEY Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Calidris canutus ru a Red Knot LT Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C GRANITE Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT, CH Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Salvelinus con uentus Bull Trout LT, CH Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C HILL JEFFERSON Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies' Tresses LT Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Ursus arctos horribilis Grizzly Bear LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C JUDITH BASIN Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx LT Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine P Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine C Page 3 of 7 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS FOR COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION ARTICLE L DECLARATION AND PURPOSE Section 1.1: Declarant: The undersigned is the declarant, Unique Realty Developer, Inc., original owner of all property encompassed in Cottage Gardens. The Declarant hereby declares for itself, its successors, and assigns, that all property in Cottage Gardens shall at all times be owned, held, used, and occupied subject to the provisions contained in this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions. The Declarant is to hold all rights and responsibilities of the future Homeowners Association as detailed in this declaration in order to care for and manage Cottage Gardens during the Period of Declarant Control. Section 1.2: Property: shall mean all residential lots and common areas in Cottage Gardens according to the final plat on record in the office of the Clerk on Recorder of Flathead County, Montana. Additional property to be added to Cottage Gardens shall also be subject to and comply with this declaration. Declarant has the right to modify property and easements during the Period of Declarant Control. Section 1.3: Purpose: The purpose of these Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions is to establish and maintain guidelines for developing, building, maintaining, living, and governing in Cottage Gardens in order to ensure and preserve attractiveness, safety, livability, and values for the benefit of homeowners and residents in the subdivision. This declaration is meant to ensure all properties maintain a minimum standard of care and quality and to guard against improper use of homes or property. Section 1.4: Term: These Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall be binding to all property within Cottage Gardens and shall transfer to all future owners. Section 1.5: Amendments: Shall there be a need to modify these Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, an amendment(s) signed by the majority of property owners in agreement of any changes must be recorded. ARTICLE II. DEFINITIONS Section 2.1: Architectural Review Committee or ARC means the committee formed to review project proposals for architecture, design, construction, landscaping, fencing, and exterior improvements to ensure compliance with this declaration and attractiveness and harmony throughout Cottage Gardens. Section 2.2: Articles of Incorporation shall mean Articles of Incorporation of Cottage Gardens Homeowners Association, as the same may be amended from time to time. Section 2.3: Assessments means the annual, special, and default assessments levied to meet the estimated financial requirements of the Cottage Gardens Homeowners Association. Section 2.4: Board of Directors means board of directors of the Homeowners Association. Section 2.5: Bylaws shall mean the bylaws of Cottage Gardens Homeowners Association which establish methods and procedures of its operation, as the same may be amended from time to time. Cottage Gardens CCRs Section 2.6: Common Area shall mean all property in Cottage Gardens subject to this declaration but excluding individual lots within the property. Common areas are for common use and benefit to all homeowners. Common area maintenance is the responsibility of the Homeowners Association. Section 2.7: Common Expenses means expenses to maintain Cottage Gardens as defined by Cottage Gardens Homeowners Association. Common Expenses include road and common area maintenance, servicing, conserving, management, administration, duties to comply with this declaration, and any other expenses deemed necessary by the Homeowners Association for care of Cottage Gardens. Section 2.8: Declarant means the undersigned, its successors, or assigns acting as the original owner(s) of the property. Section 2.9: Declaration means this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Cottage Gardens. Section 2.10: Design Guidelines are guidelines specified in this declaration meant to provide design standards for the exteriors of any lot or common area. Section 2.11: Cottage Gardens shall mean Cottage Gardens subdivision as defined on recorded plat. Section 2.12: Homeowners Association or HOA means Homeowners Association of Cottage Gardens subdivision Section 2.13: Improvements means all buildings, parking areas, fences, walls, landscaping, lighting, driveways, roads, trails, gates, signs, changes in any exterior color or shape, excavation and all other site work, including, without limitations, grading, road construction, utility improvements, removal or maintenance of trees or plants, and any new exterior construction or exterior improvement which may not be included in the foregoing. Improvements does not include turf repair or negligible improvements which will not affect colors or exterior appearance. Improvements means all current and future improvements. Section 2.14: Lot means parcel of land designated as a lot on the recorded plat. Section 2.15: Member means any person or entity holding membership in the Cottage Gardens Homeowners Association. Section 2.16: Owner means the person or persons, entity or entities, who own of record, according the real property records of Flathead County, Montana, fee simple title to a Lot, except that a person purchasing a Lot under contract for deed which is recorded in the records of Flathead County, Montana. Section 2.17: Period of Declarant Control means the period beginning on the date this declaration is first recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Flathead county, Montana, and ending on the earlier of: (a) the date which is 20 years later, or (b) the date on which the declarant has sold 90% of the Lots on all of the plats. Section 2.18: Plat means recorded survey of all or part of the property Cottage Gardens CCRs Section 2.19: Utilities: For the purpose of this declaration, utilities shall mean water, sewer, electricity, and natural gas. ARTICLE III. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Section 3.1: Homeowners Association: The Homeowners Association, or HOA, shall act as a homeowners association for Cottage Gardens. The Homeowners Association shall be established at the expiration of the Period of Declarant control as defined in this declaration or at a specified point in time which is written, recorded, and agreed upon between the majority of owners and the declarant. Section 3.2: Membership: All owners of lots within Cottage Gardens shall be members of the Homeowners Association. The owners of any lot shall automatically become members of the HOA until ownership of the lot(s) ceases for any reason. The Declarant shall be a member to the extent of the lot ownership of the same. (a) Contact Information: Upon acquiring ownership of a lot, owner shall immediately inform HOA of names and contact information. Owners shall be responsible for informing HOA of any change in contact information. Section 3.3: Board of Directors: At establishment of the Homeowners Association, there shall be inaugurated a manager of the HOA who will sit on the board of directors. The HOA may establish other directors as necessary. The Board of Directors is responsible for organizing and managing all duties of the HOA. The Board of Directors shall schedule HOA meetings from time to time as needed and shall manage expenses and assessments. Except for management and execution of obligations of the HOA, the Board of Directors shall have no other powers except those granted to all members. The HOA shall establish terms for members of the board of directors as they see fit. Section 3.4: Voting: There shall be one vote for each lot. Section 3.5: Powers and Duties: Subject to the rights and obligations of this declaration, the HOA will be responsible for the administration and operation of Cottage Gardens. (a) Common Areas: The HOA is responsible for maintaining common areas for safe use by all and visual appeal. Common areas include roads, common sidewalks, boulevards, and any other areas within Cottage Gardens that are not on individually owned lots. The HOA may grant easements, rights -of -way, leases, licenses and concessions through or over the common area for the purpose of accommodating minor encroachments by utilities, adjacent property owners, or other purposes that do not unreasonably interfere with the use of the Common Area by owners. (b) Utilities: HOA is responsible for coordinating maintenance and repair of underground utilities in common areas as needed. Owners are responsible for repair of utilities serving individual lots and at connections to main utility lines in the street. Owners are responsible for repair of utilities serving an individual lot, even if the location of repair is in a Common Area. HOA is not responsible for utility repairs at connections or to individual lots. (c) Common Expenses: The HOA is responsible for managing common expenses shared by all owners. Common expenses shall include road maintenance, snow removal in common areas, common area maintenance, servicing, conserving, management, administration, duties to comply Cottage Gardens CCRs with this declaration, and any other expenses deemed necessary by the Homeowners Association for care of Cottage Gardens. (d) Weed Control: Weed Control in Common Areas is the responsibility of the HOA. The HOA shall guard against noxious weeds as defined by Flathead County, Montana. The HOA shall control weeds and landscaping in common areas in order to maintain visual appeal throughout the subdivision. The HOA is not responsible for weed control on individual lots or on easements which are on individual lots. If an owner of a lot is not exercising weed control deemed necessary by the HOA, the HOA may take action on account of non-compliance with this declaration. (e) Road Maintenance: The HOA is responsible for maintaining roads in Cottage Gardens, including but not limited to snow removal, drainage features, pavement chip sealing, new striping, new pavement, and a means to accumulate funds for these expenses. (f) Sidewalks and Boulevards: The HOA is responsible for snow removal, weed control, and other repairs and maintenance on common area sidewalks and boulevards in order to maintain safety standards and visual appeal. (g) Easements: The HOA has the right to easements on individual lots for the purpose of inspections and maintenance of utilities or access to common areas. Except for underground utility maintenance, upkeep of easements on individual lots is the responsibility of the corresponding owner(s) of the lot. (h) Books and Records: The HOA is responsible for keeping updated books, records, documents, and financial statements and will make them available for inspection by Owners upon request. (i) Budget and assessments: The HOA is responsible for keeping a budget and estimating yearly expenses for Cottage Gardens. The HOA is responsible for setting and collecting annual assessments and managing money and expenses throughout the year. 0) Committees: The HOA may delegate duties and responsibilities to any committee or other entity that the HOA may choose to form. The HOA shall support and maintain an active Architectural Review Committee to review ongoing improvements in the subdivision. (k) Remedies for non-compliance to Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions: The HOA may establish and charge fines for violations of this declaration. The HOA has the right to take action for violations to this declaration to the extent allowed by law. 0) Meetings: The HOA is responsible for scheduling and holding meetings from time to time. All owners shall be notified of all HOA meetings not less than 30 days in advance of any meeting. ARTICLE IV. ASSESSMENTS Section 4.1: Assessments: Each owner of any lot, by acceptance of the deed to a lot, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the HOA assessments for common expenses. All types of assessments shall be payable to the HOA in installments and on dates determined by the HOA. The HOA shall notify owners of assessments, installments, and due dates no less than thirty (30) days prior to due dates. Cottage Gardens CCRs 4 Section 4.2: Annual Assessments: The HOA shall figure and collect annual assessments from each owner in an amount equal for each lot based on estimated common expenses for the year. Annual Assessments shall be prorated for lots which transfer ownership during a year. Section 4.3: Special Assessments: Special Assessments may be collected for capital improvements or other purposes agreed upon within the HOA and not included in annual assessments. Special Assessments shall be equal for each lot. Section 4.4: Default Assessments: Default assessments may be assessed against a lot pursuant to this declaration for the Owner's failure to perform an obligation under this declaration or because the HOA has incurred an expense on behalf of or caused by the owner. Section 4.5: Remedies for Nonpayment of Assessment: Any installment of an Assessment which is not paid within thirty (30) days after its due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum. The HOA or manager may bring an action at law against the owner personally and/or place and foreclose a lien against the property. No owner may not waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments or charges provided for herein by non-use of the common area or abandonment of their unit. If there is a default in payment of an installment of an assessment or charge, the HOA may accelerate the remaining balance of the annual or special assessment due by giving ten days written notice to the defaulting owner. Section 4.6: No refunds: No owner shall be entitled to any rebate, return, or refund of any amount of assessments paid to the HOA which are held as cash on hand or in any reserve account. Section 4.7: No Assessments for Declarant: Notwithstanding the ownership of any empty lot, the Declarant shall not be obligated to pay any assessments. ARTICLE V. PROPERTY USE RESTRICTIONS Section 5.1: Easements: The property will be subject to all easements shown on any recorded Plat. Section 5.2: Land Use: Each lot may be used for a single family home. There shall be no commercial use on the property. Rentals or home office or related uses which do not result in increased vehicular traffic shall not be considered commercial use. Garage sales shall be permitted, as long as no more than two such sales are conducted per year on any lot. Section 5.3: Rentals: No short term rentals shall be allowed. No lot may be used as a rental for less than 30 days at a time. Section 5.4: No subdivision of Lots: No Lot shall be further subdivided in any manner. Section 5.5: Structures: There shall be no more than one single family home on any lot. No basements allowed. Structures, including fences, must conform to setbacks and height restrictions set by Flathead County. Accessory structures for storage and recreation may be allowed per Flathead County Zoning regulations and upon approval of the Architectural Review Committee. Fencing must be in accordance with the design guidelines and must be approved by the Architectural Review Committee. Cottage Gardens CCRs Section 5.6: Dwelling size: Each home shall have a minimum of 1200 square feet of total living space, not including garages or outdoor spaces. Two story dwellings shall have at least 900 square feet of living space at ground level. Section 5.7: Garage: Each home shall have an attached garage for at least one car. Section 5.8: Driveways: Each home shall have a driveway paved in asphalt or concrete. Driveways shall be constructed so as to not interfere with drainage and shall include culverts where necessary. Section 5.9: Dwelling Construction: All dwellings shall be constructed on the lot with new materials. There shall be no trailer homes, mobile homes, modular homes, or prefabricated homes placed on any lot. Used materials in good condition, such as brick, stone, or timber beams may be utilized provided advance approval has been obtained from the Architectural Review Committee. All construction must conform to Local Building Codes and Fire Codes. All construction shall be completed within 12 months after the start of construction. Section 5.10: Drainage Control: Reasonable precaution shall be taken during construction and thereafter to prevent erosion and drainage problems. All disturbed soil areas shall be revegetated with a reasonable time is such a fashion to minimize erosion. Section 5.11: Utilities: All utilities shall be placed underground. The subdivision shall be connected to Evergreen water and sewer systems. No private water or sewer systems may be constructed. Section 5.12: Antennas, Poles, and other structures: No antennas, poles, cellular telephone towers, communication towers, or other structures shall be erected unless approved by the Architectural Review Committee prior to installation. Any satellite dish receiver must be 24 inches or less in diameter and shall not be visible from any road. Section 5.13: House numbers: Owners shall maintain house numbers which are clearly visible from the street. Section 5.14: Vehicles: All vehicles shall be parked in the garages or driveways, and no vehicle shall be parked on the common area except on a temporary bases. The parking or storage of campers, camping trailers, recreational vehicles, boats, snowmobiles, trailers, or unlicensed vehicles is prohibited unless in an enclosed garage or screened from view. Section 5.15: Animals: Dogs (no more than 2) or cats (no more than 2) or other small household pets may be kept, providing that they are not kept, bred, or maintained for any commercial purpose. No livestock or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred, or kept on any lot. Household pets must be contained upon owner's lot. In common areas, pets must be kept on leashes and cleaned up after. All pet enclosures shall be kept in the rear yard of a lot. No dog which barks and can be heard on any frequent or continuing basis shall be kept on any lot. Pets constituting a nuisance may be ordered by the HOA to be kept within the residence of the owner or ordered expelled from Cottage Gardens. Section 5.16: Signs: No signs, billboards, banners, or advertising devices of any nature except as may be authorized be the Architectural Review Committee shall be erected on any lot except for temporary For Sale signs. Cottage Gardens CCRs Section 5.17: Outdoor Lighting: All outdoor lighting must be dark -sky friendly. Lighting shall serve only the lot on which it is located. A reasonable effort should be exercised to limit light pollution and lights shining onto neighboring properties. Section 5.18: Landscaping: Landscaping of an entire lot must occur within 1 year of excavation or other ground disturbance following approval of landscaping plans by the Architectural Review Committee. Section 5.19: No Noxious weeds: No Noxious weeds, as defined by Flathead County, may be allowed on any lot or in any common area. Section 5.20: No hunting: No hunting of any kind shall be permitted in Cottage Gardens. Section 5.21: No fuel tanks: No fuel tanks, whether above or below ground, shall be permitted in Cottage Gardens. Section 5.22: No oil drilling: No oil drilling, oil development operations, oil refining, quarrying, or mining operation of any kind shall be permitted upon or in any lot, nor shall oil wells, tanks, tunnels, mineral excavations or shafts be permitted upon or in any lot. No derrick or other structures designed for use in boring for natural gas shall be erected, maintained, or permitted upon any lot. ARTICLE VI. OWNERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Section 6.1: Abide by Declaration: Agreed upon at acceptance of a deed to any lot, all owners and residents in Cottage Gardens must conform and abide to all portions of this declaration. Section 6.2: Homeowners Association: All owners are automatically equal members of the Homeowners Association as of its initiation. All owners have equal voting rights, however all votes must be collected at times given and through methods established by the HOA in order to be counted. (a) Contact Information: Owner is responsible for providing to the HOA current contact information and notifying the same of any updates to contact information immediately. Section 6.3: Assessments: All owners must pay assessments as levied by the HOA. Nonpayment of assessments is subject to action as allowed by this declaration and by law. Section 6.4: Property taxes: It is acknowledged that, for property tax purposes, Flathead County and the State of Montana may allocate to each Lot a fractional, proportional portion of the value attributable to the Common Areas. By accepting a deed to a Lot, the Owner agrees to this mechanism for property taxation and agrees to pay a proportional share, as allocated by Flathead County and the State of Montana, of the taxes attributable to the value of the Common Areas, while at the same time allowing the HOA to administer and control the Common Areas. Section 6.5: Maintenance: Owners are responsible for maintaining all structures, land, driveways, sidewalks, and any other features on the lot in working order and in appealing condition to promote safety, health, visual attractiveness, and value in the neighborhood. All expenses incurred as a result of maintenance shall be the responsibility of the owner. If reasonable maintenance is not being exercised in the opinion of the HOA, the HOA may take action for non-conformance to this declaration. Cottage Gardens CCRs Section 6.6: Improvements: Improvements are encouraged to maintain quality and increase value. Improvements that change the exterior of the home or the lot must be submitted to and approved by the Architectural Review Committee prior to initiation of any project. Section 6.7: Weeds: Owners are responsible for guarding against and treating weeds on any part of the lot. Section 6.8: Easement Access: Access must be granted to easements by the HOA or utility companies for inspections and maintenance. Section 6.9: Easement Maintenance: Easements on any individual lot shall be maintained by the owner of the lot. Section 6.10: Trash: Trash removal for each lot is the responsibility of the owners. No trash or debris shall be collected, piled, or burned on any part of any lot. The HOA may choose to organize trash pickup for the subdivision and add the expense to annual assessments. Section 6.11: Snow Removal: Snow removal on any driveway or private sidewalk is the responsibility of the owner. Driveways and sidewalks shall be cleared as needed to maintain safety for residents and visitors. Section 6.12: Landscaping: Landscaping shall be maintained regularly to promote health, safety, value, and guard against weeds. Landscaping on any lot is the responsibility of the owner. Landscaping shall be established and maintained on each entire lot to provide erosion control and visual appeal. Lawns and landscaping features shall be irrigated and mowed/trimmed as needed. Any improvements to landscaping which change the look or character of the lot shall be submitted and approved by the Architectural Review Committee prior to commencement of any project. Section 6.13: No noxious activity: No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. ARTICLE VII. DESIGN GUIDELINES Section 7.1: Purpose: The purpose of design guidelines is to provide guidelines and expectations for the exterior appearance and quality of all structures in Cottage Gardens to owners, builders, or any other entities involved in establishing, maintaining, or improving all areas in Cottage Gardens except the interiors of residences. The Design Guidelines are meant to ensure all structures in Cottage Gardens meet a high standard of quality and appearance in order to maintain pride and value throughout the subdivision. Section 7.2: Applicable Features: All exterior structures, landscaping, hardscapes, fencing, and all other exterior features, whether permanent or temporary, shall be subject to these design guidelines. Any exterior improvement that changes the appearance or quality of the lot or structures on the lot must comply with the design guidelines. Section 7.3: Enforcement: All new structures or improvements to exteriors must be submitted and approved by the Architectural Review Committee prior to commencement of any project as described in Article VIIL If any feature is created which has not been approved by the Architectural Review Committee, the HOA may take action for non-compliance with this declaration including but not limited Cottage Gardens CCRs to demanding removal of the unapproved feature, charging a fine for a violation, or taking action as allowed by law. Section 7.4: Architecture: Homes and secondary structures shall be of complementary architecture to other structures in the neighborhood. Section 7.5: Exterior Finishes: Exterior colors shall be pleasant and complementary to surrounding exterior finishes in the neighborhood. Colors in the subdivision shall be complementary, but not matching in order to achieve pleasing variation. The primary home structure on each lot must have at least two colors. Neighboring homes must have reasonable variation in color. No structure on any lot shall have a roof or exterior siding which is silver or metallic colored, reflective, or shiny. Only Class A or B roofing materials, as rated by the National Fire Protection Association, shall be allowed on all structures. Section 7.6: Secondary structures: sheds, canopies, or other yard structures must complement the primary structure in architecture and exterior finishes and must be approved by the Architectural Review Committee prior to construction or installation. Section 7.7: Landscaping: Each lot shall be landscaped completely to provide erosion control and visual appeal. A mixture of grass lawn, trees, hardscape areas, and garden areas is encouraged. Plant species natural to the area are encouraged. Section 7.8: Fencing: Fencing must comply with Flathead County zoning restrictions. No fencing is allowed forward of the front of the primary residential structure. Allowable fencing options include but are not limited to wood, chain link, and vinyl. Other fencing materials may be permitted at the discretion of the Architectural Review Committee. ARTICLE VIII. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Section 8.1: Committee and Purpose: An Architectural Review Committee (ARC) shall exist to review and ensure compliance with the design guidelines and property use regulations in order to ensure standards of quality and visual appeal throughout Cottage Gardens. During the Period of Declarant Control, the ARC shall consist of at least two members appointed by the declarant. (a) Members and Management: The HOA shall manage the ARC and establish membership practices and terms. Members of the ARC may be HOA members, or the HOA may choose to hire external consultants as members for the ARC. The ARC must be comprised of at least two committee members at all times. One member of the ARC shall be the main contact person and shall receive submittals and communicate on behalf of the ARC. Section 8.2: Scope: The Architectural Review Committee must review and approve of the appearance and materials of all structures on the exterior of the home on any lot. The ARC is NOT responsible for reviewing construction methods or practices for safety or compliance with building codes. The ARC shall not have control of or influence over anything on the interior of any structure. Items that must be submitted and approved by the ARC include but are not limited to: new homes, new accessory structures, fencing, landscaping, tree removal, and improvements, including new paint colors, to any of the same. ARC review for the foregoing is necessary for work on all lots and in all common areas. ARC approval is not necessary for planting small gardens, bushes, or trees. The ARC must review submittals based on this declaration and the design guidelines. The ARC may use its judgement and interpretation of this declaration while reviewing submittals. Wherein a submittal, or portion of a submittal, is not addressed in this declaration, the ARC may use discretion based on the appearance and values of the subdivision. Previous or existing construction or installation of exterior features or elements in the Cottage Gardens CCRs subdivision does not justify future approvals of similar elements, and each submittal will be reviewed individually and considered on a case by case basis. Section 8.3: Required Submittals: An owner, builder, or other representative must provide detailed plans for new construction or improvements for ARC review. Plans shall show location and the exterior appearance of the structure. Plans must include colors and types of materials. Plans and other necessary documents may be emailed to the designated ARC contact person. The HOA shall keep current contact information for the ARC contact person and shall share the information when requested. The ARC may request additional information or materials such as color or material samples if they feel it is necessary to review any given project. Section 8.4: Fees: The HOA may decide to charge a fee for Architectural Review to compensate for review time, meeting and submittal management, or outside hires if applicable. The fee and any details regarding the fee must be disclosed to all owners prior to being charged for any project. Section 8.5: Review Process: The ARC may choose to have regular meeting or scheduled meetings, but meeting may not be required in all cases. The ARC members may choose to communicate in person or in any other manner about submittals. The designated ARC contact shall collect submittal documents and disperse them to the committee using a method agreed upon by the committee. The ARC contact person shall respond to the submittal in writing with the conclusion of the review agreed upon by all members of the ARC. The conclusion may be approval, disapproval, or conditional approval. Commencement of any project shall not occur until final approval has been granted by the ARC and any applicable fees have been paid. Section 8.6: Timeline: The ARC shall have thirty (30) days from the date of submittal to complete the review process and issue a response. The ARC shall issue a written response within 30 days. Construction or installation of approved projects may begin when approval is issued provided any appropriate fees have been paid. Where disapprovals exist, future submittals for the same project shall be treated as new submittals and are subject to an additional 30 day review timeline. Where conditional approvals exist, work may commence after the required conditions are agreed upon in writing, providing any applicable fees have been paid. In an event in which no response is issued by the ARC within the 30 day review timeline, the project shall be deemed approved, however it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure it meets standards in this declaration. Section 8.7: Revisions to Processes: The ARC and the HOA jointly shall have the power to change, add, or modify ARC processes, applications, and practices as necessary. Any change must be written and recorded prior to initiation on new or changed processes. ARTICLE IX. MISCELLANEOUS Section 9.1: Limited Liability: Neither the declarant, the HOA, the ARC, nor their respective members shall be liable to any party for any action or for any failure to act with respect to any matter if the action taken or failure to act was in good faith and without malice. Section 9.2: Severability: Invalidity or unenforceability of any provision contained in this declaration in whole or in part shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of the declaration. Section 9.3: No Waiver: Failure to enforce any provision contained in this declaration shall not operate as a waiver of any such provision or of any other provision of this declaration. Cottage Gardens CCRs 10 Section 9.4: Entirety: This declaration shall be binding in its entirety and any article or section of this document cannot stand alone. Signature of Declarant Declarant STATE OF MONTANA, COUNTY OF FLATHEAD On this day of Date: 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary public for the State of Montana, personally appeared the declarant, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such person executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year first above written. Cottage Gardens CCRs 11 APPENDIX E COMMUNITY IMPACT INFORMATION A J aAV _ GI�Wsuiy� --- II o plI-�a1e 1 pisa'ndui U W ,a W a Q�rram^^ ^ _ t VJ 0— - tY I��IjjTT� 4Ims ly f Jjl+ n o �� 0 A 1Q Nam"n •7 �y t Fur 5 I O r� `f I 1 1 � -'y f0 � -- - - -- - 0 0 N O) OO M 0 N O N � M (D M N N O O 0 0 E O E N U > O a) C 5 o o O N N o V ! o � o N 1/1 N O m E J °E°° oU) o N goo 'm N y o O- o o OU — 6 N U �o�a�go N C O O E N m o 0 o a ml.y� w m O o U (6 U C C m O T O of O N O .0 N v / � N > � N O _ m o o �- E (� Q N L O N o o C O — - 6 U U ID O . m 0 N N Q -O (O O O N o 6 E O O N ` O N (n U 6 m N N i _m O N U N y E y T o ' .N � � O O o m C 6 O _ OU U U N Y m O m.- E "m a o a w o o n m o O o p Q N N N w N U N F O O ,Y r O y O O w O C 1/1 �.a E a E m o E o E oO o n y o E E O o � n a CV O > i 6 cy) oyy (6 U O N N L ,1/1 : N O > N LL N O O Oj LL'_O N N - O-O -6 T U 0 N 'N N 6 C N n CQ G Urfloo U) w H 00 N M N O U 0 _ L � � •L• a L _ !; H _ u.1i,711rg C'rr:a Irtnl Inc _ _ '- hr 1 � • l/r w w co 0 ti- Ili - � 1 - - v; 5 y � I , —r�,1.a.;�JeNJ•aJ-4ijP.�� N_ I .; 0 � I 0 0 oO O1 N O N (D N N O O O o �E �y72 mN E N > O a C >o w T m O o N O N 5 � 8 o m O U T a y i N O N U_ 03 a o N � a N co o o a C a — m Q O o O U O U w in m o 6 o O N N JN 2 O C m Om 2 a) o o a O U m P T O O L O 6 N O o m Q - O � U ��>�Eo m m aE c) o n o m s m v i o — I m m N o .N o N o T a) C O m 0 N N Q -O (O O C o N p m L'� U m � No. o o m m o, o m 6 a i O a O O o m C 6 O — OU U U m Y m O m'Qr m E m m o w o a -o a m a m a) n (13 o a) N a O N o m a o m o N F O O 1 O y o a o O C ` Q T O .Q E N E m o n E o= E m _n oO o n O E O ow o n a N O a) i � -6 m o m m `0 0 o m o 0 o o w U �_ '- O--O -O T m � � m s Yn O 10/31/2018 Kalispell City Hall to 575 Three Mile Dr, Kalispell, MT- Google Maps Go gle MapS Kalispell City Hall to 575 Three Mile Dr, Kalispell, MT Rathead Valley �fPAo O Foy, Mn. r, Community College Crane View Park 575 7 Mile Dri-Q) N M1� VS. N6 NGR7HRlDGE Drive 3.7 miles, 9 min Nickel Churlius Restaurant & Casino 9 O Conrad Memorial Cemetery 9 Intl Water Park Woodland Park Museum Q LL >=matd�aa Fmswkcad 0 .� aQ Bata is o gle MAR -LE VILLA Kalispell City Airport p © G Map data©2018 Google 500m, Foo via Sunset Blvd and State Hwy 9 min 424/Three Mile Dr 3.7 miles Fastest route, the usual traffic Ful via State Hwy 424/Three Mile Dr 9 min 3.4 miles Foo via US-93 10 min 4.2 miles 0 Evergr https://www.g oog le.com/maps/di r/Kal ispel I+City+ H al I,+ 1st+Avenue+East,+ Kal ispel I,+M T/575+Three+M i le+ D r,+Kal i spel I,+M T/@48.2029499,-114.3465517, l 4... 1 /1 10/31/2018 West valley Fire Department to 575 Three Mile Dr, Kalispell, MT- Google Maps Go gle Maps West Valley Fire Department to 575 Three Mile Dr, Drive 4.4 miles, 5 min Kalispell, MT West Valley 0 Fire Department Fs4 via State Hwy 424 Fastest route, the usual traffic Foo via State Hwy 424 and Three Mile Dr Foo via W Reserve Dr and Stillwater Rd Google 5 min 4.4 miles 6 min 4.6 miles 8 min 5.8 miles Map data©2018 Google 500 m L school costco wholesale O Walmarc Supei 0 NORTHRI HEIGH' https://vwwu.g oog le.com/maps/di rMlest+val I ey+Fire+ Department,+2412+ Farm+to+M arlet+ Rd,+ Kal ispel I,+M T+59901 /575+Three+M i le+ D r,+ Kal i spel I,+M T/... 1 /1 10/31/2018 Flathead County Sheriffs to 575 Three Mile Dr, Kalispell, MT- Google Maps Google Maps Flathead County Sheriff's to 575 Three Mile Dr, Kalispell, MT 575 3 Mile Brne1 E3 Ba(avia GOO& Batwla Mete , via US-93 9 min Fastest route, the usual traffic 4.2 miles via State Hwy 424/Three Mile Dr 11 min 4.1 miles via S Meridian Rd and State Hwy 11 min 424/Three Mile Dr 4.2 miles NORTHRIDGE HEIGHTS ME Lone Pine Grand View Park Drive 4.2 miles, 9 min Eit S, Nickel Chariles o R�staura�R&Cas'ina Q Conrad Memorial Cemetery der Park woodland a� Park 8 um Q s County Sheriff's a MAR -LE VILLA Kalispell Crty Airport — © s Mapdata©2018Google 500m- I https://vAAw.g oog le.com/maps/di r/Flathead+County+Sheriff s+ Department,+South+Main+Street,+ Kal i spel I,+M T/575+Three+M i I e+ D r,+ Kal ispel I ,+M T/@48.19... 1 /1 Ur ded States - census _ QuickFacts selected: Flathead County, Montana; Montana QuickFacts provides statistics for all states and counties, and for cities and towns with a population of5,000 or more. II Topics Flathead County, Montana Montana Persons under 18 years, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 22.1 % 21.8 % JL PEOPLE Population Population estimates, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 98,082 1,042,520 Population estimates base, April 1, 2010, (V2016) 90,928 989,414 Population, percent change - April 1, 2010 (estimates base) to July 1, 2016, 7 9 % 5.4 % (V2016) Population, Census, April 1, 2010 90,928 989,415 Age and Sex Persons under 5 years, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 5.9 % 6.0 % Persons under 5 years, percent, April 1, 2010 6.3 % 6.3 % Persons under 18 years, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 22.1 % 21.8 % Persons under 18 years, percent, April 1, 2010 23.4% 22.6% Persons 65 years and over, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 18.3 % 17.7 % Persons 65 years and over, percent, April 1, 2010 14.4 % 14.8 % Female persons, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 50.1 % 49.7 % Female persons, percent, April 1, 2010 50.2 % 49.8 % Race and Hispanic Origin White alone, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) (a) 95.3 % 89.2 % White alone, percent, April 1, 2010 (a) 95.5 % 89.4 % Black or African American alone, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) (a) 0.4 % 0.6 % Black or African American alone, percent, April 1, 2010 (a) 0.2 % 0.4 % American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) (a) 1.3 % 6.6 % American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, April 1, 2010 (a) 1.1 % 6.3 % Asian alone, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) (a) 0.7 % 0.8 % Asian alone, percent, April 1, 2010 (a) 0.6 % 0.6 % Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 0.1 % 0.1 % (a) Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, April 1, 2010 (a) 0.1 % 0.1 % Two or More Races, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 2.3 % 2.7% Two or More Races, percent, April 1, 2010 2.1 % 2.5 % Hispanic or Latino, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) (b) 2.6 % 3.6 % Hispanic or Latino, percent, April 1, 2010 (b) 2.3 % 2.9% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 93.1 % 86.5% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent, April 1, 2010 94.0% 87.8% Population Characteristics Veterans, 2011-2015 8,367 90,000 Foreign born persons, percent, 2011-2015 2.0% 2.1% Housing Housing units, July 1, 2016, (V2016) 47,659 497,756 Housing units, April 1, 2010 46,963 482,825 Owner -occupied housing unit rate, 2011-2015 70.9% 67.2% Median value of owner occupied housing units, 2011-2015 $231,500 $193,500 Median selected monthly owner costs -with a mortgage, 2011-2015 $1,354 $1,294 Median selected monthly owner costs -without a mortgage, 2011-2015 $387 $387 Median gross rent, 2011-2015 $788 $711 Building permits, 2016 316 4,781 Families & Living Arrangements Households, 2011-2015 37,106 409,394 Persons per household, 2011-2015 2.48 2.41 Living in same house 1 year ago, percent of persons age 1 year+, 2011-2015 87.3% 83.6% Language other than English spoken at home, percent of persons age 5 years+, 3.2 % 4.1 % 2011-2015 Education High school graduate or higher, percent of persons age 25 years+, 2011-2015 94.3 % 92.8 % Bachelor's degree or higher, percent of persons age 25 years+, 2011-2015 29.1 % 29.5% Health With a disability, under age 65 years, percent, 2011-2015 7.4 % 9.1 % Persons without health insurance, under age 65 years, percent 6 13.5 % A 14.0 % Economy In civilian labor force, total, percent of population age 16 years+, 2011-2015 63.3 % 63.6% In civilian labor force, female, percent of population age 16 years+, 2011-2015 59.51% 59.5% Total accommodation and food services sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 247,877 2,420,455 Total health care and social assistance receipts/revenue, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 1 572,470 6,469,475 Total manufacturers shipments, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 620,769 11,535,236 Total merchant wholesaler sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 1,283,451 _ 12,645,824 Total retail sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 1,515,895 15,623,573 Total retail sales per capita, 2012 (c) $16,543 $15,544 Transportation - Mean travel time to work (minutes), workers age 16 years+, 2011-2015 19.2 18.1 Income & Poverty Median household income (in 2015 dollars), 2011-2015 $47,851 $47,169 Per capita income in past 12 months (in 2015 dollars), 2011-2015 $26,388 $26,381 Persons in poverty, percent A 14.0 % A 14.6 % LN BUSINESSES Businesses Total employer establishments, 2015 4,015 37,2701 Total employment, 2015 36,507 375,041' Total annual payroll, 2015 ($1,000) 1,352,749 14,227,065' Total employment, percent change, 2014-2015 4.2% 3.1%1 Total nonemployer establishments, 2015 10,306 86,969 All firms, 2012 12,364 112,419 Men -owned firs, 2012 6,138 55,913 Women -owned firs, 2012 3,841 35,449 Minority -owned firs, 2012 472 5,578 Nonminority-owned firms, 2012 11,522 102,746 Veteran -owned firs, 2012 1,297 11,486 I Nonveteran-owned firms, 2012 10,420 93,393 ® GEOGRAPHY Geography Population per square mile, 2010 17.9 6.8 Land area in square miles, 2010 5,087.66 145,545.80 FIPS Code 30029 30 Value Notes 1. Includes data not distributed by county. This geographic level of poverty and health estimates are not comparable to other geographic levels of these estimates Some estimates presented here come from sample data, and thus have sampling errors that may render some apparent differences between geographies statistically indistinguishable. Click the Quick Info left of each row in TABLE view to learn about sampling error. The vintage year (e.g., V2016) refers to the final year of the series (2010 thm 2016). Different vintage years of estimates are not comparable. Fact Notes (a) Includes persons reporting only one race (b) Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories (c) Economic Census - Puerto Rico data are not comparable to U.S. Economic Census data Value Flags D Suppressed to avoid disclosure of confidential information F Fewer than 25 firms FN Footnote on this item in place of data NA Not available S Suppressed; does not meet publication standards X Not applicable Z Value greater than zero but less than half unit of measure shown - Either no or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the [owes interval of an open ended distribution. QuickFacts data are derived from: Population Estimates, American Community Survey, Census of Population and Housing, Current Population Survey, Small Area SHealth Insurance Estimates, Small Arez Poverty Estimates, State and County Housing Unit Estimates, County Business Patterns, Nonemployer Statistics, Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Permits. 2-3 In 2008, the tonnage of non -hazardous municipal solid waste (MSW) disposed of at the FCL was 111,064 tons. Of that total, the green box sites received 28016 tolls or 26 percent of the total waste stream generated within the County, which was transported to the landfill. Waste generation projections are discussed in detail in Section 3. 2.4 Landfill Remaining Capadty and Estimated Closure Date Based on information provided by the County, Table 2-1 presents the estimated capacity remaining as of July 2008. The projected closure date for the FCL is based on current refuse inflow and projected inflow and diversion rates, as well as remaining waste disposal capacity. Based on the factors the FCL could provide refuse disposal capacity through 2055. 2.5 Solid Waste Collection and Transportation Currently, solid waste collection is conducted through a number of private companies or is brought directly to the green box sites or landfills by customers. Evergreen Disposal services the Kalispell area (outside city limits); Glacier Disposal the Columbia Falls area; North Valley Refuse the Whitefish area; and Allied Waste (Republic) the Bigfork, Lakeside, and Somers area,. The City of Kalispell serves residents within their city limits. Refuse collected by these companies and the City of Kalispell curbside utilize typical front and/or side load garbage trucks. All County unincorporated areas not serviced by a private refuse hauler can dispose of their refuse at one of the twelve outlying green box sites or the FCL or can request collection at their home. 2.6 Waste Diversion There are a number of waste diversion activities being conducted in the County both by the District and private companies. While there is no State -mandated requirement for waste diversion and recycling in Montana, the District has taken the initiative to implement a number of voluntary programs for waste diversion, recycling and composting, including establishing bins for collecting separated materials at the landfill and green box sites. Several private companies also provide drop-off and buy-back recycling opportunities for a variety of materials, including paper, plastic, metals, lumber, and green waste. Due to prohibitive hauling costs relative to scrap value, glass is only accepted for recycling by one private company, New World Recycling, which creates a value- added landscaping and paving product for local markets. The following provides a detailed discussion of current waste diversion activities including composting. 2.6.1 Flathead County Landfill The County operates a number of recycling programs at the landfill. These programs include: ADDliance Recvcling Center Residents bring their unwanted appliances to the site, where any chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's) are removed. Once stockpiled, a subcontractor periodically crushes and bales the appliances, and transports the material to an off -site recycling facility, paying the County based upon market conditions for metals (approximately $25 per ton). In 2007, 1,845 tons of metals and white goods were recycled. Flathead County Solid Waste District Strategic Plan SYff Engineering Z:\PR0JECTS\F1athe2dVN 81006 Eng Services\Strategic P1an\PeporU\Strateg1c Rpt\Peport Fina[\Strategic Report\strategilc Plan_sep2009 - Clean,doc 10/31/2018 Real Property Inquiry Screen... Options Inquiry I Overview Unpaid Taxes Pay Taxes Tax History I Tax Bill I Disclaimer Pay Bill(s) Assr: 0625101 Year SD Inst Taxbill ate Du Status Tax Amt Penalty Interest Total Du 018 O1 1 01801687 11/30/18 Unpaid2581.61 0.00 0.00 2581.61 018 01 2 2018016871 5/31/19 Unpaid 2581.551 0.00 0.00 2581.55 Total du4 5163.161 0.001 0.00 5163.16 hftp://landpublic.flathead.nit.gov/1ipublic/?LAND—V\/eb—Public 1 /1 10/31/2018 Real Property Inquiry Screen... Options Inquiry Overview I Unpaid Taxes I Pay Taxes Tax History Tax Bill Disclaimer Assr: 0625101 Year SD lnst Taxbill ate Du Date Paid 1'ax Amt %id/Abat Pen/lnt Total Pai 018 01 1 2 0180168 5/31/1911 Not Paid] 2581.55 018 Ol 1 201801687 11/30/18 Not Paid 2581.61 2017 Ol 2 201701675 5/31/18 05/14/18 2566.59 2566.59 2017 01 1 201701675 11/30/1 12/01/17 2566.63 2566.63 016 01 2 201601636 5/31/1 06/01/17 2500.37 2500.3 016 Ol 1 201601636 11/30/16 11/09/16 2500.41 2500.41 015 Ol 2 01501605 5/31/16 05/31/16 2471.48 2471.48 015 O1 1 201501605 11/30/15 11/18/15 2471.54 2471.54 014 01 2 201401578 5/31/15 05/12/15 2156.36 2156.36 014 Ol 1 1201401578 11/30/14 11/18/14 2156.38 2156.38 013 Ol 2 01301561 5/31/14 06/04/14 1979.36 1979.36 013 O1 1 201301561 11/30/13 11/27/13 1979.39 1979.39 012 01 2 201258485 5/31/13 04/09/13 1869.86 1869.86 012 Ol 1 1201258485 11/30/12 11/08/12 1869.90 1869.90 012 Ol 2 01201555 5/31/13 %id 0.00 1872.63 012 O1 1 201201555 11/30/12 lbided 0.00 1872.68 O11 01 2 201101548 5/31/12 05/07/12 1824.07 1824.0 O11 01 1 1201101548 11/30/11 12/12/11 1824.09 51.9 1876.06 O10 O1 2 01001544 5/31/11 05/27/11 1771.31 1771.31 O10 O1 1 201001544 11/30/10 11/24/10 1771.34 1771.34 009 01 2 200957850 6/1/10 06/30/10 912.16 25.48 937.64 009 01 1 1200957850 4/30/10 06/30/10 184.31 727.8 6.76 191.0 009 Ol 2 00901501 5/31/10 %id 0.00 727.84 009 O1 1 200901501 11/30/09 11/04/09 727.87 727.8 008 01 2 200801391 5/31/09 01/28/09 678.36 678.36 008 Ol F1 00801391 11/30/08 O1/28/09 678.38 25.08 703.46 hftp://landpublic.flathead.nit.gov/1ipublic/?LAND-V\/eb-Public 1 /1 APPENDIX F AGENCY COORDINATION LETTERS 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t Department of Natural Resource & Conservation ATTN: Mr. Dan Cassidy, Acting Area Manager 655 Timberwolf Parkway Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Dan, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Evergreen Disposal ATTN: Travis Gregg PO Box 7158 Kalispell, MT 59904 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Travis, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Flathead Conservation District ATTN: Valerie Kurth 133 Interstate Lane Kalispell, MT 59901 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Valarie, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA Page 1 of 2 Wil Goodpaster - RE: request from TD&H Eng. From: "Valerie Kurth" <vkurth@flatheadcd.org> To: <wil.goodpaster@tdhengineering.com> Date: 10/25/2018 10:40 AM Subject: RE: request from TD&H Eng. Cc: "'Dean Sirucek"' <siruceks@aboutmontana.net> Hi Wil, I reviewed the information you sent to Ginger this morning. The main impact I see from this development is the potential for runoff into Spring Creek. Housing developments are often associated with increases in non -permeable surfaces and use of fertilizer (nitrogen) on lawns. Spring Creek is listed as impaired for aquatic life by Montana DEQ because of N and P concentrations. At a minimum, I recommend planting a vigorous riparian buffer along the creek (trees and shrubs) to absorb some of the runoff and fertilizers. We have a lot of information about good riparian buffers available in our office and on our website. From a 310 permitting perspective, the conservation district's jurisdiction is any project that will impact a perennial stream. Thus, we do not make jurisdiction decisions until a supervisor has visited the site as part of the application process. We recommend contractors submit an application if they are working near a stream. I will forward this information to Dean Sirucek, who is on the Flathead County Planning Board. Valerie From: Ginger Kauffman [gingerk@flatheadcd.org] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:17 AM To: vkurth@flatheadcd.org Subject: request from TD&H Eng. From: Wil Goodpaster [mailto:Wil.Goodpaster@tdhengineering.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 7:51 AM To: Ginger Kauffman <gingerk@flatheadcd.org> Subject: K18-072 Cottage Gardens Good Morning Ginger, I was hoping you could take a look at a lot layout drawing for a proposed subdivision we are working on and let me know if you see any potential impacts. Curious if this project will require a 310 permit but lot lines will maintain a 100 ft setback from Spring Creek. file:///C:/Users/wj g/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5BD 19D97tdhinctdhincpo 1001343 5... 11/5/2018 Page 2 of 2 Thanks, Will Goodpaster I Engineer TD&H Engineering 450 Corporate Drive, Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 p:406.751.5246 www.tdhengineering.com file:///C:/Users/wj g/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5BD 19D97tdhinctdhincpo 1001343 5... 11/5/2018 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks ATTN: Mr. Jim Willimas, Director 490 North Meridian Road Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Jim, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD&laEngineering 1 State Historic Preservation Office ATTN: Mr. Damon Murdo 225 North Roberts P.O. Box 201201 Helena, MT 59620-1201 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Damon, 40 6.751.52 46 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA Big Sky. BigLwid. Big History. Montana October 30, 2018 Wil Goodpaster TD&H 450 Corporate Drive, Suite 101 Kalispell MT 59901 Historic Preservation Mu.seicm. Outreach &Interpretation Publications Research Center RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION, FLATHEAD COUNTY. SHPO Project #: 2018103004 Dear Mr. Goodpaster: have conducted a cultural resource file search for the above -cited project located in Section 2, T28N R22W. According to our records there have been no previously recorded sites within the designated search locales. The absence of cultural properties in the area does not mean that they do not exist but rather may reflect the absence of any previous cultural resource inventory in the area, as our records indicated none. It is SHPO's position that any structure over fifty years of age is considered historic and is potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. If any structures are to be altered and are over fifty years old, we would recommend that they be recorded, and a determination of their eligibility be made prior to any disturbance. As long as there will be no disturbance or alteration to structures over fifty years of age we feel that there is a low likelihood cultural properties will be impacted. However, should structures need to be altered or if cultural materials be inadvertently discovered during this project we would ask that our office be contacted, and the site investigated. If you have any further questions or comments, you may contact me at (406) 444-7767 or by e-mail at dmurdo@mt.gov. I have attached an invoice for the file search. Thank you for consulting with us. Sincerely, Damon Murdo Cultural Records Manager State Historic Preservation Office File: LOCAL/SUBDIVISIONS/2018 225 North Roberts Street P.O. Box 201201 Helena, MT 59620-1201 (4a6) 444-2694 (4a6) 444-2696 FAx montanallis toricalsociety. org 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Kalispell Fire Department ATTN: Dave Dedman P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59901 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Dave, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Kalispell Police Department ATTN: Wade Rademacher 312 1 st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Wade, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Kalispell School District ATTN: Mr. Mark Flatau 233 1 st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Mark, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 Kalispell Waste Treatment ATTN: Mr. Del Phipps 2001 Airport Road Kalispell, MT 59901 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Del, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t Montana Department of Environmental Quality ATTN: Eric Sivers PO Box 200901 Helena, MT 59620 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Eric, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t Flathead County Sherriff's Office ATTN: Chuck Curry, Sherriff 920 S. Main Street, #100 Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Chuck, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 24, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t United States Postal Service ATTN: Josh Schlect, Postmaster 350 N Meridian Road Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Josh, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 31, 2018 West Valley Fire Department ATTN: Russ Sappington, Chief P.O. Box 5037 Kalispell, MT 59903 TD& d Engineering i t RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Russ, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA 450 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Kalispell, MT 59901 October 31, 2018 TD& d Engineering i t West Valley School District #1 ATTN: Cal Ketchum, Superintendent 2290 Farm to Market Road Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: COTTAGE GARDENS SUBDIVISION TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. K18-072 Dear Cal, 406.751.5246 tdhengineering.com TD&H Engineering is working on a subdivision of land that has been deemed a major subdivision. As a part of the major subdivision preliminary plat application process we are required to complete an Environmental Assessment for the project. The project is located between Heavens Peak Drive and Meadows Lane on the north side for Three Mile Drive in Kalispell, MT. We have enclosed a vicinity map, and a concept lot layout plan highlighting the proposed project location and scope for your reference. We are writing to request your agency's review and input regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Please notify us in writing regarding any impacts you see associated with the subdivision by November 5th, 2018. We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Please call if you have questions or wish to discuss the proposed project 406-751-5241. Sincerely, Will Goodpaster Engineer TD&H ENGINEERING Encl: Vicinity Map, Lot Layout plan MONTANA I WASHINGTON I IDAHO I NORTH DAKOTA I PENNSYLVANIA