Loading...
I3. Stillwater Bend PUD (Ord 1836) and PP (Reso 5964)CITY OF KALISPELL REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: Jarod Nygren, Director Planning Department 201 V Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/plannine SUBJECT: KPUD-19-01 — Stillwater Bend Planned Unit Development Zoning Overlay MEETING DATE: February 3, 2020 BACKGROUND: Spartan Holdings, LLC has submitted a commercial PUD on 25-acres of the larger 56-acre Stillwater Bend Placeholder PUD (B-2/RA-2 PUD). The development would serve as an extension of Kalispell North Town Center and will take advantage of neighboring infrastructure including Rose Crossing, new school site and water and sewer service. The applicant is submitting a PUD application for the commercial development on the eastern portion of the property bordering U.S. 93 North (Phase 1). Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of- way (including Rose Crossing extension) needed to access each lot, sewer and water extensions, storm water facilities and open space buffers adjacent the highway and river. The request would increase the commercial designation on the 56-acre property from 19-acres to 25-acres. The increase in acreage is primarily due to the storm water parcel that will be necessary to develop the property and is included in this phase. As part of the PUD application, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the 100-foot setback from U.S. 93 North to 50 feet and a reduction from the 200-foot setback from Stillwater River to a varying setback depending on the geotechnical analysis on the property. The residential component of the development within the RA-2/PUD Zone will be proposed as Phase 2 and will be part of a future PUD application request. The Kalispell City Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing January 14, 2020, to consider the application request. During the public comment portion of the hearing the applicant spoke in favor of the request and provided comment regarding five of the recommended conditions in the staff report. A motion was presented to adopt staff report KPUD-19-01 as findings of fact, and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Stillwater Bend Phase 1 be approved subject to the conditions. The Board had a lengthy discussion regarding the application request, including discussion about amendments to the recommended conditions. Following discussion, a motion was presented to amend condition number 4 language to state that "As part of the engineering review process, the City of Kalispell shall have the option to submit the geotechnical analysis to a third party for review". The motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. Another motion was presented to strike condition number 13, which required the extension of Rose Crossing to the property's western boundary. Striking the condition was in compliance with the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. A motion was presented to amend condition number 10, striking the word concrete and including the word impervious in its place allowing for different types of surfaces for the trail next to the river. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. A motion was presented to amend condition number 8, which would allow structures next to the highway to be up to 45 feet in height, rather than 35 feet due to the fact that the grade next to the highway was 10 feet lower. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. Lastly, a motion was presented to amend condition number 6 that would allow a monument sign up to 22 feet in height and 90 square feet per sign face. The motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. Further discussion concluded the PUD was appropriate and the original motion, as amended, passed unanimously upon roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve the first reading of Ordinance 1836, an Ordinance to amend section 27.02.010, official zoning map, City of Kalispell zoning ordinance 1677, by zoning certain real property described as 25-acres of unimproved land generally located in the E2 of Assessor Tract 1F in Section 25, Township 29N, Range 22W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Flathead County, Montana, more particularly described in the attached legal description, and zone the land B-2 (General Business) with a commercial PUD Zoning Overlay with 36 conditions, in accordance with the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan- It 2035 and provide an effective date. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time. ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1836 January 14, 2020, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes Staff Report Amended Application Materials & Maps c: Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk Return to: Kalispell City Clerk PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 ORDINANCE NO. 1836 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO. 1677), AND ORDINANCE NO. 1790, WHICH PREVIOUSLY APPLIED ZONING TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY CURRENTLY ZONED CITY B-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A", IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL GROWTH POLICY 2020, AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, council had previously approved Ordinance 1790 in June, 2017, by which Spartan Holdings, LLC petitioned the City of Kalispell that the zoning classification attached to the above described tract of land be zoned B-2, General Business, on approximately 19 acres of land, and RA-2, Residential Apartment/Office, on approximately 37 acres of land and that a Planned Unit Development overlay be attached to that real property; and WHEREAS, Spartan Holdings is now requesting the B-2, General Business, Planned Unit Development overlay be amended by increasing the B-2 zone from 19 to 25 acres; and WHEREAS, the property is located on the west side of Highway 93 North at the intersection of Rose Crossing and Highway 93 North; and WHEREAS, the petition of Spartan Holdings, LLC was the subject of a report compiled by the Kalispell Planning Department, Staff Report #KPUD-19-01, in which the Kalispell Planning Department evaluated the petition and recommended that a Planned Unit Development overlay be attached to the property as described above, pursuant to Kalispell City Code 27.29.020; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board held a Public Hearing on the matter on January 14, 2020 and recommended that a Planned Unit Development overlay be attached to the requested City B-2 zoning, pursuant to Kalispell City Code 27.29.030; and WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the proposal to attach a Planned Unit Development overlay to the described B-2 zoning, the City Council finds such zoning to be consistent with the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 and adopts, based upon the criterion set forth in Section 76-3-608, M.C.A., and State, Etc. v. Board of County Commissioners, Etc. 590 P2d 602, the findings of fact of KPD as set forth in Staff Report No. #KPUD-19-01. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 27.02.010, of the Official Zoning Map of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 1677) is hereby amended by designating the property described above as B-2, General Business, on approximately 25 acres of land, with a Planned Unit Development overlay with the conditions previously set forth in Ordinance No. 1790 amended as set forth in Section 2, below. SECTION 2. The Planned Unit Development overlay proposed by Spartan Holdings, LLC upon the real property described above is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Zoning Regulations: a) Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.029(3) — Allows a reduction of the entrance corridor highway buffer from 100-feet to 50-feet. 2. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: a. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 28.3.07(B)(1) — Allows a reduction in Stillwater River setback from 200-feet to the setback line determined by the geotechnical report, provided the setback cannot be less than 100-feet. 3. A 100-foot Stillwater River setback shall be restored with native riparian habitat. A landscape plan shall be submitted by a specialist (landscape architect, engineer, hydrologist, botanist, scientist, etc.) with experience in riparian area restoration. The landscape plan shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in addition to any other applicable governmental agencies prior to final plat. 4. be pfevided pfief to final plat. Ptiblie Wef-ks shall feview the additional analysis and feeemmend any o o eilia4ion bet -weer ht *w .As part of the engineeringreview view process, the City of Kalispell shall have the option to submit the geotechnical analysis to a third party for review. 5. Architectural renderings are required to be submitted to the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Building design shall be provided as listed below: a. Four sided architecture is required for all structures and buildings. Large, rectangular masses should be avoided by incorporating offsets in the wall and roof. A change in the plane of the walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. b. Entries should be a prominent component of the building face by providing an architectural covered or recessed entry with modified roof accent and increased usage of windows and trim. c. Franchise architecture maybe subject to modification to achieve the building style obj ectives. d. The design of gas pump islands shall be architecturally integrated with other structures on -site using similar colors, materials and architectural detailing. e. All roof mounted equipment, i.e. HVAC, should be shielded from all views. 6. Free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway shall be limited to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 22-13- feet in height and 960 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. 7. Lots within the development shall be limited to the sign standards applicable to the B-2 Zone, except for Lots adjacent to the common area, currently shown as Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15. Free standing signage on those lots shall be limited to 6-feet in height and 36 square feet per face and located to the west of the building constructed on the lots. 8. Buildings on Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15 shall be limited to 45-3-5-feet in height. 9. The storm water pond shall be designed in a way that it becomes a visual interest to the development. Chain link fencing surrounding the retention pond as the dominant fixture is prohibited. The developer shall work closely with the Parks Department and Public Works to come up with a design that is both visually appealing and meets the required safety guidelines. It is intended that when the project is developed the pond will act as a recreational feature and extension of the Stillwater River buffer, rather than a private maintenance utility facility. 10. An 8-foot imperviouseenefete path shall be constructed within the common area connecting the unnamed north/south City street to Phase 2 to the west. 11. 5-foot sidewalks shall be constructed within the private drives accessing Lots 1-8. 12. Direct access onto Rose Crossing shall be prohibited. 13. 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. 14. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 15. 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. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Water mains shall not terminate in dead ends. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto U.S. 93 North. 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. 22. Prior to final plat all mitigation required as part of the approved traffic impact study shall be completed. All improvements shall be reviewed and approved by either the Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or State of Montana. If infrastructure work has not been accepted, a letter stating that a proper bond has been accepted for the unfinished work by the appropriate agency is required. 23. 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. 24. 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 25. 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. 26. A property owners' association (POA) shall be formed and established for the common areas prior to final plat. The POA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas. 27. A letter from the Kalispell Fire Department approving the access, placement of the fire hydrants and fire flows within the subdivision shall be submitted prior to final plat. 28. A letter shall be obtained from the 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, common area, and highway buffer. 29. A note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. This district shall only be activated in the event that the property owners' association defaults on their park and open space amenity conditions. The taxes levied within the maintenance district shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by the Kalispell City Council. 30. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 31. All utilities shall be installed underground. 32. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 33. 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 the Stillwater River. 34. An approval from the Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained for work adjacent the Stillwater River. 35. The developer shall work with Eagle Transit to establish bus stop location(s) within the development. Bus stop location(s) shall be improved in accordance with Eagle Transit's requirements, which may include a bus shelter. This condition is waived if Eagle Transit provides a letter in writing that it will not serve the development. 36. Any water rights associated with the property shall be transferred to the City of Kalispell. The water rights shall be allocated proportionally for each phase of the development prior to final plat. SECTION 3. The balance of Section 27.02.010, Official Zoning Map, City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance not amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after 30 days of its passage by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA, THIS 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020. ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk Mark Johnson Mayor EXHIBIT A That portion of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, Flathead County, Montana and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the west boundary of U. S. Highway No. 93, and the north boundary of Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West; Thence on and along said west boundary of said U.S. Highway No. 93 the following three courses: S00°23'00"W, a distance of 820.1 feet; S13°24'42"E, a distance of 41.2 feet; S00°23'15"W, a distance of 468.4 feet to the south boundary of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 25; Thence along said south boundary, S89°54'41"W, a distance of 336.9 feet, more or less, to the centerline of the Stillwater River; Thence along said centerline the following three courses: N05°42'40"W, a distance of 34.5 feet; N28°29'43 "W, a distance of 168.1 feet; N60°23'12"W, a distance of 654.6 feet; Thence N14°57'54"W, a distance of 167.7 feet, more or less; Thence N00°02'06"W, a distance of 260.0 feet; Thence N89°59'53 "W, a distance of 15.0 feet, Thence N00°02'06"W, a distance of 400.0 feet to the north boundary of said Section 25; Thence along said north boundary, N89°57'54"E, a distance of 960.8 feet to the Point of Beginning. CITY OF KALISPELL REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: Jarod Nygren, Director Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning SUBJECT: KPP-19-02— Stillwater Bend Phase 1 Preliminary Plat MEETING DATE: February 3, 2020 BACKGROUND: Spartan Holdings, LLC has submitted Stillwater Bend -Phase 1, a major preliminary plat application on 25 acres of land within the B-2/PUD Zone. The application coincides with the Stillwater Phase 1 PUD, also being considered by the Council. Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of-way (including Rose Crossing extension) needed to access each lot, sewer and water extensions and open space buffers adjacent the highway and river. As part of the application, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the 100-foot setback from U.S. 93 North to 50 feet and a reduction from the 200-foot setback from Stillwater River to a varying setback depending on the geotechnical analysis on the property. The application was reviewed in accordance with Section 28.2.06 of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. The subject property is located at 2890 Highway 93 North, generally bound by the Stillwater River on the west and south, U.S. 93 North on the east and Northern Pines Golf Course and Falkor Defense on the north. The property can be described as 25-acres of unimproved land located in the E2 of Assessor Tract 1F in Section 25, Township 29N, Range 22W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Flathead County, Montana, The Kalispell City Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing January 14, 2020, to consider the application request. During the public comment portion of the hearing the applicant spoke in favor of the request and provided comment regarding five of the recommended conditions in the staff report. A motion was presented to adopt staff report KPP-19-02 as findings of fact, and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Stillwater Bend Phase 1 be approved subject to the conditions, as amended by the associated PUD. Board discussion concluded the preliminary plat was appropriate and the motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve Resolution 5964, a resolution approving a request from Spartan Holdings, LLC for major subdivision Preliminary Plat KPP-19-02, a major subdivision preliminary plat with 36 conditions of approval, located within 25-acres of unimproved land generally located in the E2 of Assessor Tract 1F in Section 25, Township 29N, Range 22W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Flathead County, Montana, more particularly described in the attached legal description. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time. ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 5964 January 14, 2020, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes Staff Report Amended Application Materials & Maps Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 5964 A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF STILLWATER BEND PHASE 1, DESCRIBED AS 25 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF ASSESSOR TRACT 1F IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, Spartan Holdings, LLC, the 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 January 14, 2020 on the proposal and reviewed Subdivision Report #KPP-19-02 issued by the Kalispell Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat of Stillwater Bend Phase 1 subject to certain conditions and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the city council of the City of Kalispell at its regular council meeting of February 3, 2020, reviewed the Kalispell Planning Department Report #KPP-19-02, 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-19-02 are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact of the city council. SECTION 2. That the application of Spartan Holdings, LLC, for approval of the Preliminary Plat of Stillwater Bend Phase 1, Kalispell, Flathead County, Montana is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Zoning Regulations: a) Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.029(3) — Allows a reduction of the entrance corridor highway buffer from 100-feet to 50-feet. 2. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: a. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 28.3.07(B)(1) — Allows a reduction in Stillwater River setback from 200-feet to the setback line determined by the geotechnical report, provided the setback cannot be less than 100-feet. 3. A 100-foot Stillwater River setback shall be restored with native riparian habitat. A landscape plan shall be submitted by a specialist (landscape architect, engineer, hydrologist, botanist, scientist, etc.) with experience in riparian area restoration. The landscape plan shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in addition to any other applicable governmental agencies prior to final plat. 4. be pfevided pfief to final plat. P41ie Wefks shall feview the additional analysis an feeemmend any o o ^i'ia-tio , between the twe.As part of the engineeringreview view process, the City of Kalispell shall have the option to submit the geotechnical analysis to a third party for review. 5. Architectural renderings are required to be submitted to the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Building design shall be provided as listed below: a. Four sided architecture is required for all structures and buildings. Large, rectangular masses should be avoided by incorporating offsets in the wall and roof. A change in the plane of the walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. b. Entries should be a prominent component of the building face by providing an architectural covered or recessed entry with modified roof accent and increased usage of windows and trim. c. Franchise architecture maybe subject to modification to achieve the building style obj ectives. d. The design of gas pump islands shall be architecturally integrated with other structures on -site using similar colors, materials and architectural detailing. e. All roof mounted equipment, i.e. HVAC, should be shielded from all views. 6. Free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway shall be limited to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 2245- feet in height and 960 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. 7. Lots within the development shall be limited to the sign standards applicable to the B-2 Zone, except for Lots adjacent to the common area, currently shown as Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15. Free standing signage on those lots shall be limited to 6-feet in height and 36 square feet per face and located to the west of the building constructed on the lots. 8. Buildings on Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15 shall be limited to 45-3-5-feet in height. 9. The storm water pond shall be designed in a way that it becomes a visual interest to the development. Chain link fencing surrounding the retention pond as the dominant fixture is prohibited. The developer shall work closely with the Parks Department and Public Works to come up with a design that is both visually appealing and meets the required safety guidelines. It is intended that when the project is developed the pond will act as a recreational feature and extension of the Stillwater River buffer, rather than a private maintenance utility facility. 10. An 8-foot imperviouseenefete path shall be constructed within the common area connecting the unnamed north/south City street to Phase 2 to the west. 11. 5-foot sidewalks shall be constructed within the private drives accessing Lots 1-8. 12. Direct access onto Rose Crossing shall be prohibited. • �EffW:�a'J.'�57:1.11f:7: 13. 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. 14. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 15. 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. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Water mains shall not terminate in dead ends. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto U.S. 93 North. 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. 22. Prior to final plat all mitigation required as part of the approved traffic impact study shall be completed. All improvements shall be reviewed and approved by either the Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or State of Montana. If infrastructure work has not been accepted, a letter stating that a proper bond has been accepted for the unfinished work by the appropriate agency is required. 23. 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. 24. 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 25. 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. 26. A property owners' association (POA) shall be formed and established for the common areas prior to final plat. The POA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas. 27. A letter from the Kalispell Fire Department approving the access, placement of the fire hydrants and fire flows within the subdivision shall be submitted prior to final plat. 28. A letter shall be obtained from the 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, common area, and highway buffer. 29. A note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. This district shall only be activated in the event that the property owners' association defaults on their park and open space amenity conditions. The taxes levied within the maintenance district shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by the Kalispell City Council. 30. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 31. All utilities shall be installed underground. 32. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 33. 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 the Stillwater River. 34. An approval from the Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained for work adjacent the Stillwater River. 35. The developer shall work with Eagle Transit to establish bus stop location(s) within the development. Bus stop location(s) shall be improved in accordance with Eagle Transit's requirements, which may include a bus shelter. This condition is waived if Eagle Transit provides a letter in writing that it will not serve the development. 36. Any water rights associated with the property shall be transferred to the City of Kalispell. The water rights shall be allocated proportionally for each phase of the development prior to final plat. 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 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020. ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk Mark Johnson Mayor KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMIVIISSION NIINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING January 14, 2020 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 Chad Graham, Kurt Vomfell, Joshua Borgardt, Rory Young, Doug Kauffman, Ronalee Skees and George Giavasis. Jarod Nygren represented the Kalispell Planning Department. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Skees moved and Vomfell seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the December 10, 2019 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. PUBLIC COMMENT — ITEMS NOT None. ON THE AGENDA BOARD MEMBER SEATED Rory Young recused himself, he is the representative for Spartan Holdings, LLC. KPUD-19-01 & KPP-19-02 File #KPUD-19-01 & 4KPP-19-02 — Spartan Holdings, LLC has STILLWATER BEND PHASE 1 submitted PUD and major preliminary plat applications on 56 acres of land within the B-2/PUD and RA-2/PUD Zones. Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of-way (including Rose Crossing extension) needed to access each lot, sewer and water extensions and open space buffers adjacent the highway and river. The subject property is located at 2890 Highway 93 North, generally bound by the Stillwater River on the west and south, U.S. 93 North on the east and Northern Pines Golf Course and Falkor Defense on the north. STAFF REPORT Jarod Nygren representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Report # KPUD-19-01 & #KPP-19-02. Nygren presented the project location, surrounding land uses, existing zoning, proposed zoning, City services and Growth Policy. Nygren pointed out the deviation requests including the river setback and highway buffer in detail. Staff noted that an applicant could request a deviation of the river setback provided scientific evidence warrants. In this case the applicant has submitted a Geotech report and there is a condition requiring riparian area restoration. Regarding the highway buffer they are requesting in order to provide a new local street within their development that mirrors the east side of the highway. It is not possible to construct a road with the 100-foot setback and river setback. In order to mitigate the reduction, staff has proposed conditions for limited signage, limited height, and architectural design parameters. Staff noted that the applicant had presented comments regarding a number of the proposed conditions. Staff noted that the applicants request to strike condition #13 would be a good decision because the subdivision regulations do not require what the condition is asking for because the right-of-way did not connect to an existing street or primary access to any lots. The right-of-way would be improved with Phase 2 of Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of January 14, 2020 Pagel the development. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-19-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Stillwater Bend Phase be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KPP-19-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Stillwater Bend Phase 1 be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Kauffman asked why the applicant did not include the extension of the roadway that is going to be platted as a right of way into Phase 2. Nygren advised staff would like this right of way to be platted in this first phase, because, for example, if the property in the north west corner behind the golf course were to sell, the owners would need to have a way to get to their property. Giavasis inquired as to why only 27 acres was used to calculate the buffer instead of 56 acres and the reason for the reduction from 100-foot to 50-foot. Giavasis also expressed concerns with reducing the highway buffer which had just recently been passed by the Planning Board and Council. Nygren explained that this is a unique piece of property and he used regulations which state that you can only provide the set back to the tract in which it is located, in this case, there are 2 tracts of land, Phase 1 is located within a tract of land that is 27 acres, not the entire 56 acres. The reason for the reduction is that the developer is trying to get a required 60-foot right of way into the development and with the 100-foot highway setback and river setback that would be virtually impossible. Staff pointed out that the entrance corridor regulations do allow for frontage roads within the setback, which this road acts as. Due to the requested reduction staff is recommending more stringent regulations in regard to height and signage to mitigate the impacts of the development and meet the intent of the corridor standards. Graham inquired about some of the changes in conditions that the applicant is requesting such as using impervious surfaces (condition No. 10) rather than concrete and adjusting the maximum building height from 35-foot to 45-foot along the west side of US 93 (Condition No. 8). Nygren explained that he didn't have an issue with changing the language to impervious, as it gives the ability for the developer to provide additional surfaces (brink, pavers, etc.). Common area along highway would still need to be concrete. As for the building height increase to 45-feet, the west side of US 93 is 10 feet below the highway so the height restriction would keep the buildings more in line with surrounding buildings heights along the highway corridor. PUBLIC HEARING Rory Young — Jackola Engineering — representative for Spartan Holdings, LLC — offered to answer any questions and briefly mentioned the changes in conditions that the board and staff had just discussed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of January 14, 2020 Page 12 MOTION - KPUD-19-01 Vomfell moved and Skees seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #1<-PUD-19- 01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Stillwater Bend Phase be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. MOTION — AMEND CONDITION #4 Kauffman moved and Giavasis seconded a motion to amend condition #4 to state: As part of the engineering review process, the City of Kalispell shall have the option to submit the geotechnical analysis to a third party for review. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — STRIKE CONDITION #13 Graham moved and Skees seconded a motion to strike condition #13 from the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION —AMEND CONDITION #10 Kauffman moved and Giavasis seconded a motion to amend condition 910 to state: An 8-foot impervious path shall be constructed within the common area connecting the unnamed north/south City street to Phase 2 to the west. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — AMEND CONDITION #8 Skees moved and Vomfell seconded a motion to amend condition #8 to state: Buildings on lot 1,5,9,12,14 and 15 shall be limited to 45-feet in height. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION AMEND CONDITION #6 Vomfell moved and Kauffman seconded a motion to amend condition #6 to state: Free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway shall be limited to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 22-feet in height and 90 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of January 14, 2020 Page13 ORIGINAL MOTION-KPUD-19-01 Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — KPP-19-02 Vomfell moved and Skees seconded a motion that the Kalispell City PRELIMINARY PLAT Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KPP-19-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Stillwater Bend Phase 1 be approved subject to the conditions, as amended. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS Nygren updated the board on the Pedestrian Plan, will probably come back to the board for a work session in March. NEW BUSINESS There will be a February Planning Board meeting and the position for Senior Planner is currently open. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:04pm. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Kalispell Planning Board will be on Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. and is located in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, 201 1st Ave East. Chad Graham President APPROVED as submitted/amended: Kari Hernandez Recording Secretary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of January 14, 2020 Page 14 STILLWATER BEND PHASE 1 PUD REQUEST FOR PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOMENT STAFF REPORT #KPUD-19-01 REQUEST FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT #KPP-19-02 KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT January 7, 2020 A report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request from Spartan Holdings, LLC for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and major preliminary plat applications on 25-acres. The two applications are being requested as Phase 1 within the larger 56-acre Stillwater Bend Placeholder PUD. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Planning Board for January 14, 2020, 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. A. Petitioner and Owners: Spartan Holdings, LLC 341 West Second Street, Ste. 1 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Technical Assistance: Jackola Engineering and Architecture 2250 HWY 93 South Kalispell, MT 59903 B. Background Information: Spartan Holdings, LLC has submitted a commercial PUD and major preliminary plat applications on 25-acres of the larger 56-acre Stillwater Bend Placeholder PUD (B-2/RA-2 PUD). The intent of the PUD on the entire 56-acre property is to create a mixed -use residential and commercial neighborhood in proximity to other services within the northern limits of Kalispell. Given the natural boundaries, the site has the ability to develop as a "community within a community," limiting its impact on surrounding land uses. The development would also serve as an extension of Kalispell North Town Center and will take advantage of neighboring infrastructure including Rose Crossing, new school site and water and sewer service. The applicant is now submitting a PUD application for the commercial development on the eastern portion of the property bordering U.S. 93 North (Phase 1). Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of-way (including Rose Crossing extension) needed to access each lot, sewer and water extensions, storm water facilities and open space buffers adjacent the highway and river. The request would increase the commercial designation on the 56-acre property from 19-acres to 25-acres. The I increase in acreage is primarily due to the storm water parcel that will be necessary to develop the property and is included in this phase. As part of the PUD application, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the 100-foot setback from U.S. 93 North to 50 feet and a reduction from the 200-foot setback from Stillwater River to a varying setback depending on the geotechnical analysis on the property. The residential component of the development within the RA-2/PUD Zone will be proposed as Phase 2 and will be part of a future PUD application request. The development is limited to the improvements noted above; however, the proposed development needs to take into consideration how it integrates with the overall development plan of the entire Stillwater Bend PUD. C. Location and Legal Description of Property: The subject property is located at 2890 Highway 93 North, generally bound by the Stillwater River on the west and south, U.S. 93 North on the east and Northern Pines Golf Course and Falkor Defense on the north. The property can be described as Assessor's Tracts 1F and 3A in Section 25, Township 29N, Range 22W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana and Assessor's Tract 2B in Section 24, Township 29N, Range 22W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. D. Size: The proposed development encompasses approximately 25-acres of the larger 56-acre Stillwater Bend Placeholder PUD. E. Existing zoning: In 2017 Spartan Holdings requested a PUD placeholder per Section 27.19.020(2)(b) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The project's land uses are based on the approved 2017 PUD Placeholder application and petition for annexation and initial zoning for the subject property, which proposed the zone the property as a mixture of B-2 General Business along U.S. 93 North, transitioning to RA-2 Residential Apartment/ Office to the west towards the river. The B-2, General Business, zoning designation is on a 19-acre portion of the 56-acre project site along U.S. 93 North. The B-2 Zoning District provides for a variety of sales and service establishments to serve both the residents of the area and the traveling public. The district depends on the proximity to major street and arterials and should be located in business corridors or islands. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as Commercial and Urban Mixed use on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. The RA-2, Residential Apartment/ Office, zoning designation is on a 37- acre portion of the 56-acre project site. The RA-2 Zoning District provides areas for residential development including multi -family housing and compatible non-residential uses of high land use intensity. This district would typically serve as a buffer zone between other commercial districts 2 and adjacent residential areas. The location of this district depends on proximity to major streets, arterials, and business districts. This district shall be located within or adjacent to business corridors, shopping islands or the Central Business District. The zoning would typically be found in areas designated as Urban Mixed Use, High Density Residential and Commercial on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. F. Proposed Zoning: The proposed zoning of the property will be B-2 and RA-2 with a PUD Zoning overlay. As mentioned previously, the request would increase the commercial designation on the 56-acre property from 19-acres to 25-acres. Accordingly, the RA-2/PUD zoning designation on the property would decrease from 37-acres to 31-acres. The increase in commercial acreage is primarily due to the storm water parcel that will be necessary to develop the property and is included in this phase. The contents of the Planned Unit Development Zoning overlay are further outlined in Section 1 of this staff report. G. Existing Land Use: The majority of the site has been historically used for agriculture purposes and is currently vegetated with grasses and ground cover. The relatively steep slopes along the Stillwater River are relatively undisturbed by past development and/or agriculture practices. The slopes are vegetated with evergreen trees, deciduous trees and significant underbrush. H. Adjacent Land Uses: North: One single-family residence, Northern Pines Golf Course and Falkor Defense/Sonju West: Stillwater River, vacant land and one single-family residence and appurtenant facilities (west side of river) South: Stillwater River and church East: U.S. 93 North, Kalispell North Town Center Subdivision, MDT maintenance yard and Armory. I. Adjacent Zoning: North: County SAG-10 West: County SAG-10 and West Valley Zoning District South: County SAG-10 and County SAG-5 East: City B-2/PUD J. General Land Use Character: The area proposed for development can be described as a mix of uses. The general land use character of the U.S. 93 North corridor through this area is single-family, golf course, commercial and light industrial uses intermittently placed along U.S. 93 North. Moving west and east from the highway oriented businesses are larger 3 undeveloped tracts or rural residential tracts of land that area suitable for future development, provided the necessary infrastructure is in place. K. Availability of Public Services and Extension of Services: Existing city infrastructure in this area includes city water and sewer lines within U.S. 93 North. These lines were oversized when put in place by Silverbrook Estates to serve future developments that would occur on tracts of land at the north end of Kalispell. The west side interceptor, recently completed, provides additional sewer capacities for development on the north end of town. A new traffic signal is also being installed at the intersection of Rose Crossing and U.S. 93 North once traffic warrants are met. The signal will be located at the northeast corner of the subject property. The signal will allow development within the subject property to enter onto U.S. 93 North at a safe, signalized intersection while at the same to providing a further extension of Rose Crossing to the west towards the Stillwater River. Sewer: City of Kalispell Water: City of Kalispell Refuse: Private contractor Electricity: Flathead Electric Cooperative Gas: Northwestern Energy Telephone: CenturyTel Schools: School District #5, Edgerton Elementary Fire: City of Kalispell Police: City of Kalispell I. EVALUATION OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: The intent of a PUD district is to serve as an overlay zoning district. The district shall function in concert with one or more of the underlying zones to provide a comprehensive, integrated development plan which will serve to modify the underlying zone and, where appropriate, subdivision standards with the intent of providing flexibility of architectural design and density as well as providing the option to mix land uses and densities while preserving and enhancing the integrity and environmental values of an area. The Stillwater Bend Phase 1 PUD would provide a layout of 25-acres of the larger 56-acre Stillwater Bend PUD placeholder. The PUD will be a commercial PUD and function in concert with the B-2 Zone. The Stillwater Bend PUD placeholder zoned the property B-2 and RA-2 and bound the property to a future PUD application. The remaining 31-acres within the RA-2 Zone would be submitted to the City at a future date as Phase 2. 4 Section 27.19.030(2), Commercial PUD, has the following standards applicable to this application: (a) Minimum size is two acres of developable area. The proposed development is 25-acres in size. (b) A commercial PUD may be established in areas zoned B-1 through B- 5, P-1 and H-1. The proposed zoning for the development is B-2. Sections 27.19.020(4) of the zoning regulations provide that the planning board shall review the PUD application and plan based on the following criteria: A. The compliance of the proposed PUD with the city growth policy and in particular density and use policies of the plan: The proposed development is located within the Urban Mixed Use land use category. The B-2 (General Business) Zoning District permits a variety of office, commercial and residential uses that are compatible with the Urban Mixed Use designation. Additionally, the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035 supports the project in the following ways: Chapter 4 - Business and Industry, Goal 2, new commercial development should occur in areas where public water and sewer are available. Water and sewer are located immediately adjacent the subject property within U.S. 93 North and can be extended into the proposed development. Chapter 4 - Land Use, Business and Industry, Goal 6, provide adequate areas within the community for commercial and industrial expansion and development. The proposed subdivision provides an additional area for commercial development. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - Encourage the development of compact, centrally located service and employment areas that provide easy connection between commercial and residential neighborhoods. The development is proposed at a developing intersection (Rose Crossing/U.S. 93 North) and provides easy connections via improved roadways and pedestrian facilities between the commercial development and residential development planned to the west. The development will also have access via automobile and s pedestrian facilities to the Kalispell North Town Center Development to the east, where additional employment, service, residential and school facilities are planned. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - A complete system of pedestrian and bike paths is important in mixed use areas. The development will include a path system along the highway, sidewalks throughout the development and paths along the river connecting the commercial and residential land uses on the property. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - Expand the depth of the urban highway commercial areas as mixed -use corridors, in order to provide an alternative to continued linear commercial development, concentrate more intensive uses along traffic arterials, improve business district circulation and transportation efficiency areas, by secondary street access, provide flexibility for larger development sites, and expand small business opportunities. The project design incorporates vehicle access directly onto U.S. 93 North through a westerly extension of Rose Crossing, which is an arterial roadway. Additionally, the development proposes a new unnamed City local street that will be extended southerly and intersect with U.S. 93 North at Lincoln Street. This new road will provide the ability to circulate through the subject proposed development without having to access U.S. 93 North. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - Avoid encroachment into established, intact residential areas There is not an established residential neighborhood in the project vicinity. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - Within these corridor areas, provide for higher -intensity, mixed -use areas roughly two blocks on both sides of urban highways. As distance from the highway increases, create a gradual transition into the residential neighborhoods by encouraging multi family, office and other compatible uses as a transition tool with sensitivity to compatible design. The proposed development creates a two block wide commercial transition from the highway to the multi -family development that will be proposed further to the west. The B-2 Zoning will provide for an area where the neighboring RA-2 Zone can have access to services that address their daily needs without having to make prolonged trips into other areas of the city. The B-2 Zoning will be in close enough proximity that it will be accessible for pedestrians and cyclists, reducing overall vehicle trips throughout the community. 10 Chapter 4 - Business and Industry (Urban Mixed -Use areas) - Allow a compatible mix of higher -intensity uses including of as well as some commercial and light industrial; medium and high density residential and public facilities. The B-2 Zoning District provides for a mix of high intensity uses suitable as a transition from the highway to the residential to the west. Chapter 4 - Business and Industry, Goal 5, large scale retail should be encouraged to develop in an architecturally compatible way and with integrated design rather than an isolated development. Staff is recommending as a condition of approval that the commercial development be required to have four-sided architecture. Additionally, any development will be reviewed by the City's Architecture Review Committee prior to building permit issuance. Chapter 1 - The Economy, GOAL # 1, Encourage an adequate supply of jobs, higher median income for those jobs, and stable, diversified economy. The proposed development will provide for a multitude of employment opportunities of varying types and income levels when completed. Chapter I - The Economy, GOAL #3, strengthen Kalispell as a regional retail center that strives to capture more local and out of County dollars. The proposed development will provide a potential landing spot for more retail business seeking to locate within Kalispell. Highway 93 North Growth Policy Amendment, Goal 1, gateway entrances to Kalispell that enhance the community through improved design. The development is proposing a 50-foot landscaped highway buffer along the properties highway frontage. The City's requirement is 100-foot wide, however, with their PUD application the applicant is requesting a reduction for reasons further outlined below. Additionally, the development will gain access to the highway via controlled access through a lighted intersection at Rose Crossing and a % movement only at the intersection of the highway and the unnamed City street. In conclusion, the proposed B-2 Zoning District with a PUD overlay is compatible with the Urban Mixed Use land use. The requested zoning district is also consistent with the above stated goals and policies of the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035. B. The extent to which the PUD departs from the underlying zoning and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest, and the mitigating conditions that the PUD provides to address the deviations; The applicant is requesting a departure in the zoning regulations in regards to the corridor setback off of U.S. 93 North. Below is further explanation of the deviations requested: 1. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.029(3) - The purpose of this section is to implement development standards applicable to gateway entrances to the community. The entrances are an important gateway to the community, and as such should be developed in such a way that they create an inviting and positive first impression of the community. The regulations require a 100-foot highway buffer along U.S. 93 North between N. Reserve Drive and the annexation boundary. The applicant is requesting that the buffer be reduced to 50-feet. Section 27.20.029(4)(b) states that the buffer area shall not encompass more than 10% of the gross area of any parcel as platted at the time of adoption of the regulation. In this case, the parent property being developed is approximately 27-acres. Accordingly, the maximum acreage required for the buffer would be 2.7-acres. A 100-foot buffer along the entire frontage of the subject property would require approximately 3- acres. The applicant's 50-foot buffer will encompass approximately 1.4- acres, or about 52% of what would be required. The standard is intended to protect the health, safety and welfare of traveling public by preventing or reducing traffic congestion and distracting visual clutter associated with developments along major thoroughfares. Despite the buffer reduction to 50-feet, the intent and purpose of the entrance corridor is being maintained and are in the interest of the public in the following ways: a) The applicant will be constructing a new north/ south unnamed City street connecting from Rose Crossing to the % movement aligning with Lincoln Street on the east side of U.S. 93 within Kalispell North Town Center. This new City street provides additional traffic/pedestrian circulation and could not be constructed if a 100-foot buffer were required due to the Stillwater River setbacks, as a city right-of-way is an additional 60-feet in width and there is not enough land area between the bank of the river and the highway with a 100-foot setback. b) Section 27.20.029(4)(c)(4) allows frontage roads within a required buffer area that limit number of accesses onto the highway. A frontage road would reduce the amount of landscaped area within the buffer area as much as 50 feet, 8 even if 100-feet were provided. In this case, the developer has chosen to construct a City street that functions as a frontage road, thereby limiting the amount of accesses on and off the highway while at the same time providing a 50-foot landscaped buffer along the highway. c) Staff is also recommending a condition that limits the amount of free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 15-feet in height and 60 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. This will further the City's goal of limiting visual clutter along the highway. d) Lots within the development shall be limited to the sign standards applicable to the B-2 Zone, except for Lots adjacent to the common area, currently shown as Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15, free standing signage shall be limited to 6-feet in height and 36 square feet per face and located to the west of the building constructed on the lots. e) The building pads along the highway are as much as 9-feet below the edge of the highways asphalt. This differential contributes to a feeling of separation from the highway, reducing the necessity of a 100-foot setback. fl Staff is also recommending a 35-foot building height max for those lots immediately adjacent the highway. This coincides with the height limitation of those properties adjacent the highway within Kalispell North Town Center. C. The extent to which the PUD departs from the subdivision regulations (if subdivision is anticipated) and the public works standards for design and construction applicable to the subject property, the reasons why such departures are deemed to be in the public interest, and the mitigating conditions that the PUD provides to address the deviations; The applicant is requesting a departure in the subdivision regulations in regards to the 200-foot setback off the Stillwater River. Below is further explanation of the deviation requested: 1. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 28.3.07(B)(1) - The intent of the setback is to limit any additional negative impacts to the Stillwater River, which has been designated an "impaired river". Montana Department of Environmental Quality has identified nutrients, siltation/ sediment, PCB's and temperature as the primary cause of impairment. The river banks and associated riparian area function as an important wildlife corridor. Lastly, the setback is in place to minimize potential property damage from a slide/sluff of the banks of the Stillwater River. The applicant has requested the reduction of the 200-foot setback to a varying setback depending on the geotechnical analysis provided. The developer can request a reduction of the setback by providing the Planning Department with sound scientific information and reasonable mitigation to address potential impacts. An analysis of the proposed reduction is provided below and the proposed reduction serves in the interest of the public in the following ways: a) A geotechnical consultation from Slopeside Engineering was provided by the applicant with the application. The geotechniocal consultation used a Geotechnical Investigation, also completed by Slopeside Engineering, as the site assessment relied upon for planning purposes. Based on slope analysis conducted, observations of subsurface explorations and experience with similar soil structures and slopes, Slopeside Engineering recommends permanent slopes no steeper than 3H:1V for slopes in the vicinity of the slopes leading to the Stillwater River. The gradual slope recommendation of 3H:1V takes into consideration the soil types, perched water in sand lenses, existing slide debris at the toe of slope, and the presence of the Stillwater River. Due to the uncertainty of the material below the toe of the slope and erosion patterns of the Stillwater River in this area, they also recommend an additional 20-foot setback from the crest of the 3H:1V slope. In Slopeside's opinion, the setback line presented is appropriate and will provide the opportunity to address small failures and provide adequate drainage and mitigation if the property develops. FIGURE 1 showing the proposed setback is below. The recommended setback from the geotech report is shown in blue and the 200-foot setback required by the subdivision regulations is shown in the green hatching. As you can see, in some areas the requested setback area is relatively close to the required setback and in some areas less. 10 If ~� 11 IFounnaRv . {' -F C OS"w, ROSECRc,5 SFUYEIF"il _ PRO"OSEO ZON111G p. �J &OI1NR.1(iY 1-11E I I _I Ex1571B6 1J- Pic - �r��re malra I'' $1IlSiING SURFACE SLOPES 10%TO2S% FIGURE 1: Geotech recommended setback (Blue Line), 200' setback green hatching. Based off the information provided by a licensed professional engineer, staff feels that the reduction based off of the geotechnical study is warranted. However, due to the fact that the subdivision is proposing a new City street in close proximity to the slope, staff is recommending a condition that a third party analysis/peer review of the study is completed prior to construction for long-term viability purposes. Although the slope stability concerns have been addressed, there are still concerns with the wildlife corridor and impairment of the river which is further addressed below. b) The river banks and associated riparian areas function as important wildlife habitat. The subject property has very little riparian habitat due to its history of farming. Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks generally recommends a 100-foot setback from rivers in order to preserve habitat. In this case, there is very little riparian habitat on the property and all existing riparian habitat on the property is being maintained. Staff is recommending as a condition of the project that a minimum setback of 100-feet from the river be maintained for wildlife. II Staff is also recommending that riparian habitat be restored within the setback in those areas where there is none. Riparian restoration is the reestablishment of riparian functions and related physical, chemical, and biological linkages between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. It repairs the diversity and dynamics of ecosystems degraded by human impacts. If you look at the map above, 100-feet is generally the same setback the geotech report is recommending. It should be noted that the setback area does qualify as a recreational amenity for the development and a trail system can be located within the setback. The 100-foot setback will provide for wildlife habitat, provide recreational opportunity, slope stability and will improve upon factors that contribute to the impairment of the Stillwater River, further explained below. c) As mentioned previously, the Stillwater River has been designated an "impaired river". Montana Department of Environmental Quality has identified nutrients, siltation/ sediment, PCB's and temperature as the primary cause of impairment. Generally, City development in of itself would lead to an improvement of this property's impacts on the Stillwater River in all facets listed above vs. the property's current use of farming. Historical and active farming activity all up and down the Stillwater River is the primary reason for the impairment. Staff is recommending a 100-foot setback and riparian area restoration in order to improve upon the factors leading to the Stillwater River's impairment. The 100-foot setback mentioned above for wildlife will also function as a filter for runoff, silt/ sediment, shade, etc. before entering the water body. This setback in coordination with the City's storm water management program will improve the properties current impacts, even with a reduction from the 200-foot setback currently required. D. The overall internal integrity of the PUD including the appropriate use of internal design elements, the use of buffers between different land uses, the use of transitions between uses of greater and lesser intensity, the use of enhanced design features to provide connectedness for both vehicle and pedestrian traffic throughout the PUD and the use of innovative and traditional design to foster more livable neighborhoods; Rose Crossing is being extended westerly from the intersection of U.S. 93 North to the subdivision's western boundary. The intersection of Rose Crossing and U.S. 93 North is developing into a major intersection that will accommodate the type of development proposed in an area designated as Urban Mixed Use, 12 similar to Kalispell North Town Center to the east. Design features such as; four-sided architecture, landscape features, downward lighting, limited freestanding signage, increased greenspace, riparian restoration and bike paths are being recommended by staff. The commercial development proposed within this Phase 1 will function as a commercial center that transitions into the high density residential that will develop to the west. The development will provide for an area that the neighboring high -density residential can have access to services that address their daily needs without having to make prolonged trips into other areas of the city. The commercial development will be in close enough proximity to other residential uses that it will be accessible for pedestrians and cyclists, reducing overall vehicle trips throughout the community. The development meets the city's goal of providing adequate areas in the community for commercial development that meets the needs of present and future business in terms of cost, type, design and location. The applicant will also be constructing a new north/south unnamed City street connecting from Rose Crossing extension to the 3/4 movement aligning with Lincoln Street on the east side of U.S. 93 within Kalispell North Town Center. This unnamed City street will function as a frontage road, thereby limiting the amount of accesses on and off the highway. At this time, it is important to consider how Phase 1 and Phase 2 will connect. There is 1.4-acres of open space/buffer area adjacent the highway that functions as a 50-foot wide buffer between the development and the highway and will include a trail system tying into the Rose Crossing extension and new unnamed north/ south City street. Further, the trail system proposed within the river setback will connect into the City Streets providing a seamless connection between the two phases. E. The nature and extent of the common open space in the planned development project, the reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of the common open space and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan; As Phase 1 is commercial no open space is required. However, there is 1.4- acres of open space/buffer area adjacent the highway that functions as a 50- foot wide buffer between the development and the highway and will include a trail system tying into the Rose Crossing extension and new unnamed north/ south City street. Further, the trail system proposed within the river setback will connect into the City Streets and provide a recreational amenity for those working and residing in the area. Additional recreational components to the property will be further considered with Phase 2 of the development when the residential component of the property is requested. As currently proposed, a future property owners' association would be set up to maintain the open space and other park areas within the future subdivisions on the project site. These areas include all open space areas shown on the 13 PUD plan. It is therefore imperative that these areas be well maintained for the visual aspect of the Stillwater Bend project from adjacent properties and the highway, the safety of the pedestrian paths and the on -going functionality of the storm water facilities. Therefore, staff recommends that a note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. F. The manner in which said plan does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic and further the amenities of light or air, recreation and visual enjoyment; Public service facilities and infrastructure are adequate for the development of this site. Any new improvements to the property such as internal roads, traffic lights, storm water retention and water/ sewer connections would be installed in accordance with city policies and standards at the developers' expense. A Traffic Impact Study was completed by the developer and outlined below. Water: Water to the subdivision will be provided by the City of Kalispell. The applicant will extend water service to the property from U.S. 93 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 U.S. 93 North. The sewer 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 sewer system to accommodate this subdivision. Access and Roads: The subdivisions main entrance will be off Rose Crossing, which will be extended westerly and be improved to arterial standards. The applicant will also be constructing a new north/ south unnamed City street connecting from Rose Crossing extension to the % movement aligning with Lincoln Street on the east side of U.S. 93 within Kalispell North Town Center. This unnamed City street will function as a frontage road, thereby limiting the amount of accesses on and off the highway. Control over vehicular traffic: The developer hired Abelin Traffic Services to prepare a traffic impact study for the proposed project. The traffic impact study analyzed the full buildout of the proposed development, including Phase 1 and Phase 2. The traffic study was prepared using standard techniques to forecast traffic volumes and operations at 3 nearby study intersections. The following intersections were analyzed in the study: 14 1. U.S. 93 and Rose Crossing 2. U.S. 93 and Lincoln Street 3. U.S. 93 and Whitefish Stage As proposed, the Stillwater Bend Subdivision will not create any new roadway capacity problems that have not already been identified and planned for mitigation with the Kalispell North Town Center project. The development has provided for individual automobiles, pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the PUD proposal. To provide for a greater diversity of transportation options planning staff would recommend that the developer work with Eagle Transit to establish at least one bus stop location in the project site. Eagle Transit provides transportation in a safe manner for the transportation -disadvantaged and the general public of Flathead County and has a fixed route within the county and has several bus stops within the City of Kalispell. With this development it may be time for Eagle Transit to consider a stop in the project area to serve the residents on this end of town, as upon completion of this development there will be a significant number of residents at the north end of town. Storm Water: Roadways will be paved and curb and gutter will channel runoff to designed low points, where storm water will be collected and routed to a storm water pond. Storm water runoff from the site shall be managed and constructed per the City of Kalispell Construction and Design Guidelines and storm water management program. Final design will be approved by Kalispell Public Works Department prior to building permit issuance. Additionally, prior to receiving a building permit the developer will need to submit a construction storm water management plan to the Public Works Department. This plan will need to show how storm water will be treated and where it will be directed during construction activities. Schools: The property is within the boundaries of School District #5 and Edgerton Elementary. As the development is commercial there will not be an impact on the schools as far as additional students. Phase 2 will have a potential impact on the school district because of the residences that will be constructed, however, 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. Police: Police services will be provided by the 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 15 adequate access for fire protection. Fire station 62 is located approximately 1.5 miles away providing good response time. The City of Kalispell requires developments to complete a minimum of two- thirds of the necessary public infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, etc.) prior to filing the final plat for subsequent subdivisions. This has been included in the list of conditions to insure that, prior to issuing a building permit on a new lot, there is access which meets the fire department's minimum standards as well as adequate water and sewer services are available. G. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established; The proposal is compliant with the Urban Mixed Use land use category on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. The character in which the development is located is commercial, light industrial and open space (Golf Course). The addition of development is complimentary to the established commercial/industrial uses to the north, south and east. The proposed land use conforms with the B-2 Zoning on the property currently. H. In the case of a plan which proposes development over a period of years, the sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect and maintain the integrity of the plan which finding shall be made only after consultation with the city attorney; At this time only Phase 1 of the development is proposed. Section 27.19.020(10), Abandonment and Expiration, outlines procedures to be followed when the PUD fails to comply with a completion schedule. Part of the requirements of the PUD is that the developer would enter into an agreement with the City of Kalispell to adequately insure that the overall integrity of the development, the installation of required infrastructure, architectural integrity and proposed amenities, are accomplished as proposed. A recommended condition of approval for the PUD would require this agreement be in place prior to filing the final plat for the first phase of the project. I. Conformity with all applicable provisions of this chapter. No other specific deviations from the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance or Subdivision Regulations can be identified based upon the information submitted with the application other than those addressed in this report. 16 II. Evaluation Based on Statutory Criteria This report evaluates the request in accordance with state and local regulations. The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by Section 27.29.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance and 76-2-303 M.C.A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-304, M.C.A. 1. Is the zoning regulation made in accordance with the growth polices See Section 1 (A) above. 2. Does the zoning regulation consider the effect on motorized and non - motorized transportation systems? The developer hired Abelin Traffic Services to prepare a traffic impact study for the proposed project. The traffic impact study analyzed the full buildout of the proposed development, including Phase 1 and Phase 2. The traffic study was prepared using standard techniques to forecast traffic volumes and operations at 3 nearby study intersections. The following intersections were analyzed in the study: 1. U.S. 93 and Rose Crossing 2. U.S. 93 and Lincoln Street 3. U.S. 93 and Whitefish Stage As proposed, the Stillwater Bend Subdivision will not create any new roadway capacity problems that have not already been identified and planned for mitigation with the Kalispell North Town Center project. 3. That historical uses and established use patterns and recent change in use trends will be weighedqually and consideration not be given to one to the exclusion of the other. The requested zone is in compliance with the growth policy and the city anticipated the property would develop in the requested manner. Additionally, the proposed PUD in conjunction with the B-2 zoning district is consistent with the surrounding commercial character of the area and its location adjacent to the U.S. 93 North right-of-way. 4. Is the zoning regulation designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers? At the time this property is developed, the property owners will be required to insure that there is adequate infrastructure in the case of an 17 emergency. There are no features related to the property which would compromise the safety of the public. New construction will be required to be in compliance with the building and safety codes of the city. All municipal services including police and fire protection, water and sewer service is available to the property. The site is within the immediate service area of the Kalispell Fire Station 62. 5. Is the zoning regulation designed to promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare? The requested zoning classification will promote the health and general welfare by restricting land uses to those which would be consistent with the city's growth policy map and provide a place for new urban commercial development. As with safety from fire and other dangers, the general health, safety, and welfare of the public will be promoted through general city regulations designed to regulate allowable uses. In this case, those regulations are provided for within the B-2 Zoning standards and Stillwater Bend PUD Zoning Overlay. 6. Does the zoning regulation consider the reasonable provision of adequate light and air? The requested PUD does not modify in a manner that would negatively impact required setback, height, and lot coverage standards of the B-2 Zoning District, which are established in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to insure adequate light and air are provided. 7. Will the requested zone promote compatible urban growth? The proposed PUD in conjunction with the B-2 Zoning District is consistent with the surrounding commercial character of the area and its location adjacent to the U.S. 93 right-of-way. 8. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people? Minimum lot standards and use standards will avoid the undue concentration when the property develops. 9. Is the zoning regulation designed to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public reauirements? Improvements to the property such as water, sewer and drainage would be installed in accordance with city policies and standards at the developer's expense, thereby insuring that there is adequate provision of services to the site prior to development. Any development is reviewed by the city's 18 Site Review Committee to ensure any impacts to the public infrastructure are adequately addressed. 10. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the propertyparticular uses? The proposed development would permit uses consistent with the surrounding land uses already established along the U.S. 93 North corridor. The proposed zoning district can therefore be found to give due consideration of the suitability of this property for the permitted uses in the district. Given the natural boundaries, the site has the ability to develop as a "community within a community," limiting its impact on surrounding land uses. Surrounding land uses consist of the Stillwater River at the west and south, Falkor/Sanju and golf course to the north and U.S. 93 North 93 to the east. 11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the B-2 zoning with a PUD Zoning overlay will promote compatible and like uses on the project site which can be found on other properties in the area. 12. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the municipality? Commercial and residential development should be encouraged in areas where services and facilities are available to support these types of uses permitted or conditionally permitted under the B-2 and RA-2 Zoning Districts. The proposed zoning with a PUD overlay is appropriate given the changes that are occurring in the vicinity. III. REVIEW AND FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE MAJOR PRELIMINARY PLAT A. 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 area to be built upon does not have steep slopes or woody fuels. Hydrants will be required to be placed in 19 compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and approved by the Fire Chief. Flooding: The subject property is located directly adjacent the Stillwater River. The Stillwater River is mapped by FEMA as a "Zone A" floodplain. Flood Insurance Rate Map, panel number 30029C 14215J shows the entire subdivision to be outside of the 100-year floodplain. No development is proposed within the mapped floodplain. Additionally, staff is recommending remediation within the buffer area that will serve to decrease flooding risk of the property and improve bank stability. Access: The subdivisions main entrance will be off Rose Crossing, which will be extended westerly and be improved to arterial standards. The applicant will also be constructing a new north/ south unnamed City street connecting from Rose Crossing extension to the % movement aligning with Lincoln Street on the east side of U.S. 93 within Kalispell North Town Center. This unnamed City street will function as a frontage road, thereby limiting the amount of accesses on and off the highway. Geology: A geotechnical consultation from Slopeside Engineering was provided by the applicant with the application. The geotechniocal consultation used a Geotechnical Investigation, also completed by Slopeside Engineering, as the site assessment relied upon for planning purposes. Based on slope analysis conducted, observations of subsurface explorations and experience with similar soil structures and slopes, Slopeside Engineering recommends permanent slops no steeper than 3H:1V for slopes in the vicinity of the slopes leading to the Stillwater River. The gradual slope recommendation of 3H:1V takes into consideration the soil types, perched water in sand lenses, existing slide debris at the toe of slope, and the presence of the Stillwater River. Due to the uncertainty of the material below the toe of the slope and erosion patterns of the Stillwater River in this area, they also recommend an additional 20-foot setback from the crest of the 3H:1V slope. Based off the information provided by a licensed professional engineer, staff feels that the reduction based on the geo tech report is warranted. However, due to the fact that the subdivision is proposing a new City street in close proximity to the slope, staff is recommending a condition that a third party analysis/peer review of the study is completed prior to construction for long-term viability purposes. B. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat: The Stillwater River, river banks and associated riparian areas function as important wildlife habitat. In this case, there is very little riparian habitat on the property and all existing habitat is being maintained. Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks generally recommends a 100-foot 20 setback from rivers in order to preserve habitat Staff is recommending as a condition of the project that a minimum setback of 100-feet from the river be maintained for wildlife. Staff is also recommending that riparian habitat be restored within the setback in those areas where there is none currently. 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. Small portions of the property are located within designated wetlands adjacent the Stillwater River. Staff is recommending a 100-foot setback and riparian area restoration in order to improve upon the factors leading to the Stillwater River's impairment. The 100-foot setback mentioned above will function as a filter for runoff, silt/ sediment, shade, etc. before entering the water body. This setback in coordination with the City's storm water management program will improve the properties current impacts to the Stillwater River. Drainage: Curbs and gutters will be installed and a storm management plan will have to be developed to address the runoff from the site. A preliminary plat includes a common area storm water lot where a storm water pond will be constructed that will outfall into the Stillwater River. The drainage plan will have to comply with the City of Kalispell standard and designed by a professional engineer. A condition of approval requires that a property owners' 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 U.S. 93 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. 21 Sewer: Sewer to the subdivision will be provided by the City of Kalispell. The applicant will extend sewer service to the property from U.S. 93 North. The sewer 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 sewer system to accommodate this subdivision. Access and Roads: The subdivision's main entrance will be off Rose Crossing, which will be extended westerly and be improved to arterial standards. The applicant will also be constructing a new north/ south unnamed City street connecting from Rose Crossing extension to the % movement aligning with Lincoln Street on the east side of U.S. 93 within Kalispell North Town Center. This unnamed City street will function as a frontage road, thereby limiting the amount of accesses on and off the highway. Schools: The property is within the boundaries of School District #5 and Edgerton Elementary. As the development is commercial there will not be an impact on the schools as far as additional students. Phase 2 will have a potential impact on the school district because of the residences that will be constructed, however, 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. Police: Police services will be provided by the 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 1.5 miles away providing good response time. Parks Recreation: As currently proposed, a future property owners' association would be set up to maintain the open space and other park areas within the future subdivisions on the project site. These areas include all open space areas shown on the PUD plan. It is therefore imperative that these areas be well maintained for the visual aspect of the Stillwater Bend project from adjacent properties and the highway, the safety of the pedestrian paths and the on -going functionality of the storm water facilities. Therefore, staff recommends that a note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. This district shall only be activated in the event that the property owners' association defaults on their park and open space amenity conditions. The taxes levied within the maintenance 22 E. F. district shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by the Kalispell City Council. Solid Waste: Solid waste will be handled by private disposal. 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 3 miles from the site. Effects on Agriculture and agricultural water user facilities: The site has been traditionally used for agricultural uses including crop production. According to the Kalispell Growth Policy Resources and Analysis Section, "Important Farmlands" map, the project generally has a farmland classification of "prime farmland' when irrigated. Current policies in the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035, Chapter 5, Land Use: Natural Environment, state the following: Policy — Encourage urban growth only on agriculture lands entirely within the city's annexation policy boundary. The subject property is entirely within city limits. Allowing higher density development within the city's growth policy area, it could reasonably be expected that more farmland could be conserved because the availability of residential and commercial lots within the Kalispell Growth Policy boundary, limiting sprawl/leapfrog development. Relation to the Kalispell Growth Policy: The subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use land use category of the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. Urban Mixed Use typically embraces the following concepts of which this project incorporates: 1. Encourages the development of compact, centrally located service and employment areas that provide easy connections between existing commercial and residential neighborhoods. 2. A complete system of pedestrian and bike paths is important in mixed -use areas. 23 3. Expand the depth of urban highway commercial areas as mixed -use corridors, in order to provide an alternative to linear commercial development, concentrate more intensive uses along traffic arterials, improve business district circulation and transportation efficiency areas, by secondary street access, provide flexibility for larger development sites, and expand small business opportunities. 4. Within these corridor areas, provide for higher -intensity, mixed - use areas roughly two blocks on both sides of urban highways. As distance from the highway increases, create a gradual transition into the residential neighborhoods by encouraging multi -family, offices and other compatible uses as a transition tool with sensitivity to compatible design. S. Avoid encroachment into established, intact residential areas. 6. Allow a compatible mix of higher -intensity uses including office as well as some commercial and light industrial; medium and high -density residential and public facilities. G. Compliance with Zoning: The request is in compliance with the B-2 Zoning regulations, provided the highway buffer deviation request granted. H. Compliance with the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: This request complies with provisions of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, provided the river setback deviation requested. RECOMMENDATIONS: I. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-19-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Stillwater Bend Phase be approved subject to the conditions listed below: II. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KPP-19-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for 24 Stillwater Bend Phase 1 be approved subject to the conditions listed below: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Zoning Regulations: a) Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.029(3) - Allows a reduction of the entrance corridor highway buffer from 100-feet to 50-feet. 2. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: a. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 28.3.07(B) (1) - Allows a reduction in Stillwater River setback from 200-feet to the setback line determined by the geotechnical report, provided the setback cannot be less than 100-feet. 3. A 100-foot Stillwater River setback shall be restored with native riparian habitat. A landscape plan shall be submitted by a specialist (landscape architect, engineer, hydrologist, botanist, scientist, etc.) with experience in riparian area restoration. The landscape plan shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in addition to any other applicable governmental agencies prior to final plat. 4. A third party analysis/peer review of the Slopeside Engineering geotechnical analysis shall be provided prior to final plat. Public Works shall review the additional analysis and recommend any necessary reconciliation between the two. S. Architectural renderings are required to be submitted to the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Building design shall be provided as listed below: a. Four sided architecture is required for all structures and buildings. Large, rectangular masses should be avoided by incorporating offsets in the wall and roof. A change in the plane of the walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. 25 b. Entries should be a prominent component of the building face by providing an architectural covered or recessed entry with modified roof accent and increased usage of windows and trim. c. Franchise architecture may be subject to modification to achieve the building style objectives. d. The design of gas pump islands shall be architecturally integrated with other structures on -site using similar colors, materials and architectural detailing. e. All roof mounted equipment, i.e. HVAC, should be shielded from all views. 6. Free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway shall be limited to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 15-feet in height and 60 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. 7. Lots within the development shall be limited to the sign standards applicable to the B-2 Zone, except for Lots adjacent to the common area, currently shown as Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15. Free standing signage on those lots shall be limited to 6-feet in height and 36 square feet per face and located to the west of the building constructed on the lots. 8. Buildings on Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15 shall be limited to 35-feet in height. 9. The storm water pond shall be designed in a way that it becomes a visual interest to the development. Chain link fencing surrounding the retention pond as the dominant fixture is prohibited. The developer shall work closely with the Parks Department and Public Works to come up with a design that is both visually appealing and meets the required safety guidelines. It is intended that when the project is developed the pond will act as a recreational feature and extension of the Stillwater River buffer, rather than a private maintenance utility facility. 10. An 8-foot concrete path shall be constructed within the common area connecting the unnamed north/ south City street to Phase 2 to the west. 11. 5-foot sidewalks shall be constructed within the private drives accessing Lots 1-8. 12. Direct access onto Rose Crossing shall be prohibited. 26 13. Rose Crossing shall be extended to the subdivision's western property boundary and a temporary turnaround constructed. 14. 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. 15. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 16. 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. 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. 17. 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. 18. 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. 19. Water mains shall not terminate in dead ends. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto U.S. 93 North. 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. 27 23. Prior to final plat all mitigation required as part of the approved traffic impact study shall be completed. All improvements shall be reviewed and approved by either the Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or State of Montana. If infrastructure work has not been accepted, a letter stating that a proper bond has been accepted for the unfinished work by the appropriate agency is required. 24. 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. 25. 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 26. 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. 27. A property owners' association (POA) shall be formed and established for the common areas prior to final plat. The POA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas. 28. A letter from the Kalispell Fire Department approving the access, placement of the fire hydrants and fire flows within the subdivision shall be submitted prior to final plat. 29. A letter shall be obtained from the Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping 28 materials within the landscape boulevards of the streets serving the subdivision, common area, and highway buffer. 30. A note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. This district shall only be activated in the event that the property owners' association defaults on their park and open space amenity conditions. The taxes levied within the maintenance district shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by the Kalispell City Council. 31. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 32. All utilities shall be installed underground. 33. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 34. 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 the Stillwater River. 35. An approval from the Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained for work adjacent the Stillwater River. 36. The developer shall work with Eagle Transit to establish bus stop location(s) within the development. Bus stop location(s) shall be improved in accordance with Eagle Transit's requirements, which may include a bus shelter. This condition is waived if Eagle Transit provides a letter in writing that it will not serve the development. 37. Any water rights associated with the property shall be transferred to the City of Kalispell. The water rights shall be allocated proportionally for each phase of the development prior to final plat. 29 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Zoning Regulations: a) Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.029(3) - Allows a reduction of the entrance corridor highway buffer from 100-feet to 50-feet. 2. The Planned Unit Development for Stillwater Bend allows the following deviations from the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: a. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 28.3.07 (B) (1) - Allows a reduction in Stillwater River setback from 200-feet to the setback line determined by the geotechnical report, provided the setback cannot be less than 100-feet. 3. A 100-foot Stillwater River setback shall be restored with native riparian habitat. A landscape plan shall be submitted by a specialist (landscape architect, engineer, hydrologist, botanist, scientist, etc.) with experience in riparian area restoration. The landscape plan shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in addition to any other applicable governmental agencies prior to final plat. 4 thir party an ly s �p@@F r — Of the � v�eS le T'i Rgirioorir (r q-. r-r—cxxxr -cc �S�ccroZrc�� vr—cxr��=9pcTrcc�nrr�zrrccrrrr� shall i eview the -additional an4 sii s and oriel any sa-izy Feeeneiliatie '�ei t'�e-.As part of the engineering review process, the City of Kalispell shall have the option to submit the geotechnical analysis to a third party for review. 5. Architectural renderings are required to be submitted to the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Building design shall be provided as listed below: a. Four sided architecture is required for all structures and buildings. Large, rectangular masses should be avoided by incorporating offsets in the wall and roof. A change in the plane of the walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. b. Entries should be a prominent component of the building face by providing an architectural covered or recessed entry with modified roof accent and increased usage of windows and trim. c. Franchise architecture may be subject to modification to achieve the building style objectives. d. The design of gas pump islands shall be architecturally integrated with other structures on -site using similar colors, materials and architectural detailing. e. All roof mounted equipment, i.e. HVAC, should be shielded from all views. 6. Free standing signage within the common area adjacent to the highway shall be limited to one monument sign as defined in Section 27.20.29(1)(b). The sign shall be limited to 2245-feet in height and 9.60 square feet per face. The sign shall also function as a common monument sign for the development. 7. Lots within the development shall be limited to the sign standards applicable to the B-2 Zone, except for Lots adjacent to the common area, currently shown as Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15. Free standing signage on those lots shall be limited to 6-feet in height and 36 square feet per face and located to the west of the building constructed on the lots. 8. Buildings on Lots 1, 5, 9, 12, 14, and 15 shall be limited to 45-3-5-feet in height. 9. The storm water pond shall be designed in a way that it becomes a visual interest to the development. Chain link fencing surrounding the retention pond as the dominant fixture is prohibited. The developer shall work closely with the Parks Department and Public Works to come up with a design that is both visually appealing and meets the required safety guidelines. It is intended that when the project is developed the pond will act as a recreational feature and extension of the Stillwater River buffer, rather than a private maintenance utility facility. 10. An 8-foot imperviouseECG path shall be constructed within the common area connecting the unnamed north/ south City street to Phase 2 to the west. 11. 5-foot sidewalks shall be constructed within the private drives accessing Lots 1-8. 12. Direct access onto Rose Crossing shall be prohibited. -- - - - - - - - - - 44-.13. 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. 14. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 15. 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. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 49-.18. Water mains shall not terminate in dead ends. 19. 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. 24-.20. 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. 2-2-.21. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto U.S. 93 North. 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. 2-3-.22. Prior to final plat all mitigation required as part of the approved traffic impact study shall be completed. All improvements shall be reviewed and approved by either the Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or State of Montana. If infrastructure work has not been accepted, a letter stating that a proper bond has been accepted for the unfinished work by the appropriate agency is required. 24.23. 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. 25-.24. 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 2-6-.25. 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. 2-A-. 26. A property owners' association (POA) shall be formed and established for the common areas prior to final plat. The POA should include provisions for the maintenance of all common areas. 29-.27. A letter from the Kalispell Fire Department approving the access, placement of the fire hydrants and fire flows within the subdivision shall be submitted prior to final plat. 2-9-.28. A letter shall be obtained from the 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, common area, and highway buffer. -34,29. A note shall be placed on the final plat indicating a waiver of the right to protest creation of a park maintenance district. This district shall only be activated in the event that the property owners' association defaults on their park and open space amenity conditions. The taxes levied within the maintenance district shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by the Kalispell City Council. 34-.30. A minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for the subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. -3-2 .31. All utilities shall be installed underground. -3-3-.32. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 3433. 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 the Stillwater River. .34. An approval from the Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained for work adjacent the Stillwater River. 3-6-.35. The developer shall work with Eagle Transit to establish bus stop location(s) within the development. Bus stop location(s) shall be improved in accordance with Eagle Transit's requirements, which may include a bus shelter. This condition is waived if Eagle Transit provides a letter in writing that it will not serve the development. -3-7-.36. Any water rights associated with the property shall be transferred to the City of Kalispell. The water rights shall be allocated proportionally for each phase of the development prior to final plat. PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE MONTANA Planning Department 201 1-t Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning APPLICATION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PROJECT NAME Stillwater Bend Phase 1 1. 2. 3. NAME OF APPLICANT: Spartan Holdings MAIL ADDRESS: 341 W Second Street STE 1 CITY/STATE/ZIP: San Bernardino, CA 92401 PHONE: 909-772-7800 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER IF DIFFERENT THAN APPLICANT: 4. NAME: 5. MAIL ADDRESS: 5. CITY/STATE/ZIP: PHONE: 7. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: Jackola Engineering and Architecture S. MAIL ADDRESS: 2250 HWY 93 S, PO Box 1134 9. CITY/STATE/ZIP: Kalispell, MT 59903 PHONE:406-755-3208 If there are others who should be notified during the review process, please list those. Check One: X Initial PUD proposal Amendment to an existing PUD I C Property Address: 2890 Highway 93 N, Kalispell, MT 59901 Total Area of Property: 55.98 acres p �': Legal description including section, township & range: See attached D. The present zoning of the above property is: B-2 / RA-2 1 E. Please provide the following information in a narrative format with supporting drawings or other format as needed: a. An overall description of the goals and objectives for the development of the project. b. In cases where the development will be executed in increments, a schedule showing the time within phase will be completed. C. The extent to which the plan departs from zoning and subdivision regulations including but not limited to density, setbacks and use, and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest; d. The nature and extent of the common open space in the project and the provisions for maintenance and conservation of the common open space; and the adequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan; e. The manner in which services will be provided such as water, sewer, storm water management, schools, roads, traffic management, pedestrian access, recreational facilities and other applicable services and utilities. f. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established g. How the plan provides reasonable consideration to the character of the neighborhood and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed use. h. Where there are more intensive uses or incompatible uses planned within the project or on the project boundaries, how with the impacts of those uses be mitigated. How the development plan will further the goals, policies and objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy. j. Include site plans, drawings and schematics with supporting narratives where needed that includes the following information: (1). Total acreage and present zoning classifications; (2). Zoning classification of all adjoining properties; (3). Density in dwelling units per gross acre; (4). Location, size height and number of stories for buildings and uses proposed for buildings; (5). Layout and dimensions of streets, parking areas, pedestrian walkways and surfacing; 2 (6). Vehicle, emergency and pedestrian access, traffic circulation and control; (7). Location, size, height, color and materials of signs; (S). Location and height of fencing and/or screening; (9). Location and type of landscaping; (10). Location and type of open space and common areas; (11). Proposed maintenance of common areas and open space; (12). Property boundary locations and setback lines (13). Special design standards, materials and / or colors; (14). Proposed schedule of completions and phasing of the development, if applicable; (15). Covenants, conditions and restrictions; (16). Any other information that may be deemed relevant and appropriate to allow for adequate review. If the PUD involves the division of land for the purpose of conveyance, a preliminary plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the subdivision regulations. Please note that the approved final plan, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the zoning for the district. No building permit shall be issued for any structure within the district unless such structure conforms to the provisions of the approved plan. The signing of this application signifies that the aforementioned information is true and correct and grants approval for Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during review process. r ' ppli t Signature) (Date) 3 APPLICATION PROCESS APPLICABLE TO ALL ZONING APPLICATIONS: A. Pre -Application Meeting: A discussion with the planning director or designated member of staff must precede filing of this application. Among topics to be discussed are: Master Plan or Growth Policy compatibility with the application, compatibility of proposed zone change with surrounding zoning classifications, and the application procedure. B. Application Contents: 1. Completed application form. 2. Application fee per schedule below, made payable to the City of Kalispell. PUD/CONCEPT PUD Zoning Review Fee Residential (no subdivision) $1,000 + $125/unit Commercial (no subdivision) $1,200 + $100/acre Residential (with subdivision) $1,000 + $100/acre Commercial (with subdivision) $1,000 + $100/acre 3. Electronic copy of the application materials submitted. Either copied onto a disk or emailed to planningdaRalispell.com (Please Mote the maximum file size to email is 20mg) 4. A bona fide legal description of the subject property and a map showing the location and boundaries of the property, Please consult the with staff of the Kalispell Planning Office for submittal dates and dates for the planning board meeting at which it will be heard in order that requirements of state statutes and the zoning regulations may be fulfilled. The application must be accepted as complete forty-five (45) days prior to the scheduled planning board meeting. 4 The following narrative addresses requirements for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) application per City of Kalispell standards. a. Overall description of goals and objectives for the development of the Project. The Stillwater Bend Project proposes to create a commercial and residential development on approximately 56 acres located on the west side of Highway 93 (the Site). The overall intent of this PUD is to create a mixed -use residential and commercial neighborhood in proximity to other resources within the northern limits of the Kalispell community. The commercial development on the eastern side of the property (Phase 1) is the subject of this PUD application. b. In cases where the development will be executed in increments, a schedule showing the time within phase will be completed. There are currently two phases intended for this development. Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of-way needed to access each lot, while Phase 2 will consist of developing the remaining residential lots, Construction of Phase I is expected within the next two years, and the Phase 2 timeline will be dependent on economic conditions. c. Extent to which the plan departs from zoning and subdivision regulations including but not limited to density, setbacks and use, and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest. The Project's land uses are based on the approved 2017 PUD Placeholder application and Petition for Annexation and Initial Zoning for the subject property, which proposed to zone the property as a mixture of B-2 General Business along the highway frontage, transitioning to RA-2 Residential Apartment/Office to the west. The PUD Placeholder application stated that there would be a 200' setback from the Stillwater River. The Stillwater River setback has been revised and is based on a slope stability analysis prepared by Slopeside Engineering in 2017 for a Geotechnical Report. This setback balances low-lying areas and will be utilized to provide a walking path and recreation space. The City Transportation Plan noted that a major east/west arterial should be provided between Farm to Market and US Hwy 2. This plan suggested that a continuation of the existing Rose Crossing alignment to west would be an appropriate location. The Project proposes to reserve an 80' ROW along the northern boundary for this potential future arterial, in the event that the arterial is ever necessary. The necessity of an arterial at this location is questionable due to its proximity to the existing east/west arterial (Reserve Drive) less than a mile to the south, the difficulty in crossing the Stillwater River, and the lack of an appropriate ROW for continuation of the arterial on the West side of the Stillwater River. Additionally, based on current and likely locations of future development in the Flathead Valley, an additional east/west arterial at this location will likely be far in the future. In addition to the east/west arterial along the site's northern boundary, the project proposes a frontage road with a 60' ROW running north/south through the commercial part of the subdivision. This frontage road will intersect with the 80' ROW to the north. The City Highway Corridor standard requires a 100' setback from ROW to the lot line in a subdivision. The ROW belonging to Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is approximately 200' wide along the Site's highway frontage, with the highway's edge of asphalt approximately 60' from the Site's eastern property line. Additionally, the existing grades along the northern portion of the Site's eastern boundary, where the bulk of the development will be, is around 9 feet below the highway's edge of asphalt. Moving south, the grade shallows out to around 3' to 6' below the highway's edge of asphalt. This differential grading further contributes to a feeling of separation from the highway, and creates a "nestled" development; thereby reducing the necessity for a 100' highway setback. Additionally, existing structures to the north and south of the Site are located within 100' of Highway 93, A reduced highway setback for the Site would be consistent with surrounding properties. Therefore, the highway setback along the Site's eastern boundary is proposed to be reduced to 50' from 100'. d. Nature and extent of the common open space in the Project and the provision for maintenance and conservation of the common open space; and the adequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan. The Project will provide common open space in the form of a buffer area along the Stillwater River, neighborhood parks, and accent areas as required by zoning and city regulations. Additionally, a bike trail, matching the trail on the opposite side of the highway, will be constructed along the site's eastern boundary within the highway setback. Sidewalks along the proposed frontage road will connect to the proposed bike trail and to the Site's common area along the river frontage. Open space will be maintained by the neighborhood HOA. Open space amenities and landscaping will be proposed in a later plan which will be reviewed and approved by the City of Kalispell Planning and Parks & Recreation Departments. e. The manner in which services will be provided such as water, sewer, storm water management, schools, roads, traffic management, pedestrian access, recreational facilities and other applicable services and utilities. Water supply, sewer collection, storm water management, roadways, traffic management, pedestrian access, and recreational facilities will be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell Standards for Design and Construction. The facilities will be installed at the expense of the Developer and will be granted to the City of Kalispell after completion of construction for future ownership. The water distribution system will be comprised of a network of water mains which will connect to the existing transmission pipeline located within the Highway 93 right-of-way. Fire hydrants will be installed at appropriate locations and each lot will be provided with an individual water service, Wastewater collection will be provided by a combination of gravity sewer mains and a sewage lift station, which will ultimately convey wastewater to the existing City sewer main located within the Highway 93 right-of-way. Roadways will be paved and curb and gutters will be provided to direct stormwater to low points where it will be captured in catch basins. Stormwater will be retained and treated on -site, per City requirements. There will be two ingress/egress points from the Site onto Highway 93, one of which will extend Rose Crossing through the Site and which will provide for connectivity with the residential and commercial developments on the other side of the highway. f. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development Project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established. The subject property is situated in an area that is currently experiencing tremendous residential and commercial growth. The Project is expected to facilitate further growth and provide additional commercial and residential opportunities for potential residents. The Site's location along Highway 93 provides easy access to the Site while also buffering it from neighboring land uses. An existing golf course located immediately to the north of the Site provides an open space buffer and scenic amenity. Lastly, the presence of the Stillwater River to the west will also mitigate adjoining land uses. The river is a boundary for much of the Site, creating a natural and scenic buffer between single family land uses to the west and southwest. g. How the plan provides reasonable consideration to the character of the neighborhood and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed use. The Site's existing boundaries with the Stillwater River, golf course, and Highway 93 create natural buffers with adjacent land uses, while at the same time providing a desirable residential, commercial, professional, and recreational space. The Site's highway frontage allows for commercial land uses that blend and transition to residential land uses with increased distance from the highway. As mentioned before, there are several other residential and commercial mixed -use developments in the Project's immediate vicinity. h. Where there are more intensive uses or incompatible uses planned within the Project or on the Project boundaries, how with the impacts of those uses be mitigated. Proposed uses of the Stillwater Bend development are not expected to be incompatible with surrounding uses. The mix of B-2 and RA-2 zoning will allow for a blending of land uses that take full advantage of the unique location and other physical attributes of the Site. The Stillwater River, golf course, and Highway 93 provide a buffer from immediately adjacent land uses. i. How the development plan will further the goals, policies and objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy. The approved 2017 Growth Policy Amendment outlines how the goals of the Project are aligned with the City's Growth Policy. This area of Kalispell is currently undergoing significant growth with the recent completion of the Highway 93 Bypass and additional residential and commercial developments in the Site's immediate vicinity. Development of this Project will accommodate growth and development in the City of Kalispell in an area adjacent to a major transportation corridor while being served by existing municipal facilities and services. j. Include Site plans, drawings and schematics with supporting narratives where needed that includes the following information. 1. Total acreage and present zoning classifications See attachment. 2. Zoning classification of all adjoining properties See attachment. 3. Density in dwelling units per gross acre Not applicable for B-2 zoning. A separate PUD will be prepared for the RA-2 zoned properties. 4. Location, size height and number of stories for buildings and uses proposed for buildings 60 feet height maximum, B-2 zone 5. Layout and dimensions of streets, parking areas, pedestrian walkways and surfacing See proposed PUD Site plan. 6. Vehicle, emergency and pedestrian access, traffic circulation and control See proposed PUD Site plan; The development will be primarily accessed from Highway 93 in the northeast corner of the property with the extension of Rose Crossing through the Project. This access point is planned to be improved to a signalized intersection. A secondary, emergency access will be developed in the south east corner of the property. 7. Location, size, height, color and materials of signs Development signage will be located at the main Site entrance at Rose Crossing. The sign will be monument style utilizing the Project logo and will be made of stone and wood elements used as landscape accents. The height, size, color, and materials of the proposed signage will conform to the Kalispell Sign Ordinance. 8. Location and height of fencing and/or screening No fencing is being proposed at this time; a preliminary landscape plan will be submitted prior to Phase 1 construction. Should fences be constructed, they will conform to City regulations (4 feet height maximum front, 6.5 feet height maximum rear in B-2 zone). 9. Location and type of landscaping A preliminary landscape plan will be submitted prior to Phase 1 construction. 10. Location and type of open space and common areas Open space on -site will consist of lawn, shrubs, and trees and is anticipated to include automatic sprinklers. 11. Proposed maintenance of common areas and open space See CCRs. 12. Property boundary locations and setback lines See proposed PUD Site plan. 13. Special design standards, materials and/or colors See CCRs. 14. Proposed schedule of completions and phasing of the development, if applicable See proposed PUD Site plan for phasing; Phase 1 will be constructed over the next two years, and Phase 2 is dependent on future economic conditions. 15. Covenants, conditions and restrictions See Attached CCRs. 16. Any other information that may be deemed relevant and appropriate to allow for adequate review See attached plans and other supplementary information. 0 SITE EXHIBIT 1_ 250' Z 0 Ln o� mz� Asa Zoe �Z sra-= rQ� tl5o xwv e3 saufx fAx: Joo-i55]]I! Stillwater Bend Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application Prepared For: Spartan Holdings 341 W Second Street STE 1 San Bernardino, CA, 92401 Prepared By: "e �~chj�PefUre, Surveying^�`a'�a Jackola Engineering & Architecture PO Box 1134 Kalispell, MT 59903 Date December 4th, 2019 PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE MOON ANA Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planninE MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: FEE ATTACHED $2, 875 Major Subdivision (6 or more lots) $1,000 + $12 5 / 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 NAME: Stillwater Bend Phase 1 OWNER(S) OF RECORD: Name Spartan Holdings phone 909-772-7800 Mailing Address 341 W Second Street STE 1 city San Bernardino State CA Zip 92401 TECHNICAL/ PROFESSIONAL PARTICIPANTS (Surveyor/ Designer/ Engineer, etc): Name & Address Jackola Engineering: 2250 HWY 93 S, Pa Box 1134, Kalispell, MT 59941 Name & Address Name & Address LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: Property Address 2890 Highway 93 N, Kalispell, MT 59901 Assessor's Tract No(s) See attached Lot No(s) 1/4 Sec Section Township Range GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBDIVISION: Number of Lots or Rental Spaces 10 Total Acreage in Subdivision 24.82 1 Total Acreage in Lots 13.81 ac Minimum Size of Lots or Spaces 0.75 ac Total Acreage in Streets or Roads 3.83 ac Maximum Size of Lots or Spaces 1.64 ac Total Acreage in Parks, Open Spaces and/or Common Areas 7.18 ac PROPOSED USE(S) AND NUMBER OF ASSOCIATED LOTS/SPACES: Single Family Townhouse Mobile Home Park Duplex Apartment Recreational Vehicle Park Commercial 10 Lots Industrial Planned Unit Development Condominium Multi -Family Other ►a► 4 COJA -I 4 Dwskil � i i � " f13*11 co � ►AV 0 C47 � f-M a] &I 1i:i COY 1� ESTIMATE OF MARKET VALUE BEFORE IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED: Roads: Gravel Paved x Curb x Gutter x Sidewalks x Alleys Other 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 Other _ Solid Waste: Home Pick Up Central Storage Contract Hauler x Owner Haul Mail Delivery: Central Individual x School District: school Districts Fire Protection: Hydrants x Tanker Recharge Fire District: west Valley Drainage System: Regional stormwater system PROPOSED EROSIONISEDIMENTATION CONTROL; VARIANCES: ARE ANY VARIANCES REQUESTED? SeePU❑ (yes/no) If yes, please complete the information below: SECTION OF REGULATIONS CREATING HARDSHIP: EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP THAT WOULD BE CREATED WITH STRICT COMPLIANCE k►fjV011a:4xRUJI111FAIll0col �6� 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? 3 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 planning(akalispell.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 prbces„6. X/1 (Date) M I mmq qrAwl a 9z i Stillwater Bend Subdivision Environmental Assessment Prepared For: Spartan Holdings 341 W Second Street STE 1 San Bernadino, CA, 92401 Prepared By: ''ecturp, SurveY�n9' .. Jackola Engineering & Architecture PO Box 1134 Kalispell, MT 59903 Date December 41h, 2019 Table of Contents PART I — PROPERTY DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 1 1. Surface Water:..................................................................................................................................1 2. Groundwater....................................................................................................................................2 3. Topography, Geology and soils........................................................................................................ 2 4. Vegetation........................................................................................................................................ 4 5. Wildlife..............................................................................................................................................5 6. Land Use: .......................................................................................................................................... 5 PART II — SUMMARY OF PROBABLE IMPACTS....................................................................................... 6 1. Effects on Agriculture....................................................................................................................... 6 2. Effects on Local Services...................................................................................................................7 3. Effects on the Historic or Natural Environment..............................................................................9 4. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat........................................................................................10 S. Effects on the Public Health and Safety........................................................................................11 PART III — COMMUNITY IMPACT REPORT........................................................................................... 12 1. Education and Busing.....................................................................................................................12 2. Roads and Maintenance................................................................................................................12 3. Water, Sewage, and Solid Waste Facilities....................................................................................14 4. Fire and Police Protection..............................................................................................................14 S. Parks and Recreation Facilities......................................................................................................15 6. Payment for Extension of Capital Facilities...................................................................................15 Appendides Appendix A —Site Mapping • Existing Conditions Plan • Proposed Site Plan Appendix B — Surface Water Mapping • Wetland and Surface Water Map • Flood Plain Map Appendix C — Geotechnical Investigation Appendix D — Cut/Fill Heat Map Appendix E — Vegetation Map Appendix F —Traffic Impact Study ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION This Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared by Jackola Engineering and Architecture for the Stillwater Bend subdivision located in Kalispell, MT. The assessment investigates the potential impacts of the proposed development and was conducted following the City of Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Title 28, Ordinance No. 1707, Appendix B. The Stillwater Bend subdivision proposes to create a commercial and residential development on approximately 56 acres located on the west side of US Highway 93, approximately one mile north of the northern terminus of the US Highway 93 Bypass. The subdivision proposes an 80' ROW along the northern boundary of the Site for future development, a 60' ROW frontage road with two access points from US HWY 93, and a bike trail along the site's eastern boundary along the highway. Municipal water and sewer services will be provided to each lot. An Existing Conditions Plan and Site Plan are included in Appendix A. PART I — PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1. Surface Water Locate on a plat overlay or sketch map: A. Any natural water systems such as streams, rivers, intermittent streams, lakes or marshes (also indicate the names and sizes of each). B. Any artificial water systems such as canals, ditches, aqueducts, reservoirs, and irrigation systems (also indicate the names, sizes and present uses of each). C. Time when water is present (seasonally or all year). D. Any areas subject to flood hazard, or in delineated 100-year floodplain. 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. A map showing all natural and manmade water bodies and a map showing all federally designated wetland and riparian areas near the site are provided in Appendix B. A setback from the Stillwater River, which borders the Site to the west, was determined based on a slope stability analysis prepared as a part of a site Geotechnical Investigation by Slopeside Engineering in November 2017 (included in Appendix C). This setback balances low-lying areas and will prevent any alterations to the stream bank or stream channels for the duration of the project. Based on the available mapping, visual site inspections, and the geotechnical setback, it was determined that the development layout poses no adverse effects to any known natural or manmade water bodies nor wetland or riparian areas, including the Stillwater River. The Stillwater River runs in a southerly direction immediately to the west of the Site. A map showing the 100-year flood plain boundary for the Stillwater River, as shown on FIRM 30029c1805J effective November, 2015, is provided in Appendix B. This map shows that the 100-year floodplain falls within the geotechnical setback and that the remainder of the site lies within Zone X, an area of minimal flood Page 1 1 hazard. Therefore, it can be concluded that flooding will be of little risk to any development built on the site. 2. Groundwater A: Provide the following information: 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. The 2017 geotechnical investigation, included in Appendix C, found that depth to groundwater varied across the site; however, depth to groundwater at borings closest to the river's edge varied from approximately 16 to 34 feet below ground surface. Based on the Ground -Water Resources of the Flathead Lake Area: Flathead, Lake Missoula, and Sanders Counties Montana, the site lies in the vicinity of the 30-foot deep Lost Creek Aquifer which is located north of Kalispell. However, due to the Site's proximity to the Stillwater River and based on observations made during the geotechnical investigation, groundwater encountered in the borings on site was likely perched water tables travelling through confined sand and silt lenses or the result of direct influence from the Stillwater River. Additionally, based on the clay soils which were encountered during the investigation, there is likely a limiting geological layer which would restrict water from draining to the Lost Creek Aquifer. Thus, it can be concluded that development of the subdivision will have minimal impact on nearby aquifer, and that groundwater from the site would not be a significant source of recharge. B: Describe any steps necessary to avoid depletion or degradation of groundwater recharge areas. Although the Subdivision will most likely have a minimal to negligible contribution to degradation of surrounding aquifers, water quality treatment measures will be put in -place in compliance with City of Kalispell MS4 requirements to ensure groundwater quality is maintained. 3. Topography, Geology 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: A topographic survey of the site was conducted in July 2019 and is discussed below. A drawing showing contour elevations and existing site elements is provided in Appendix A. The site generally slopes down to the southwest towards the Stillwater River. The site's high point is located in the northeast corner, and there is an approximate 60-foot elevation difference across the site. Shallow Bedrock No shallow bedrock was uncovered during the geotechnical investigation. Therefore, it can be concluded that this hazard does not exist onsite ii. Unstable Slopes As a part of the geotechnical investigation, a slope stability analysis was performed for the site. Slope stability concerns were indicated in the vicinity of the relatively steep slopes Page 1 2 leading down to the Stillwater River. Based on this slope stability analysis, a geotechnical setback line was developed at varying distances from the river's edge and is shown on several maps included in the appendices. iii. Unstable or expansive soils The soils near the surface consist of moisture sensitive, fine-grained soils with little cohesion. As a result, these soils can be easily disturbed and strength diminished during construction, particularly in relatively high moisture content areas and where surface water is allowed to pond. Therefore, positive drainage will be critical during construction to maintain the structural integrity of the soil structure. iv. Excessive slope As mentioned above, steep slopes are located along the banks of the Stillwater River, and a geotechnical setback was created to prevent development in these areas. Slopes greater than 15% are shown on the existing conditions map in Appendix B. e: Locate on an overlay or sketch map any known hazards affecting the development which could result in property damage or personal injury due to: i. Falls, slides or slumps — soil, rock, mud, snow According to the geotechnical investigation, portions of soil between the toe of the slope and the Stillwater River, particularly in areas with the most vertical relief, appear to be historic and active slide debris material that has moved and slumped over many years. Although portions of the slope and ground surface between the crest of the slope and the Stillwater River appear to be part of past slope failures and are currently still active, it is important to note that signs of slope instability above the crest of the slope were not observed. It appears that the soil above the crests of the slopes have not experienced significant movement due to slope failure. ii. Rock outcroppings There are no rock outcroppings in the project vicinity; therefore, there is minimal to negligible possibility of damage to property or personal injury on the site from falling rock or dangerous outcroppings. iii. Seismic Activity Based on the site geotechnical investigation, the site is located in a zone of potentially significant seismic ground movement. Risks of property damage or personal injury will be mitigated during the construction of the residential units. iv. High Water Table Depth to groundwater is anticipated to be greater than 15 feet below the ground surface, which is likely below the planned excavation limits and utility construction. C. Describe measures proposed to prevent or reduce these hazards. Falls, slides or slumps mitigation Page 1 3 To mitigate risks due to unstable slopes along the Stillwater River, the geotechnical investigation recommended a geotechnical setback from the river. ii. Seismic Mitigation To mitigate the effect of any earthquake induced ground motion, all residences will be built in accordance IRC design criteria. 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. As noted above, there is an approximate 60-foot elevation difference across the site. Preliminary grading plans propose leveling out some of the higher areas. A heat map showing the preliminary areas of cuts and fills and the approximate depth in those areas is provided in Appendix D. 4. Vegetation A: On a plat overlay or sketch map: Indicate the distribution of the major vegetation types, such as marsh, grassland, shrub, coniferous forest, deciduous forest, mixed forest The map provided in Appendix E indicates the major vegetation types found on the site, as shown on the Montana Natural Heritage Map Viewer. Based on this mapping, the site is predominantly occupied by agricultural land throughout the central portion of the site, with isolated areas of grassland around the perimeter and wet meadows and riparian woodland and shrubland areas along the river banks. ii. Identify the location of critical plant communities such as: Stream bank or shoreline vegetation, vegetation on steep, unstable slopes, vegetation on soils highly susceptible to wind or water erosion, type and extent of noxious weeds. Wetland or riparian land cover is located along the Stillwater River banks. These areas will not be disturbed as they are located within the geotechnical setback. Please see map provided in Appendix B and Appendix G for nearby locations of critical plant communities. e: Describe measures to: i. Preserve trees and other natural vegetation e.g. locating roads and lot boundaries, planning construction to avoid damaging tree cover. As shown on the vegetation map provided in Appendix E, a majority of the site is occupied by historic agricultural lands. Existing trees on the site, as shown on the existing conditions plan in Appendix A, are located along the river's edge within the setback, and along the site's northern boundary, outside of the development area. Therefore, measures to protect such vegetation will not be needed for this project. ii. Protect critical plant communities e.g. keeping structural development away from these areas, setting areas aside for open space. As shown on the vegetation map provided in Appendix E, stream bank vegetation is located within the geotechnical setback and will therefore not be disturbed as a result of this project. Page 14 During construction, stormwater BMPs will be implemented to ensure that runoff from the site will be properly managed and treated. Similarly, runoff water quality after construction will be maintained in accordance with City regulations. iii. Prevent and control grass, brush or forest fires e.g. green strips, water supply, access. Upon completion of the subdivision, brush fires will be highly unlikely due to the developed urban nature of the subdivision and surrounding properties. City hydrants will be placed throughout the development at maximum 300 foot spacing to provide water during emergencies. iv. Control and prevent growth of noxious weeds All yards within the development will be fully landscaped upon construction of each individual residence. This landscaping will help prevent growth of noxious weeds within the subdivision. Before construction of each lot, all undeveloped areas will be covered with top soil, cleared of any noxious weeds and reseeded with native grasses for stabilization. 5. Wildlife A: Identify species offish and wildlife use the area affected by the proposed subdivision. Large game are the only species which may be affected by the development. The MT Crucial Areas Planning System lists the site as a white-tailed deer winter range habitat. White Tailed deer are common in the open grass areas surrounding and including the site. e: 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. Based on the MT Crucial Areas Planning System, there are no known critical wildlife areas, nesting areas, or habitat for endangered or threatened species on the site. 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). To reduce the possibility of attracting deer to the subdivision, ornamental plants and fruit trees will not be included in the site landscaping. 6. Land Use: Aerial imagery dating back to as early as 1990 shows that the site was historically utilized as farm land. However, the project's proposed land uses are based on an approved 2017 PUD Placeholder application and Petition for Annexation and Initial Zoning for the subject property, which proposed to zone the property as a mixture of B-2 General Business along the highway frontage, transitioning to RA-2 Residential Apartment/Office to the west. The property is part of a PUD previously approved by the City of Kalispell. See appendix A for location map. Page 1 5 PART II — SUMMARY OF PROBABLE IMPACTS Summarize the effects of the proposed subdivision on each topic below. Provide responses to the following questions and provide reference materials as required: 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. From the NCRS soils report, existing onsite soils consist primarily of Kalispell loam and a small portion of Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils. Kalispell Loams are classified as prime farmland if irrigated and the Tally Blanchard and Flathead soil types are designated as not prime farmland. A copy of the NRCS report is provided in Appendix F. B: Describe whether the subdivision would remove from production any agricultural or timber land. The subdivision is not located on or near any timber land and will not affect timber production. The subdivision was historically used as farmland, but has been designated as RA-2 and B-2 zones in a previously approved PUD. The subdivision is in line with City of Kalispell's growth plan. C. Describe possible conflicts with nearby agricultural operations, e.g., residential development creating problems for moving livestock, operating farm machinery, operating septoge disposal sites, maintaining water supplies, controlling weeds or applying pesticides; agricultural operations suffering from vandalism, uncontrolled pets or damaged fences. The subdivision is located in an area of Kalispell that is currently undergoing significant growth with the recent completion of the Highway 93 Bypass and additional residential and commercial developments to the north, south and east of the Site. As such, there are few existing agricultural operations in the vicinity of the Site and any open space to the west of the Site is separated from the subdivision by the Stillwater River. Therefore, there are no foreseeable conflicts that could arise. D: Describe possible nuisance problems which may arise from locating a subdivision near agricultural or timber lands. Since the proposed development is not immediately near existing agricultural or timberland operations, there are no foreseeable nuisances that could arise from locating a subdivision near such areas. E: Describe effects the subdivision would have on the value of nearby agricultural lands. Since the subdivision is not immediately near any agricultural land, there are no foreseeable effects that devalue such property. 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. Since surrounding properties are not of agricultural use, there will be no conflicts or problems regarding agricultural water use facilities upon development of the subdivision. Page 16 e: 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. Since surrounding properties are not of agricultural use, there will be no nuisance problems regarding agricultural water use facilities upon development of the subdivision. 3. Effects on Local Services A: Indicate the proposed use and number of lots or spaces in each: There are currently two phases intended for this development. Phase 1 will consist of 15 commercial lots along with the necessary right-of-way needed to access each lot, while Phase 2 will consist of developing the remaining residential lots. e: Describe the additional or expanded public services and facilities that would be required of local government or special districts to serve the subdivision. 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). Phase 1 of the development will include construction of approximately 15 new sewer and water services, 2,000 feet of new water and sewer main, and 2,000 feet of new City roadway. Phase 1 of the project does not include and residential development, and therefore will not add any additional children attending Kalispell schools. Upon development of Phase 2, these values will be updated as necessary. However, the maximum number of residential lots (and therefore water and sewer services) as determined by the site's zoning will be approximately 855 equivalent dwelling units (EDU) (40 EDU/developable acre, with 21.3 ac excluding the land within the geotechnical setback). The City of Kalispell has approved the PUD for this development and is capable of meeting the service requirements for the new businesses and future residents. ii. Who will bear the cost, e.g. all taxpayers within the jurisdiction, people within special taxing districts, or users of a service? The sewer and water main extensions will be paid for by the developer. The utility services to each individual property line will be paid for by the developer, and the utility connection and impact fees will be paid for by the developer or lot owner. The City of Kalispell will receive property taxes from the developed lots to use as it sees fit for road maintenance, etc. The Kalispell schools will also receive taxpayer money to help offset the cost of the additional students attending City schools as a result of the Phase 2 Development. The City Fire and Police department do not anticipate that there will be an increase in costs or need for additional staff due to the construction of the subdivision. iii. Describe off -site costs or costs to other jurisdictions which may be incurred, e.g. development of water sources or construction of a sewage treatment plant; costs borne by the municipality. There is no need for improvements or increased capacity of the City of Kalispell wastewater treatment plant or water source to provide those services to the subdivision. Page 1 7 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. New water and sewer mains will be constructed through the subdivision, utilizing existing mains located in US Hwy 93, providing municipal water and sewer services to previously un-served land. D: What are the present tax revenues received from the un-subdivided land? From the 2019 Real Estate Tax Bill for each parcel, a total of $7,734.27 was paid in property taxes. The following is a breakdown of the dollar amount to each taxing authority. By the County $61.14 was paid to Flathead County ii. By the Municipality if applicable $7,460.88 was paid to the City of Kalispell iii. By the Schools $211.53 was paid to the schools 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. The subdivision includes development of 15 commercial properties. Commercial properties are difficult to project the types of development which might occur and future tax revenue. To establish some basis, a development similar to the commercial property currently occupied by Starbucks on the north side of Kalispell will be the comparable. The 2018 Real Estate Tax Bill for one of these lots stated a total of $14,496.87 was paid in taxes by the property owner. The total development of the proposed 15 commercial lots would generate approximately $217,453 annually. The following gives a breakdown of the approximate dollar amount which will be paid by each commercial lot owner of the proposed subdivision. County: $33,139 Municipality: $75,608 Schools: $108,661 This section will be updated with necessary information pending development plans for Phase 2 of the subdivision. F. Would new taxes generated from the subdivision cover additional public costs? Since there will be no need to increase staff or upgrade infrastructure upon completion of the subdivision, all new taxes generated should be sufficient to cover any additional public costs. 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? Page 1 8 There is no new special improvement district created as part of this project. 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. There are no known or possible historic paleontological, archaeological or cultural sites located on or near the property which would be affected by the development. e: 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. 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. Although the Site is located along the Stillwater River, a geotechnical setback will be implemented that will prevent development from altering sensitive lands in proximity to the Stillwater River's banks. Generally natural slopes will be maintained, and cut and fill operations will strive to balance earthwork quantities. Plant life within the development areas on site consists of grasses and farmed crops. Existing site vegetation, location of nearby water ways, and location of steep slopes is shown on the existing conditions plan, provided in Appendix A. As with any residential development, there is potential for runoff to contain lawn fertilizers however these concentrations are expected to be well below that of an agricultural use. Additionally, water quality measures will be taken to reduce this pollutant load in the stormwater runoff. ii. Would groundwater supplies likely be contaminated or depleted as a result of the subdivision? Sewer and water will be supplied by City of Kalispell. Sewage from the subdivision will be collected and discharged into the City sewer system. Therefore, there is no potential for sewage contamination of any surface or groundwater. As noted above, water for the subdivision will be supplied by City of Kalispell and not through individual wells. Therefore, depletion of groundwater as a result of this development is not likely. 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? Site design will maintain reasonable slopes and will attempt to keep grades as close to existing grades as feasible. Cut slopes will be properly stabilized. As previously mentioned, sensitive areas, including steep slopes and highly erodible soils are mostly located within the geotechnical setback and will not be disturbed. As noted above, sewage will be collected and discharged to the City of Kalispell system. The development has no planned onsite sewage treatment systems that could contaminate soils. Page 1 9 iv. Describe the impacts that removal of vegetation would have on soil erosion, bank, or shoreline instability. Based on the geotechnical setback, the development will not have an effect on soil erosion, bank, or shoreline instability. However, erosion potential during and after construction will be mitigated through the use of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan in which BMPs will be set in place. Upon completion of the project, all exposed areas will be immediately stabilized and reseeded. V. Would the value of significant historical, visual, or open space features be reduced or eliminated? There are no historical, visual or open space features on or near the site. vi. Describe possible natural hazards the subdivision could be subject to, e.g., natural hazards such as flooding, rock, snow or landslides, high winds, severe wildfires, or difficulties such as shallow bedrock, high water table, unstable or expansive soils, or excessive slopes. As discussed in previous sections, natural hazards (Stillwater River 100-year flood plain, steep slopes, unstable soils) are mostly located within the geotechnical setback , and will therefore pose little to no risk to the 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 revegetotion of earthworks. The Site's highway frontage allows for commercial land uses that blend and transition to residential land uses with increased distance from the highway. As mentioned before, there are several other residential and commercial mixed -use developments in the Project's immediate vicinity, including Eagle Valley Ranch and Kalispell North Town Center located on the opposite side of the highway. 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. The area of the subdivision is designated as big game winter habitat by Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. Currently Montana Fish and Wildlife have 35.6% of the state designated as "Score 2 winter habitat" and another 30% of the state as "Score 1 winter habitat". The current proposed development is in line with the city of Kalispell's growth plan and is relatively small in size in comparison to the size of the habitat in the Flathead valley. Additionally, the site is bordered by existing development to the north, south, and east. Any additional impact the development may have on these wildlife areas will be minimal. e: Describe the effect that pets or human activity would have on wildlife. As the site is bordered by existing developments and is located along a highway corridor, the effect on wildlife from additional people and pets moving into the area due to the proposed development will be minimal to negligible. Page 1 10 6. Effects on the Public Health and Safety 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. There are no known health or safety hazards as described in the statement above. e: 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. US Hwy 93 borders the site to the east; however, there is a 5-10-foot elevation difference between the highway and eastern edge of the site, and therefore there are no known health or safety hazards as described in the statement above on or near the subdivision. 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 land adjacent to the site consists of the following uses: Northern Pines Golf course to the North, Stillwater River to the east and south, a church and residential development to the south, and US Hwy 93 to the west. These areas are shown on the existing conditions map in Appendix A. Commercial properties will be located along the highway frontage, which will provide a buffer from the highway for the residential lots, located further to the west. 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. There are no public health or safety hazards that would be created by the subdivision. Page 1 11 PART III — COMMUNITY IMPACT REPORT Provide a community impact report containing a statement of estimated number of people coming into the area as a result of the subdivision, anticipated needs or the proposed subdivision for public facilities and services, the increased capital and operating cost to each affected unit of local government. Provide responses to each of the following questions and provide reference materials as required. 1. Education and Busing A: Describe the available educational facilities that would serve this subdivision. The subdivision is located within School District 5, and will be serviced the Edgerton Elementary School and Glacier High school. The City of Kalispell has grown in recent years and many of the schools are near or at capacity. However, large changes are planned to meet the needs of the growing student population and funds for these projects have already been attained. Revenue collected from property taxes for the project will be sufficient to cover the increased cost for each new student obtained as a part of this development. 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 upon 2010 Census data, the average number of persons per house hold in Kalispell is 2.38. The percentage of children 18 years and younger for Kalispell is 25.1%. In Phase 2, there is a maximum of 855 equivalent dwelling units (EDU) for the site, which equates to approximately which mean that there will be approximately 2,035 total people with 511 people under the age of 18. If the ages of these students are distributed evenly among the grades K-12, in a given year there would be 236 new students attending the Edgerton Elementary School, 118 new students attending the Middle School, and 157 new students attending Glacier High School. 2. Roads and Maintenance A: Estimate how much daily traffic the subdivision, when fully occupied, will generate on existing streets and arterials. Based on the Traffic Impact Study (TIS), included in Appendix F and prepared by Abelin Traffic Services for the subdivision, it is estimated that the development will generate approximately 9,000 trips per day; 6,260 from the residential portion and 2,740 from the commercial portion. B: Describe the capability of existing and proposed roads to safely accommodate this increased traffic. Development of the subdivision will increase traffic loads on US Hwy 93 and Rose Crossing. Due to the commercial and residential developments on the opposite side of the highway, a stoplight is planned at the highway's intersection with Rose Crossing, at the northern, primary entrance to the Site. The TIS indicates that no roadway improvements are necessary at this time. Page 1 12 C. Describe increased maintenance problems and increased cost due to this increase in volume. It is not anticipated that there will be an increase in the maintenance requirements to US Hwy 93 due to the fact that the highway is not yet operating at full capacity. However, there will be additional maintenance and cost to the City since there will be roughly 2,000 feet of new City right-of-way upon completion of Phase 1 the project, with additional city ROW to be expected at the completion of Phase 2. D: Describe proposed new public or private access roads including: i. Measures for disposing of storm run-off from streets and roads. Storm water runoff will either surface flow or be collected in curb inlets and piped to one of the proposed retention basins along the southern and eastern edges of the site. The ponds will be sized to retain and treat water on -site. ii. Type of road surface and provisions to be made for dust. All new roads within the Subdivision will be asphalt. Similarly, all driveways to the residences will be concrete. By paving all driving surfaces, the potential for dust generation will be minimal. iii. Facilities for streams or drainage crossing (e.g. culverts, bridges). There are no planned stream or drainage crossings as part of this project iv. Seeding of disturbed areas. All exposed, disturbed areas will be stabilized and landscaped or reseeded upon completion of the subdivision construction. Residential lots and City boulevard will be landscaped with plantings, trees, and sod. The open spaces used for storm water retention will be re -seeded with native grasses in accordance with City regulations. E: Describe the closing or modification of any existing roads. There will be no road closures of existing streets during the construction of the project. F. Explain why road access was not provided within the subdivision, if access to any individual lot is directly from arterial streets or roads. This question is not applicable to the Subdivision; access to each lot will be from the local road running in a north/south direction. 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 right of way will be available to the subdivision from the proposed frontage road. H: Estimate the cost and completion date of the system, and indicate who will pay the cost of installation, maintenance and snow removal. The estimated completion date of all work within Phase 1 of the subdivision right-of-way including roads, sidewalk, and boulevard will be November 2020 and the completion of Phase 2 will be dependent on economic conditions. The estimated costs for the entire subdivision improvements is estimated to Page 1 13 be $2,000,000.00. Cost of installation for the road system will be paid for by the developer. The cost for all road maintenance and snow removal upon final plat of the subdivision will be paid for by the City of Kalispell. 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. There will be no new municipal wastewater treatment or water supply system needed to supplement the current City of Kalispell infrastructure due to an increase in demand from the subdivision. New water and sewer mains will be extended to the subdivision from mains located within US Hwy 93, and will be constructed within the proposed frontage road ROW. B. Provide information on estimated cost of the system, who will bear the costs, and how the system will be financed. There will be no new municipal wastewater treatment or water supply system needed to supplement the current City of Kalispell infrastructure due to an increase in demand from the subdivision. The estimated costs of all utility work for the subdivision is estimated to be $990,000. Cost of installation for all of the subdivision infrastructure will be paid for by the developer. 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. A water main will be extended through the subdivision from an existing 14" PVC water main located on the west side of Highway 93. It has been confirmed with the City that the existing system has capacity to meet these demands. The proposed sewer system will discharge wastewater into the existing 18" sewer main on the opposite side of the highway. Similarly, the city has confirmed that the municipal wastewater treatment system has capacity for the proposed development. 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. All new sewer and water main plans will be sent to Montana DEQ for approval. E. Describe the proposed method of collecting and disposing of solid waste from the development. Solid waste collection and disposal service is available from either Evergreen Disposal or the City of Kalispell. F. if use of an existing collection system or disposal facility is proposed indicate the name and location of the facility. As mentioned above, solid waste collection and disposal service is available from either Evergreen Disposal or the City of Kalispell. 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. Page 1 14 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 subdivision will be located within the City of Kalispell Fire District. Municipal fire hydrants will be placed with the ROW at a minimum spacing of 300 feet. Residential structures will not be sprinkled. Apartment units and commercial buildings will have fire suppression systems. The subdivision will have two accesses which will allow the number of single-family lots to exceed 30lots ii. Law Enforcement protection —is the proposed subdivision within the jurisdiction of a County Sheriff or municipal policy department? The subdivision is located under the jurisdiction of the City of Kalispell Police Department. e: 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? There is no foreseeable increase in the needs of both the Kalispell police and fire department to service the subdivision. As a result, there will be no increase in required funding for either agency 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. Phase 2 of the development includes a maximum of 855 EDU's. This results in a required 25.65 acres of park land based on 0.03 acres per DU. Phase 1 will dedicate 7.18 acres of open space, some of which will be improved with a bike path. Some of the improved open space may meet park land requirements, however it is anticipated that the developer will pay cash in -lieu to Kalispell Parks and Recreation to fulfill the full requirement of dedicating 0.03 acres of park land per dwelling unit or cash equivalent to parkland. B. List other parks and recreation facilities or sites in the area and their approximate distance from the site. The Northern Pines Golf Course is located immediately north of the subdivision. A bike path was recently constructed on the opposite side of the highway. 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). The 2019 appraised land value as shown on the MT cadastral is 2277. 6. Payment for Extension of Capital Facilities A. Indicate how the sub -divider will pay for the cost of extending capital facilities resulting from expected impacts directly attributable to the subdivision. No capital facilities extension is anticipated. Page 1 15 APPENDIX A SITE MAPPING VNViNOA'11]dSIlV)I S9NIG10H NVidVdS NOISIAi(ions GN39 d31V/\AllliS LU V) V) 0 0- 0 SS)(SS) III dml FO RO EDE J LIP a L-ft �-7/ VNViNOA'11]dS11V)1 S9NIG10H NVidVdS NOISIMions GN39 d31V/\AllliS fir V)o Oil QQ 7 -- O 0 u LD V) x LU ss) oAI N /y SURFACE WATER MAPPING VNVINOW '11]dSlIV)I S9NIG10H NVidVdS NOISIAi(ionS GN39 d31t/MllliS 0) C: .CL CL � � C/) 0 C: � (D � � C: (D � � (D � � � 0 7 1:1 7 g 2 \ g = \ � 9 \ k / \ \ L E 0- co \ \ / / / E E E 1:1 7 7 11 11 "Tp NA g Patuml Heritage Program Aprogof the Montana State Library's Natural Resource Information System operated bythe University of Montana. Wetland and Riparian Summarized by: (Custom Area of Interest) f Wetland and Riparian Mapping fmiaind P - Palustrine AB - Aquatic Bed P - Palustrine, AB - Aquatic Bed Wetlands with vegetation growing on or below the water G - Intermittently Exposed 9 Acres surface for most of the growing season. (no modifier) 6 Acres PABG x - Excavated 3 Acres PABGx ® EM - Emergent P - Palustrine, EM - Emergent Wetlands with erect, rooted herbaceous vegetation present A - Temporarily Flooded 9 Acres during most of the growing season. (no modifier) 9 Acres PEMA C - Seasonally Flooded 2 Acres (no modifier) 2 Acres PEMC F - Semipermanently Flooded 1 Acres (no modifier) 1 Acres PEMF R - Riverine (Rivers) 3 - Upper Perennial M UB - Unconsolidated Bottom R - Riverine (Rivers), 3 - Upper Perennial, UB - Unconsolidated Bottom H - Permanently Flooded 21 Acres Stream channels where the substrate is at least 25% mud, silt (no modifier) 21 Acres R3UBH or other fine particles. Page 1 of 3 Rp - Riparian 1 - Lotic M SS - Scrub -Shrub Rp - Riparian, 1 - Lotic, SS - Scrub -Shrub (no modifier) 8 Acres Rp1SS This type ofriparian area is dominated by woody vegetation that is less than 6 meters (20 feet) tall. Woody vegetation includes tree saplings and trees that are stunted due to environmental conditions. Page 2 of 3 Introduction to Wetland and Riparian Within the report area you have requested, wetland and riparian mapping is summarized by acres of each classification present. Summaries are only provided for modern MTNHP wetland and riparian mapping and not for outdated (NWI Legacy) or incomplete (NWI Scalable) mapping efforts; described here. MTNHP has made all three of these datasets and associated metadata available for separate download on the Montana Wetland and Riparian Framework MSDI download page. Wetland and Riparian mapping is one of 15 Montana Spatial Data Infrastructure framework layers considered vital for making statewide maps of Montana and understanding its geography. The wetland and riparian framework layer consists of spatial data representing the extent, type, and approximate location of wetlands, riparian areas, and deepwater habitats in Montana. Wetland and riparian mapping is completed through photointerpretation of 1-m resolution color infrared aerial imagery acquired from 2005 or later. A coding convention using letters and numbers is assigned to each mapped wetland. These letters and numbers describe the broad landscape context of the wetland, its vegetation type, its water regime, and the kind of alterations that may have occurred. Ancillary data layers such as topographic maps, digital elevation models, soils data, and other aerial imagery sources are also used to improve mapping accuracy. Wetland mapping follows the federal Wetland Mapping Standard and classifies wetlands according to the Cowardin classification system of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Cowardin et al. 1979, FGDC Wetlands Subcommittee 2013). Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands differently than the NWI. Similar coding, based on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conventions, is applied to riparian areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). These are mapped areas where vegetation composition and growth is influenced by nearby water bodies, but where soils, plant communities, and hydrology do not display true wetland characteristics. These data are intended for use in publications at a scale of 1:12,000 or smaller. Mapped wetland and riparian areas do not represent precise boundaries and digital wetland data cannot substitute for an on -site determination of jurisdictional wetlands. A detailed overview, with examples, of both wetland and riparian classification systems and associated codes can be found at: http://mtnhp.org/help/MapViewer/WetRip Classification.asp Literature Cited Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. La Roe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, D.C. 103pp. Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. 2009. A system for mapping riparian areas in the western United States. Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Branch of Resource and Mapping Support, Arlington, Virginia. Page 3 of 3 APPENDIX C GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Slopeside Engineering December 4, 2019 Spartan Holdings, LLC 341 West Second Street, Suite 1 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Subject: Geotechnical Consultation Stillwater Bend 57 Acre Site Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Job No. 17-466 Dear Mr. Joe Carman, At the request of Jackola Engineering, Slopeside Engineering, LLC (Slopeside), is providing geotechnical consultation services for the Stillwater Bend 57 acre site in Kalispell, Montana. Slopeside previously provided a Geotechnical Investigation for general site development of this property. The report is titled, "Geotechnical Investigation, Stillwater Village Development - 57 Acre Site, Kalispell, Montana, Job No. 17-466," and is dated November 7, 2017. The report was completed for Spartan Holdings, and included the 57 acre site described in the report; however a different civil engineering company from Kalispell was working with you at that time. Discussions with the Project Team indicate a similar development is planned for the site as is discussed in the previous report. Observations of the site throughout the last 2 years indicate minimal site grading and changes have occurred on the site, with the exception of agricultural farming. In addition, we do not anticipate the soils and groundwater information presented in the report have been appreciably altered. In our opinion, the Geotechnical Investigation completed by Slopeside approximately 2 years Skslop esideeng�gmailcom 406-270-3480 181 Deerfoot Trail 4'**.Kalispell, MT, 59901 Stillwater Bend 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC ago for the subject property can be relied upon for site assessment and planning purposes. The Geotechnical Investigation is attached to this letter for convenience. Please contact Slopeside Engineering, LLC, if you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter or our recommendations. Sincerely, Joshua Smith, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Page 2 of 2 $$11opeside o _ _ _Engineering November 7, 2017 Spartan Holdings, LLC 341 W. Second Street, Suite 1 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Stillwater Village Development - 57 Acre Site Kalispell, Montana Job No. 17-466 Dear Mr. Joe Carman, At your request, Slopeside Engineering, LLC (Slopeside) has conducted a geotechnical investigation for the planned Stillwater Village Development at a 57 acre site in Kalispell, Montana. The Vicinity Map, Figure 1, shows the general location of the site. The investigation was conducted to evaluate subsurface materials, observe conditions at the site, and develop recommendations for site preparation, earthwork, concrete flatwork, asphaltic concrete pavement (AC) sections, and utility trench backfill. In addition, slope stability analyses and recommendations for setbacks from the crest of the existing slopes leading to Stillwater River are provided. The investigation included a review of existing subsurface information for the site vicinity, subsurface explorations, and engineering analyses. This report describes the work accomplished and provides our conclusions and recommendations for use in the design and construction of the site development phase of this project. Slopeside has strived to perform the investigation and develop recommendations in a manner consistent with the degree of care that is presently standard to the geotechnical engineering profession. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is approximately 57 acres located at 2890 US Highway 93, adjacent to the Stillwater River, in Kalispell, Montana. We understand the planned development will consist of a mixture of commercial lots near the highway and residential lots throughout the remainder of the site. At a minimum, we anticipate site improvements will consist of site grading, construction of utilities, construction of asphaltic concrete paved roadways, and construction of concrete flatwork. Design layout is not completed at this time, and we understand details for the layout are currently �kslop esideeng@gmail.com 406-270-3480 181 Deerfoot Trail �**.Kalispell, MT, 59901 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC conceptual and will depend somewhat on the recommendations outlined in this report. Based on our understanding, the maj ority of the property development is planned for the relatively flat and gently sloping portions of the property. However, site grading to flatten slopes and increase slope stability near the Stillwater River are also being considered. SITE DESCRIPTION General The prof ect site is located in the northern portion of Kalispell, along the US Hwy 93 corridor. The site is bordered by the Stillwater River to the west, a residential structure to the south, Northern Pines golf course and a commercial building to the north, and US Hwy 93 to the east. Past development of the site is minimal, consisting of buried drainage improvements in the southeast corner of the site and irrigation pumps to draw water from the Stillwater River near the center of the south property boundary. The majority of the site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and is currently vegetated with grasses and ground cover. The relatively steep slopes along the Stillwater River are relatively undisturbed by past development and/or agricultural practices. The steep slopes are vegetated with evergreen trees, deciduous trees, and significant underbrush. Seeps and springs were not observed at the ground surface within the planned development area; however, seeps and springs near the river are common in this area, and are very likely present during the wetter times of the year, in the vicinity of the thick underbrush near the Stillwater River. Topography A geologic reconnaissance of the site indicates significant landslide and slumping activity have occurred and are still occurring along the slopes leading down to the Stillwater River. Site observations indicate the majority of the site gradually slopes downward toward the southwest at average slopes of 5H:1 V or flatter with some areas as steep as 2.5H:IV. The slopes in the vicinity of the Stillwater River grade downward toward the Stillwater River at average slopes of 1.5H:1V to 2H:1V, with slopes as steep as 1H:1V in localized areas. Observations of the terrain below the crest of the slope in most areas indicate undulating and hummocky terrain is present down to the Stillwater River. Small scarps and slumps were also observed in the soil near the banks of the Stillwater River, in addition to scattered crooked trees that appear to have moved at one time and then straightened to grow upward. Seeps and springs were not observed; however, we anticipate may be present in some areas under the thick underbrush based on our knowledge of the soils, groundwater table, and perched water flowing through sand lenses in this area. It appears portions of the relatively steep slope along the Stillwater River (particularly in the areas with the most vertical relief) is the head scarp of past slumps and erosion. In addition, portions of the soil between the toe of the slope and the Stillwater River appear to be ancient and active slide debris material that has moved and slumped over many years. The presence of the Stillwater River and the fact that portions of the property are on the outside of the river bend, exasperates the issue and can increase erosion of the toe of this material during high now and currents typically experienced during the winter and spring months. Although portions of the slope and ground surface between the crest of the slope and the Stillwater River appear to be part of past slope failures and are currently still active, it is important Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC to note that signs of slope instability above the crest of the slope were not observed. It appears that the soil above the crests of the slopes have not experienced significant movement due to slope failure. Geology The project site lies in the Rocky Mountain Trench bounded by the Salish Mountains to the West and the Swan Range to the East. The trench was traversed by the Flathead Glacier and was covered by substantial areas of glacial lakes during recession of the ice mass. The surficial geology of the area consists of silts and clays deposited by glacial lakes and sands and gravels deposited during more turbulent times. The soils are underlain by glacial till soils consisting of silty gravel with large cobbles and boulders that were deposited during glaciation of the area. Site Seismicity The site lies within the Intermountain Seismic Belt and is mapped as a zone of potentially significant seismic ground movement. Subsurface materials encountered during this limited investigation indicate the site soils should be classified as Site Class E, in accordance with the International Building Code (IBC 2012). Based on the presence of steep slopes, evidence of past slope failures, and the presence of perched water within sand lenses, we anticipate the risk of lateral spreading in the vicinity of the steep slopes along the Stillwater River are moderate to high. The risk of liquefaction is low is to moderate based on the presence of fine grained soils, a low water table, and density of the granular soils in most areas. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS General Subsurface materials and conditions at the site were investigated on August 28 through 30, 2017 with nine borings, designated B-1 and B-9, and on October 19, 2017 with ten test pits, designated TP-1 through TP-10. The majority of the borings were drilled near the crest of the steep slope leading down to the Stillwater River and were advanced to depths of 20.3 and 50.5 ft below the ground surface. The test pits were excavated throughout the rest of the development and extended down to depths of about 9 to 10 ft below the ground surface. The approximate locations of the subsurface explorations are shown on Figure 2. A detailed discussion of the field exploration and laboratory testing programs completed for this investigation are provided in Appendix A. Logs of the borings and test pits are provided in Appendix A on Figures IA through 19A. Soils Typical soils observed at the ground surface consist of silt with varying percentages of sand and sand with varying percentages of silt over glacial lacustrine deposits comprised of varved silt, silty clay, lean clay, and sandy silt deposits. For the purpose of discussion, the materials and soils disclosed by the subsurface investigation have been grouped into the following categories: 1. SILT 2. SAND 3. SILT, Silty CLAY, Lean CLAY, and Sandy SILT Page 3 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC 1. SILT. Most explorations advanced for this project encountered silt soils below the topsoil layer. The silt is typically light brown to gray, damp and contains varying percentages of fine grained sand. The sand percentages in the silt tend to increase with depth and can vary significantly across the site. Based on Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts of 5 to 58, it appears the silt soils are medium stiff to hard to depths of about 12 ft. SPT blow counts are typically in the soft to medium stiff range below a depth of about 12 ft, as moisture contents increase. Moisture contents of 4 to 33 percent indicate the silt is damp to wet (saturated). A bucket sample of the silt soil was obtained in Test Pit TP-9 at depths of 2 to 3 ft for extensive laboratory testing. Soil tests indicate the material is a low plasticity silt with fine grained sand. A standard moisture density relationship (ASTM D698) indicates the maximum dry density of the silt is 113.1 pcf with an optimum moisture content of 14.6 percent. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests indicate a CBR value of 7.2% is appropriate for the silt soil compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The silt extends to varying depths and is typically underlain by sand with varying percentages of silt or laminated lakebed deposits. Boring B-8 was terminated in this silt layer at a depth of 20.3 ft below the ground surface, and Test Pits TP-2, TP-3, TP-6, and TP-8 were terminated in this layer at depths of 9.5 to 10.0 ft. 2. SAND. The majority of the explorations encountered fine grained sand with varying percentages of silt below the silt or lakebed deposits. The sand contains random thin layers of silt and appears damp to moist, and saturated below the ground water table. SPT blow counts of 3 to 60 blows per ft indicate the sand is loose to very dense. Moisture contents of 3 to 23 percent indicate the sand is damp to wet. Borings 13-1 and B-9, and Test Pits TP-1, TP-5, and TP-9 were terminated in the sand layer at depths of 10 to 50.5 ft below the ground surface. 3. SILT, Silty CLAY, Lean CLAY, and Sandy SILT. Laminated lakebed deposits comprised of varved layers of silt, silty clay, lean clay, and sandy silt were encountered in many of the explorations at various depths. These soils are laminated lakebed deposits and tend to strength diminish with depth as the moisture contents increase. SPT blow counts of 3 to 25 blows per foot indicate these soils are soft to very stiff. Moisture contents range from 10 to 36 percent. Borings B-2 through B-7 and test pits TP-4, TP-7, and TP-10 were terminated in this soil unit at depths of 20.3 to 40.3 ft and 9.0 to 10.0 ft, respectively. Groundwater Groundwater was observed at varying depths across the site. Two inch diameter perforated PVC pipes were installed in Borings 13-1, B-4, B-5, and B-9 for periodic groundwater measurements. The groundwater depth was measured on September 12, 2017, at depths of 16.2 to 33.9 ft below the ground surface. It is important to note the groundwater elevations range from 2,966.9 to 2,955.1 ft and show a gradient flowing to the southwest. Groundwater was encountered in Borings B-2 and B-7; however, due to the time required for equilibration, the depth was not measured. Based on observations during drilling and observed moisture contents, it appears perched water is traveling through confined sand and silt lenses that could outlet on the relatively steep slope near some of the boring locations. It should be noted that seasonal seepage due to rainfall, snowmelt, and golf course irrigation is likely to occur randomly above the measured water levels. Numerous other factors may contribute to groundwater fluctuations and occurrence of seepage; evaluation of these factors Page 4 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC requires special study that is beyond the scope of this report. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS General Based on discussions with the project team at the time of this investigation, we understand the development will consist of a combination of commercial and residential lots. Access to the lots will be provided by AC paved roadways. In addition, where feasible, slope flattening should be considered to assist in reducing the risk of slope stability failures along the slopes leading down to the Stillwater River. Site Preparation The soils encountered at the ground surface in the vicinity of the planned improvements consist of topsoil underlain by silt and clay soils with varying percentages of sand. Sand with varying percentages of silt was also encountered within the upper 10 ft of soil in some areas. Site stripping will need to be conducted in all planned development areas. We anticipate the topsoil and rooted zones will vary between 6 inches and 18 inches in most areas and up to about to 3 or 4 ft in the low lying drainage areas. We anticipate an average stripping thickness of about 12 inches across the entire site. The soils encountered near the ground surface within the planned site development area consist primarily of fine-grained moisture -sensitive soils. Based on past experience, the near -surface fine-grained soils encountered during this investigation have little cohesion. As a result, these soils can be easily disturbed and strength diminished during construction if in -situ moisture contents are greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction. This is of particular concern during the seasonally wet times of the year when seepage or surface water is allowed to pond and infiltrate. Therefore, positive site drainage is of critical importance to both construction and long-term performance of the proposed improvements. Based on our experience in the project vicinity and observations during the subsurface investigation, we anticipate groundwater depths will be greater than 15 ft below the ground surface, and will likely be below the planned excavation limits and utility construction. However, the groundwater level shall be evaluated in the vicinity of planned lift stations to understand the affect on lateral earth pressures and planned construction techniques. Earthwork We understand it is desirable to use on -site soils for the construction of Structural Fill. Near surface, on -site soils consist primarily of silt, clay, and sand. With the exception of topsoil, all soils encountered during this investigation are suitable for Structural Fill construction as long as the soils are free of organics, deleterious materials, and cobbles or boulders larger than 6 inches (cobbles and boulders are not anticipated on the project site). Compaction of Structural Fill shall be accomplished when moisture contents are within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D698. Observations revealed that in most areas, the in situ soils are typically near or dry of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D698, indicating water may need to be added to these soils and the soils will need to be moisture conditioned prior to compaction. In the event that the natural moisture contents of the in situ soils are greater than the optimum moisture Page 5 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC content as determined by ASTM D698, the soils will need to be moisture conditioned by drying methods to approach the optimum moisture content. Construction of Structural Fill during relatively wet weather or when temperatures are below freezing (including nightly low temperatures), will significantly reduce the efficiency of earthwork operations. Limiting mass grading to the relatively dry and warm late spring, summer or early fall months will reduce the likelihood of weather affecting construction operations. Foundation Design Shallow foundations for typical residential and commercial structures shall be established in the native, stiff to very stiff fine grained soils, or compacted Structural Fill or sand. Assuming Slopeside's recommendations are followed, we anticipate the site will be suitable for typical residential and commercial construction. Depending on planned grading and the locations of certain lots, we anticipate below grade spaces are also feasible on most lots. Pavement Analysis Flexible pavement designs have been conducted using the 1993 edition of the AASHTO Guide to Pavement Design. Local road and Arterial roadway pavement sections are provided based on the intended use of the paved areas and our experience with similar projects. Local road pavement sections should be used for interior roads at the development and not major through streets. Arterial roadway pavement sections should be constructed in main access areas where through traffic is anticipated. A CBR value of 5 was used to model the subgrade, assuming the subgrade is compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 and the moisture content is within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. The pavement sections are presented in the Recommendations section of this report. Slope Stability Analysis Observations at the site indicate significant slope stability concerns are present in the vicinity of the relatively steep slopes leading down to the Stillwater River. Experience with the soils encountered, observed groundwater levels, and perched water in sand lenses indicate the current slope is marginal and future movements are likely as pore pressures build and toe resistance is lost due to erosion of the toe at the banks of the Stillwater River. We understand current regulations indicate development is not allowed within 200 ft of the Stillwater River. Although we understand the intent of this regulation, in our opinion, slope stability is a site specific concern and the 200 ft setback may not be appropriate in all areas. In some areas, 200 ft may be significantly greater than necessary and in other areas, 200 ft may not be far enough to protect planned structures from slope stability concerns. Slopeside Engineering's experience with Lakebed deposits in the Flathead Valley, specifically along the Stillwater River, have culminated in recommended slopes and setbacks. The common failure mechanism in these locations is a small failure that occurs at the toe of the slope due to trapped pore water pressures in sand lenses. Following the initial slump, the slope failure tends to propagate upslope as seepage erodes the slide material and soil lense. Larger failures are also possible that tend to fail up to the crest of the slope, and then propagate if measures to stabilize the Page 6 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC head scarp are not constructed. Based on slope stability analyses conducted in the vicinity of this project, observations of subsurface explorations and experience with similar soil structures and slopes, Slopeside Engineering recommends permanent slopes no steeper than 3H:1 V for slopes in the vicinity of the slopes leading to the Stillwater River. The gradual slope recommendation of 3H:1V takes into consideration the soil types, perched water in sand lenses, existing slide debris at the toe of the slope, and the presence of the Stillwater River. Due to the uncertainty of the material below the toe of the slope and erosion patterns of the Stillwater River in this area, we also recommend an additional 20 ft setback from the crest of the 3H:1V slope. The approximate setback line derived from these recommendations is presented as a blue line on Figure 3. We anticipate some revision of this line may be necessary as grading plans and overall site development plans are formulated; however, in our opinion, at this time, the setback line proposed is appropriate for this investigation. We anticipate grading the existing steep slope to a 3H:1 V may not be desirable at this time. In our opinion, the setback line presented is still appropriate and will provide the opportunity to address small failures and provide adequate drainage and mitigation should they develop. RECOMMENDATIONS 1.0 General Site Preparation 1.1 The removal of topsoil and other organic material, including the clearing and grubbing of surficial vegetation and root zones, should be accomplished within the construction zone prior to any earthwork construction. An average stripping thickness of about 12 inches to remove topsoil and cultivated zones is anticipated across the entire site. Following removal of surface organics, the underlying soils shall be evaluated by a qualified geotechnical engineer for suitability as a subgrade material in all pavement, earthwork, and building areas. The subgrade shall consist of silt, silty clay, or sand soils, scarified to a depth of 8 inches, and then compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698, and be within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. Lean clay soils encountered at subgrade elevation are suitable for subgrade if the lean clay is undisturbed. Compaction of undisturbed lean clay soils is not necessary when moisture contents are greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction and proof rolling of the lean clay soils results in minimal to no deformation as observed by our Geotechnical Engineer. 1.2 Surface drainage should be established to direct runoff away from the construction area. Ditching and detention/retention ponds with sump pumps may be needed to control the now of runoff water. 1.3 Excavated material or structural fill to be placed as backfill shall not be stockpiled within 100 ft of the crest of the steep slopes leading down to the Stillwater River. Stockpiling soil on or near the steep slopes will add weight to the slope that will reduce the factor of safety against sliding. Page 7 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC 1.4 Soils encountered at the site have a relatively high silt percentage. These soils are fine grained, moisture -sensitive soils that are easily disturbed by construction activities and traffic when moisture contents are greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction. In the event moisture contents of the silt soils are greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction (this is most likely in the low lying areas near the Stillwater River along the west edge of the property and near the center to the south property boundary), we recommend construction traffic not travel over the fine grained subgrade soils. In areas where heavy construction traffic is anticipated, haul roads with a minimum gravel thickness of 2 feet should be constructed over the planned subgrade. The gravel shall consist of a well -graded gravel with a maximum size of 3 inches with no more than 7 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Geotextile fabric placed between the fine-grained soils and gravel for the haul road will reduce the risk of continued maintenance of the haul road during construction. Provided that the haul road is constructed over firm subgrade stripped of organics, it can be used as a portion of the subbase course for the roadways. 1.5 The stability of construction excavations and associated worker safety are the responsibility of the contractor in accordance with current OSHA regulations; this responsibility may require design by a registered professional engineer. Based on the predominant soil types encountered during our investigation, temporary construction excavations for dry conditions that are to be planned in accordance with OSHA provisions should assume Type B material conditions for the silt and clay soils, and Type C conditions for the relatively clean sand soils encountered. Actual subsurface conditions at the time of excavation should be observed by a geotechnical engineer to determine whether slope flattening, bracing or other stabilization is necessary due to seepage or other unexpected conditions. 2.0 Excavation, Earthwork, and Construction Materials 2.1 Based on observations during Slopeside's subsurface investigation, we anticipate subgrade soil moisture contents will be at or less than the optimum moisture content for compaction of the near surface soil. However, if the moisture contents of subgrade soils are greater than the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D698, track -mounted hydraulic excavators should be used to accomplish excavation to subgrade in all Structural Fill, roadway and foundation areas. The use of track -mounted equipment will reduce the risk of disturbing the underlying moisture -sensitive, fine-grained soils. Rubber -tired equipment, including graders and scrapers, used within 2 feet of subgrade elevation will greatly increase the risk of disturbing the underlying subgrade soils when moisture contents are greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction. 2.2 Structural Fill constructed within proposed roadways, parking lots, building pads, engineered slopes and all other areas that are settlement sensitive shall be comprised of soils that are free of organics and deleterious materials. All Structural Fill material shall be placed in no greater than 8-inch thick lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. In addition, the moisture content of the Structural Fill at the time of compaction shall be within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D698. Cobbles and boulders larger than 6 inch maximum Page 8 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC size shall not be used as fill material. Structural Fills shall consist of on -site soils or be from a material source approved by our geotechnical engineer and meet the following composition guidelines: • The sand and gravel -size particles comprising the fill shall be hard, durable rock materials that will not degrade by moistening or under mechanical action of the compacting equipment; i.e. not shale or other clayey rock types. • The binder/fines should have maximum Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index values of 25 and 10 percent, respectively. • No frozen, organic, or other deleterious materials should be present in the Structural Fill. 2.3 In the event that fill operations are planned for the relatively wet fall, winter and spring months, the fill material may need to be comprised of granular Structural Fill free of organics and deleterious materials. All granular Structural Fill material shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. In addition, the moisture content of the granular Structural Fill at the time of compaction shall be within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D698. Granular Structural Fills shall consist of aggregate from a material source approved by our geotechnical engineer and meet the following gradation and composition guidelines: Screen or Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight 3 -inch 100 1'/z-inch 85-100 No. 4 30-60 No. 200 10 maximum The sand and gravel -size particles comprising the fill should be hard, durable rock materials that will not degrade by moistening or under mechanical action of the compacting equipment; i.e. not shale or other clayey rock types. The binder/fines should have maximum Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index values of 25 and 10 percent, respectively. No frozen, organic, or other deleterious materials should be present in the Structural Fill. 2.4 Fill placement should be observed and tested by our geotechnical site representative. Any areas of rutting, excessive deformation, or other non -uniform performance should be moisture conditioned and recompacted, or removed and replaced, as recommended by our geotechnical engineer. Structural Fill should not be placed on frozen subgrade material or Page 9 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC previously placed Structural Fill or subgrade that has frozen. 2.5 Utility trench backfill material should be approved by our geotechnical engineer, be placed in uniform lifts of maximum 8-inch loose thickness, and be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. In our opinion, on -site silt, silty clay, sand, and lean clay are acceptable for backfill purposes, provided the soils are compacted within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content and they are free of construction debris, and frozen or deleterious material. Utility trench backfill with on site soils would be a deviation from the City of Kalispell Standards and will need to be approved by the Public Works Department in areas within the City's right of way. Cobbles and boulders greater than 4 inch maximum size should not be used as trench backfill material. Backfill should not be placed on frozen subgrade material or previously placed backfill that has frozen. 2.6 Since it is difficult to compact the surface of fill slopes, we recommend fill slopes be overbuilt by 2 feet and trimmed back after construction to provide a surface that is more resistant to localized sloughing. Following construction of all slopes, topsoil can be placed and "track walked" with an appropriately sized dozer. It is important to vegetate and promote root growth after placement of the topsoil on sand and silt soils to reduce the risk of localized sloughing. 2.7 Permanent slopes using Structural Fill shall be no steeper than 2H:1V in most areas. Permanent slopes in the vicinity of the slopes leading down to the Stillwater River shall be no steeper than 3H:1V. 2.8 Structural Fill constructed on slopes steeper than 5H:1V shall be benched into the existing grade as shown on Figure 4. 3.0 Site Drainage 3.1 Finished site grades should be positively sloped away from foundation and backfill zones. Upslope grading should be designed and maintained to route runoff away from the building areas. 3.2 Due to the sensitive nature of existing slopes, stormwater, drains, and roof gutters shall not be allowed to outlet on the slopes. 4.0 Asphaltic Concrete Pavement 4.1 In preparation for subbase course, the subgrade shall be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. In areas where Structural Fill has been previously compacted as part of the Earthwork operations for this project, scarifying and recompacting the subgrade will not be necessary unless the subgrade has previously frozen or is disturbed. Any areas where rutting, yielding, or non -uniform subgrade performance is observed, shall be repaired and improved as recommended by our geotechnical engineer. Compacted silt Page 10 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC is the assumed pavement subgrade material. 4.2 The following flexible pavement thickness design sections assume a 20-year design period, and are consistent with City of Kalispell Standards for Construction. The pavement sections assume construction procedures and material requirements as outlined in the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications, Sixth Edition, 2010, are followed. Pavement Component Arterial Local Street Asphaltic Concrete Pavement 4 in. 4 in. 3/4-inch minus Crushed Base Course 6 in. 6 in. 3 inch minus Uncrushed Subbase 15 in. 9 i n.. 5.0 Exterior Concrete Flatwork 5.1 Concrete flatwork that is allowed to move independently, such as sidewalks, typically have minimal damage of the concrete due to frost heave. As long as the concrete is allowed to raise and lower without being fixed at the edges, minimal cracking due to frost heave is anticipated. 5.2 To reduce the risk of frost heave occurring within the limits of the exterior concrete flatwork and affecting entryways and fixed concrete slabs, Slopeside recommends a combination of reducing water infiltration and removing some of the frost susceptible soils. Slopeside recommends reducing the amount of surface water infiltrating into the ground by collecting roof water in gutters and hard piping the runoff to an acceptable outlet approved by the Civil Engineer. Slopeside also recommends the frost susceptible subgrade soils be overexcavated to a depth of about 2 ft below the bottom of concrete elevation and backfilled with at least 18 inches of Structural Fill consisting of 3 inch minus "pit run" gravel with no more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The upper 6 inches of base material below the concrete should consist of /4 inch to 1 inch open -graded angular drain rock. The drain rock shall be compacted using vibratory methods until well -keyed, and positive drainage shall be provided to allow water to exit from the open graded gravel. 6.0 Seismic Design 6.1 Seismic design following the static procedures outlined in the International Building Code may be conducted using a Site Class E (2012 IBC). A site specific seismic hazard study will be necessary if dynamic procedures are to be followed. 7.0 Construction Services and Quality Control 7.1 Geotechnical observation should be provided to monitor the site preparation, earthwork, and AC pavement stages of construction. These geotechnical services should ascertain that subsurface conditions are reasonably consistent with those determined by our investigation, Page 11 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC and should ascertain that site and foundation preparation are consistent with our recommendations. This is of critical importance due to the location of the improvements in relationship to the existing slope. CONCLUSION The foregoing recommendations present our initial geotechnical input for design and construction of the project. In order for these recommendations to be properly incorporated in the subsequent design and construction stages we recommend that our geotechnical engineering staff remain involved with the project to ascertain that our recommendations have been properly interpreted both during design and construction. These services will reduce the potential for misinterpretation of subsurface conditions and geotechnical design recommendations that are important in the preparation of project plans, specifications and bid documents. LIMITATIONS Slopeside Engineering, LLC, has strived to prepare this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area solely for use by the client for design purposes and is not intended as a construction or bid document representing subsurface conditions in their entirety. The conclusions and recommendations presented are based upon the data obtained during the investigation as applied to the proposed design and construction details discussed in this report. The nature and extent of variations between the subsurface explorations may not become evident until construction. If variations are then exposed, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Sincerely, Of O HUA CO j 1 /7 SMITH / % No, 15675 PE �,` `ss�OI1lALE�G` . Joshua C. Smith, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Page 12 4 AFO&71 - '' . r IG` °0 F� HIV ■■ f f Project: Stillwater Village - 57 Acre Site Job Number: 17-466 Kalispell, Montana Date: November 6, 2017 Site Plan slopeside Slopeside Engineering, LLC Kalispell, MT \ Engineering FIGURE 2 CL a r4armH`JIMSf1 a d � m SI cside's Sctbark LP LO Ir u = w = dn IC z r C, LU •� fr am u a' rf L❑❑ ! DC O P a 92 - 67 ¢ EL rCr I- AL LM Ef -� 6w ject: Stillwater Village - 57 Acre Site Job Number: 17-466 Kalispell, Montana Date: November 6, 2017 Recommended Setback Line Slopeside Slopeside Engineering, LLC Kalispell, MT \ Engineering FIGURE 3 APPENDIX A Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD EXPLORATIONS General The subsurface materials and conditions atthe site were investigated by Slopeside on August 28 through 30, 2017, with nine borings designated B-1 through B-9, and on October 19, 2017 with ten test pits designated TP-1 through TP-10. The locations of the subsurface explorations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. All field explorations were observed by an experienced engineer or geologist provided by our firm, who maintained a detailed log of the materials disclosed during the course of the work. The following subsections contain a detailed description of the field investigation completed for this project. Borings Borings B-1 through B-9 were completed to depths of 20.3 to 50.5 ft. The borings were drilled with hollow -stem auger techniques using a truck -mounted Mobile B61 drill rig provided and operated by Crowley Environmental Drilling of Butte, Montana. Disturbed samples were obtained from the borings at 2.5- to 5-ftintervals of depth. Disturbed samples were obtained using a standard split -spoon sampler and undisturbed samples were obtained using a thin -walled shelby-tube sampler when deemed appropriate. At the time of sampling, the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted. This test consists of driving a standard split -spoon sampler into the soil a distance of 18 in. using a 140-lb hammer dropped 30 in. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 in. is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance, or N-value. The N-values provide a measure of the relative density of granular soils, such as sand, and the relative consistency or stiffness of cohesive soils, such as silt and clay. The soil samples obtained in the split -spoon sampler were carefully examined in the field, and representative portions were saved in airtight plastic bags for further examination and physical testing in our laboratory. Logs of the borings are provided on Figures I through 9A. Each log presents a descriptive summary of the various types of materials encountered and notes the depth where the materials and/or characteristics of the materials change. To the left of the descriptive summary, the numbers and types of samples taken during drilling operations are indicated. To the right, N-values are shown graphically, along with the natural moisture contents, Atterberg Limits, and Torvane shear strength values. Test Pits Test Pits TP-1 through TP-10 were completed to depths ranging from 9.0 to 10.0 ft. The test pits were excavated using a rubber tired backhoe, provided and operated by LHC, Inc., of Kalispell, Montana. Grab samples were obtained from the sidewalls of the excavations and from the backhoe bucket at about 3- to 4-ft intervals of depth. Soil samples obtained in the field were saved in airtight plastic bags for further examination and physical property testing in the laboratory. Logs of the test pits are provided on Figures l0A through 19A. Each log presents a descriptive summary of the various types of materials encountered and notes the depth where the materials and/or characteristics of the materials change. Page A-1 Stillwater Village Development, 57 Acre Site - Kalispell, Montana Slopeside Engineering, LLC LABORATORY TESTING General All samples obtained from the subsurface explorations were returned to our laboratory or taken to a local laboratory where the physical characteristics of the samples were noted, and field classifications were modified where necessary. The laboratory testing program consisted of natural moisture contents, Atterberg Limits, grain size analysis, a moisture density relationship, and a California Bearing Ratio test. Natural Moisture Content Natural moisture content determinations were made in conformance with ASTM D2216. Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits are defined as soil plasticity determined by the moisture range through which a soil passes from a plastic to liquid consistency. This test was conducted in conformance with ASTM D4318 and results are presented on Figure 20A. Grain Size Distribution Grain size distributions indicate the percent by dry weight of clay, silt, sand, and gravel comprising the soil matrix. These tests are conducted in accordance with ASTM D421/422 and results are presented on Figure 21A. Moisture -Density Relationship A moisture -density relationship was determined in accordance with ASTM D698. The laboratory test supplies compaction energy to the soil in a steel mold by the impact of a specified weigh hammer dropped a specified distance. From this test, the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content can be determined for a specified energy imparted to the soil for purposes of comparing in -place field densities and moisture contents. The results for this test are presented on Figure 22A. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) The California Bearing Ratio test is conducted in general accordance with the procedures of ASTM D 1883-99. The testis performed on a subgrade soil sample that has been compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D698, and allowed to soak in water for a four - day period in a standard 6-inch diameter mold. A surcharge weight of 25 pounds (127 psf) is maintained on the sample during the soaking period to simulate the pressure that will exist on the subgrade due to the pavement structure. This pressure will tend to reduce swell and increase bearing capacity similar to the pavement. After the soaking period, any swelling of the sample is measured, and the bearing test performed by forcing a piston with an end area of three square inches into the sample while measuring stress and strain. The data is then compared with similar standardized results for tests on high -quality crushed aggregate. The bearing ratio is determined by comparing the stress required for 0.1-inch penetration of the soil sample versus the standard 1,000 psi stress required for the same penetration of the crushed aggregate. The results of this test have been presented on Figure 23A. Page A-2 USDA united states Department of Agriculture MRCS 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 Stillwater Bend Subdivision November 18, 2019 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. 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. ,zee ,»_i7TT & \ & _ _ _ m� aSV29 _ 006Zm coszm ooz�m 009zm oo9zm \ � • m. � �� /,zem1 \ e � � e / 2 e c � � 3 ^) =q \ ) e ( ) �\ 2 - e In \ _ / \ ` ) i J � � \ { ) ,a= m! _ _ _ msvcg aSV29 _ OD6Jm 002/m 0021m 009/m oc)gzm [ \ & & Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Aa Alluvial land, poorly drained 0.0 0.0% Ab Alluvial land, well drained 38.7 17.7% Bm Blanchard fine sand, 12 to 35 1.6 0.7% percent slopes, wind eroded Bt Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 15.6 7.1 % 7 to 12 percent slopes Bu Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 5.9 2.7% 12 to 20 percent slopes By Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 1.2 0.6% 20 to 45 percent slopes Kd Kalispell gravelly loam, 18.5 8.5% moderately deep over gravel, 12 to 40 percent slopes Ke Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent 35.6 16.2% slopes Kf Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent 7.3 3.3% slopes, wind eroded Kg Kalispell loam, 3 to 7 percent 8.1 3.7% slopes Kh Kalispell loam, 3 to 7 percent 8.3 3.8% slopes, wind eroded Kk Kalispell loam, 7 to 12 percent 5.0 2.3% slopes Kn Kalispell loam, moderately deep 6.4 2.9% over gravel, 0 to 7 percent slopes Kzb Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 3 to 7 4.7 2.1 % percent slopes Kzc Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 7 to 24.6 11.2% 20 percent slopes Ms Muck and peat 8.1 3.7% Ta Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead 16.7 7.6% soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes Tc Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead 1.2 0.5% soils, 3 to 7 percent slopes Te Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead 4.7 2.1 % soils, 7 to 12 percent slopes Tg Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead 6.9 3.1 % soils, 12 to 20 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 219.4 100.0% 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 11 Custom Soil Resource Report Ab—Alluvial land, well drained Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vnm Elevation: 1,650 to 3,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 135 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Alluvial land and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Alluvial Land Typical profile H2 - 6 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent 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 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT), Bottomland (R044AP801 MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Poorly drained soils Percent of map unit. 10 percent Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Bm—Blanchard fine sand, 12 to 35 percent slopes, wind eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vny Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Dunes Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: fine sand C - 3 to 60 inches: fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 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 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Hydric soil rating: No Bt—Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vp4 Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Wind reworked alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 12 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) 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No High (1.98 to 5.95 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Bu—Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vp5 Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Wind reworked alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 20 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No Bv—Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 20 to 45 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vp6 Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Wind reworked alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 20 to 45 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A it. Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kd—Kalispell gravelly loam, moderately deep over gravel, 12 to 40 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgg 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 Kalispell and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: gravelly loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified gravelly loamy fine sand to gravelly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 40 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e 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. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No Ke—Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgh 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam 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 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kf—Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, wind eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgj 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bw - 5 to 10 inches: silt loam Bk - 10 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent 19 Custom Soil Resource Report 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kg —Kalispell loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgk 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Bk - 13 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kh—Kalispell loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes, wind eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vgI 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear 21 Custom Soil Resource Report Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bw - 5 to 10 inches: silt loam Bk - 10 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kk—Kalispell loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vgm 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 Kalispell and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. 22 Custom Soil Resource Report Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e 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 Kn—Kalispell loam, moderately deep over gravel, 0 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vgp 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 23 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: gravelly loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified gravelly loamy fine sand to gravelly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.7 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kzb—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vrl 24 Custom Soil Resource Report Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 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 Kalispell and similar soils: 60 percent Tuffit and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam C - 13 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 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 Description of Tuffit Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Btn - 4 to 12 inches: silty clay 25 Custom Soil Resource Report Bkn - 12 to 29 inches: silty clay loam C - 29 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silty clay 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 low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 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: Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 32.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Claypan (Cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kzc—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 7 to 20 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vr2 Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 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 Kalispell and similar soils: 60 percent Tuffit and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. W Custom Soil Resource Report Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam C - 13 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 20 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: Very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tuffit Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Btn - 4 to 12 inches: silty clay Bkn - 12 to 29 inches: silty clay loam C - 29 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 15 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 low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None 27 Custom Soil Resource Report Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 32.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Claypan (Cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT), Saline-Sodic Grassland (R044AP803MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Ms —Muck and peat Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vry Elevation: 4,500 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 70 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Muck and peat and similar soils: 45 percent IMnginaw and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Muck And Peat Setting Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 6 inches 28 Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT), Subirrigated Grassland (R044AP806MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Winginaw Setting Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Organic material over alluvium Typical profile Oil - 0 to 8 inches: peat Oi2 - 8 to 28 inches: peat 2Ak - 28 to 32 inches: loam 2Bkgl - 32 to 40 inches: gravelly loam 2Bkg2 - 40 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: Frequent Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 12.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: Subirrigated Grassland (R044AP806MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Hydric soil rating: No 29 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 Flathead and similar soils: 30 percent Blanchard 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 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 30 Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: Sandy (Sy) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW183MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Flathead Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium 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 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 31 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Tc—Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vsv 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 Flathead and similar soils: 30 percent Tally and similar soils: 30 percent Blanchard and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Flathead Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium 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 32 Custom Soil Resource Report 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: 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 Description of Tally Setting Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans 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: 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): 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): None specified 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 33 Custom Soil Resource Report 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: 3 to 7 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) 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 Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No High (1.98 to 5.95 Te—Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 7 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vsx 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 34 Custom Soil Resource Report 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: Terraces, alluvial fans 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: 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): 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): None specified 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: 7 to 12 percent 35 Custom Soil Resource Report 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): None specified 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 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: 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: 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 WV Custom Soil Resource Report Tg—Tally, Blanchard, and Flathead soils, 12 to 20 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 4vsz 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 Blanchard and similar soils: 30 percent Flathead and similar soils: 30 percent Tally and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. 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: 12 to 20 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) 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No High (1.98 to 5.95 37 Custom Soil Resource Report Description of Flathead Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium 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: 12 to 20 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tally Setting Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans 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: 12 to 20 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well 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 38 Custom Soil Resource Report 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): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy (Sy) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW183MT), Upland Grassland (R044AP808MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No 39 APPENDIX D HEAT MAP )■■■■■■■■■ 2 o ) ) \ ) ) ) � ) \ 00 \ ) ) ; \ \ ■ mViN m ' sIlV)l smmO10H Nd wd s NasbeansON3aw31Va2ls1 % � � 2 / / \� \ APPENDIX D VEGETATION MAPPING J�1111NTnNA PapgturHeritage Aprogram of the Montana State Library's Natural Resource Information System operated bythe University of Montana. Land Cover Summarized by: (Custom Area of Interest) Grassland Systems Montane Grassland Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill, and Valley Grassland 210/o(134 This grassland system of the northern Rocky Mountains is found at lower montane to foothill elevations in mountains and Acres) valleys throughout Montana. These grasslands are floristically similar to Big Sagebrush Steppe but are defined by shorter summers, colder winters, and young soils derived from recent glacial and alluvial material. They are found at elevations from 548 - 1,650 meters (1,800-5,413 feet). In the lower montane zone, they range from small meadows to large open parks surrounded by conifers; below the lower treeline, they occur as extensive foothill and valley grasslands. Soils are relatively deep, fine -textured, often with coarse fragments, and non -saline. Microphytic crust may be present in high - quality occurrences. This system is typified by cool -season perennial bunch grasses and forbs (>25%) cover, with a sparse shrub cover (<10%). Rough fescue (Festuca campestris) is dominant in the northwestern portion of the state and Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis) is dominant or co -dominant throughout the range of the system. Bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata) occurs as a co -dominant throughout the range as well, especially on xeric sites. Western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) is consistently present, often with appreciable coverage (>10%) in lower elevation occurrences in western Montana and virtually always present, with relatively high coverages (>250/o), on the edge of the Northwestern Great Plains region. Species diversity ranges from a high of more than 50 per 400 square meter plot on mesic sites to 15 (or fewer) on xeric and disturbed sites. Most occurrences have at least 25 vascular species present. Farmland conversion, noxious species invasion, fire suppression, heavy grazing and oil and gas development are major threats to this system. Page 1 of 4 Human Land Use Developed Developed, Open Space 191/o(121 Vegetation (primarily grasses) planted in developed settings for recreation, erosion control, or aesthetic purposes. Acres) Impervious surfaces account for less than 20% of total cover. This category often includes highway and railway rights of way and graveled rural roads. 11W Human Land Use Agriculture Cultivated Crops 161/o(104 These areas used for the production of crops, such as corn, soybeans, small grains, sunflowers, vegetables, and cotton, Acres) typically on an annual cycle. Agricultural plant cover is variable depending on season and type of farming. Other areas include more stable land cover of orchards and vineyards. Human Land Use Developed ■ Low Intensity Residential 9% (55 Includes areas with a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. Impervious surfaces account for 20-50% of total Acres) cover. These areas most commonly include single-family housing units in rural and suburban areas. Paved roadways may be classified into this category. Human Lana us Agriculture Pasture/Hay 7% (48 These agriculture lands typically have perennial herbaceous cover (e.g. regularly -shaped plantings) used for livestock Acres) grazing or the production of hay. There are obvious signs of management such as irrigation and haying that distinguish it from natural grasslands. Identified CRP lands are included in this land cover type. Wetland and Riparian Systems Wet meadow 1P Alpine -Montane Wet Meadow 7% (47 These moderate -to- high- elevation systems are found throughout the Rocky Mountains, dominated by herbaceous species Acres) found on wetter sites with very low -velocity surface and subsurface flows. Occurrences range in elevation from montane to alpine at 1,000 to 3,353 meters (3,280-11,000 feet). This system typically occurs in cold, moist basins, seeps and alluvial terraces of headwater streams or as a narrow strip adjacent to alpine lakes (Hansen et al., 1996). Wet meadows are typically found on flat areas or gentle slopes, but may also occur on sub -irrigated sites with slopes up to 10 percent. In alpine regions, sites are typically small depressions located below late -melting snow patches or on snowbeds. The growing season may only last for one to two months. Soils of this system may be mineral or organic. In either case, soils show typical hydric soil characteristics, including high organic content and/or low chroma and redoximorphic features. This system often occurs as a mosaic of several plant associations, often dominated by graminoids such as tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia caespitosa), and a diversity of montane or alpine sedges such as small -head sedge (Carexillota), small - winged sedge (Carexmicroptera), black alpine sedge (Carexnigricans), Holms€TMs Rocky Mountain sedge (Carex scopulorum) shortstalk sedge (Carex podocarpa) and Paysons€TMs sedge (Carex paysonis). Drummonds€TMs rush (Juncus drummondii), Mertens€TMs rush (Juncus mertensianus), and high elevation bluegrasses (Poa arctica and Poa alpina) are often present. Forbs such as arrow -leaf groundsel (Senecio triangularis), slender -sepal marsh marigold (Caltha leptosepala), and spreading globeflower (Trollius laxus) often form high cover in higher elevation meadows. Wet meadows are associated with snowmelt and are usually not subjected to high disturbance events such as flooding. Human Land Use No Image Developed ■ Other Roads 5% (32 County, city and or rural roads generally open to motor vehicles. Acres) Human Land Use baMining and Resource Extraction ■ Quarries, Strip Mines and Gravel Pits 4% (27 Areas of extractive mining activities with significant surface expression in the form of pits, service roads, and permanently Acres) installed processing machinery wetland and Riparian systems Open Water ■ Open Water 4% (25 All areas of open water, generally with less than 25% cover of vegetation or soil Acres) Page 2 of 4 ti -W — Wetland and Riparian Systems Floodplain and Riparian ■ Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland 2% (13 This ecological system is found throughout the Rocky Mountain and Colorado Plateau regions. In Montana, sites occur at Acres) elevations of 609-1,219 meters (2,000-4,000 feet) west of the Continental Divide. East of the Continental Divide, this system ranges up to 1,676 meters (5,500 feet). It generally comprises a mosaic of multiple communities that are tree - dominated with a diverse shrub component. It is dependent on a natural hydrologic regime with annual to episodic flooding, so it is usually found within the flood zone of rivers, on islands, sand or cobble bars, and along streambanks. It can form large, wide occurrences on mid -channel islands in larger rivers, or narrow bands on small, rocky canyon tributaries and well -drained benches. It is also typically found in backwater channels and other perennially wet but less scoured sites, such as floodplains, swales and irrigation ditches. In some locations, occurrences extend into moderately high intermountain basins where the adjacent vegetation is sage steppe. Black cottonwood (Popuius baisamifera ssp. trichocarpa) is the key indicator species. Other dominant trees may include boxelder maple (Acer negundo), narrowleaf cottonwood (Popuius angustifoiia), eastern cottonwood (Popuius deitoides), Douglas -fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), peachleaf willow (Saiix amygdaioides), or Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopuiorum). Dominant shrubs include Rocky Mountain maple (Acer giabrum), thinleaf alder (Ainus incana), river birch (Betuia occidentaiis), redoiser dogwood (Corpus sericea), hawthorne (Crataegus species), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), skunkbush sumac (Rhus triiobata), willows (Saiix species), rose (Rosa species), silver buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea), or snowberry (Symphoricarpos species). Human Land Use No Image Developed ■ Commercial / Industrial 2% (13 Businesses, industrial parks, hospitals, airports; utilities in commercial/industrial areas. Acres) Human Land Use No Image Developed ■ Major Roads 2% (12 U.S. and State Highways that are not part of the National Highway System (NHS) Interstate network. This category Acres) includes entrance and exit ramps to NHS Interstate highways. Additional Limited Land Cover 1% (4 Acres) 0 Introduced Upland Vegetation - Annual and Biennial Forbland <1% (2 Acres) 0 Emergent Marsh <1% (2 Acres) 0 Rocky Mountain Mesic Montane Mixed Conifer Forest <1% (2 Acres) 0 High Intensity Residential <1% (1 Acres) 7 Rocky Mountain Montane -Foothill Deciduous Shrubland <1% (0Acres) Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Montane Mesic Meadow <1% (0 Acres) Insect -Killed Forest <1% (0Acres) 1■ Rocky Mountain Ponderosa Pine Woodland and Savanna <1% (0Acres) Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Montane Fen Page 3 of 4 Introduction to Land Cover Land Use/Land Cover is one of 15 Montana Spatial Data Infrastructure framework layers considered vital for making statewide maps of Montana and understanding its geography. The layer records all Montana natural vegetation, land cover and land use, classified from satellite and aerial imagery, mapped at a scale of 1:100000, and interpreted with supporting ground -level data. The baseline map is adapted from the Northwest ReGAP (NWGAP) project land cover classification, which used 30m resolution multi -spectral Landsat imagery acquired between 1999 and 2001. Vegetation classes were drawn from the Ecological System Classification developed by NatureServe (Comer et al. 2003). The land cover classes were developed by Anderson et al. (1976). The NWGAP effort encompasses 12 map zones. Montana overlaps seven of these zones. The two NWGAP teams responsible for the initial land cover mapping effort in Montana were Sanborn and NWGAP at the University of Idaho. Both Sanborn and NWGAP employed a similar modeling approach in which Classification and Regression Tree (CART) models were applied to Landsat ETM+ scenes. The Spatial Analysis Lab within the Montana Natural Heritage Program was responsible for developing a seamless Montana land cover map with a consistent statewide legend from these two separate products. Additionally, the Montana land cover layer incorporates several other land cover and land use products (e.g., MSDI Structures and Transportation themes and the Montana Department of Revenue Final Land Unit classification) and reclassifications based on plot -level data and the latest NAIP imagery to improve accuracy and enhance the usability of the theme. Updates are done as partner support and funding allow, or when other MSDI datasets can be incorporated. Recent updates include fire perimeters and agricultural land use (annually), energy developments such as wind, oil and gas installations (2014), roads, structures and other impervious surfaces (various years): and local updates/improvements to specific ecological systems (e.g., central Montana grassland and sagebrush ecosystems). Current and previous versions of the Land Use/Land Cover layer with full metadata are available for download at the Montana State Library's Geographic Information Clearinghouse. Within the report area you have requested, land cover is summarized by acres of Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 Ecological Systems. Literature Cited Anderson, J.R. E.E. Hardy, J.T. Roach, and R.E. Witmer. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. Comer, P., D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Evans, S. Gawler, C. Josse, G. Kittel, S. Menard, M. Pyne, M. Reid, K. Schulz, K. Snow, and J. Teague. 2003. Ecological systems of the United States: A working classification of U.S. terrestrial systems. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. Page 4 of 4 APPENDIX F TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY • • abelin traffic services Prepared For: Stillwater Bend Subdivision lackola Engineering & Architecture 2250 U.S. 93 S Kalispell, MT 59901 December, 2019 Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 406-459-1443 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Table of Contents A. Executive Summary...................................................................................... I B. Project Description........................................................................................ I C. Existing Conditions........................................................................................ I Adjacent Roadways..............................................................................1 TrafficData............................................................................................3 HistoricTraffic Data...............................................................................3 Planned Road Improvements................................................................4 Additional Developments.......................................................................5 Levelof Service.....................................................................................5 D. Proposed Development..............................................................................6 E. Trip Generation and Assignment................................................................6 F. Trip Distribution..........................................................................................8 G. Traffic Impacts Outside of the Development...............................................8 H. Impact Summary & Recommendations......................................................9 List of Figures Figure 1 — Proposed Development Site...................................................................2 Figure 2 — Proposed Development..........................................................................7 Figure3 —Trip Distribution....................................................................................... 8 List of Tables Table 1 — Historic Average Daily Traffic Data..........................................................3 Table 2 — 2019 Level of Service Summary..............................................................5 Table 3 — Trip Generation Rates.............................................................................6 Table 4 — Level of Service Summary with Developments.......................................9 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Stillwater Bend Subdivision is a 56-acre commercial and residential project located west of Highway 93 at Rose Crossing in Kalispell, Montana. At full build -out, the project would produce over 8,000 new daily vehicle trips in this area. As proposed, the Stillwater Bend Subdivision would not create any new roadway capacity problems that were not already identified and planned for mitigation with the Kalispell North Town Center project just to the east of the Stillwater Bend Subdivision. Based on the reconfiguration of the Highway 93/Rose Crossing intersection with the Stillwater Bend project, the developers should work with the City of Kalispell and the Kalispell North Town Center to create an alternative intersection lane configuration and develop a more efficient lane mix for this planned future traffic signal to meet the future growth needs in this area. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This document studies the possible effects on the surrounding road system from a proposed residential and commercial development located west of Highway 93 in Kalispell, Montana. The document provides information regarding possible traffic impacts in the area and identifies traffic mitigation efforts that the development may require. The development would include up 25 acres of B-2 business property and 31 acres of RA-2 residential property (855 potential multi -family units). C. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed development property currently consists of a 56-acre parcel of land located west U.S. Highway 93 on the northern edge of the City of Kalispell. The property currently consists of an undeveloped farm field. The surrounding area is comprised of a mix of commercial properties adjacent to the Highway 93 corridor. The Kalispell North Town Center project is currently under construction to the east of Highway 93. Currently the road infrastructure for this project and the Kalispell Ford Dealership have been constructed east of Highway 93. See Figure 1 for a location map of the proposed development. Adjacent Roadways US Highway 93 is a five -lane north/south principal arterial roadway which extends north from Kalispell to Whitefish. The roadway has a rural cross-section with a paved width of 78 feet and a shared center two-way left -turn lane. The road is currently signalized at the intersection Abelin Traffic Services 1 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana with West Reserve Drive to the south. The posted speed -limit on Highway 93 is 65 MPH north of Reserve Drive. ATS acquired Traffic data collected by MDT that indicates the roadway carried 19,742 VPD north of Reserve Drive in 2018. Whitefish Stage Road/ Route 292 is a two-lane north/south minor arterial route which extends north of Kalispell and connects to Montana Highway 40 south of Whitefish. The roadway provides agricultural and residential access in the area. The route has a rural cross-section with a total paved width of 24 feet. The posted speed limit on Whitefish Stage Road is 50 MPH north of Reserve Drive. Whitefish Stage Road is signal controlled at the intersection with West Reserve Drive. Data obtained by ATS from MDT indicates that the roadway carried 3,860 VPD north of Reserve Drive in 2018. Rose Crossing is a local east/west route that extends east from Highway 93 to US Route 2. The newly constructed road provides access to commercial, agricultural, and residential areas east of Highway 93 including Kalispell Ford. The posted speed limit on Rose Crossing is 35 Abelin Traffic Services 2 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana MPH. Rose Crossing is STOP controlled at the intersections with Highway 93 and Whitefish Stage Road. Nob Hill Loop is an east/west local route that extends 2,000 feet east from Highway 93 to provide access for future development of this area. Once completed the roadway will provide a connection from Highway 93 to Whitefish Stage Road. The roadway has a posted speed limit of 35 MPH and is STOP controlled at the intersections with Highway 93 and Whitefish Stage Road. Traffic Data In July 2019 Abelin Traffic Services (ATS) collected traffic data at area intersections to evaluate current operations characteristics. These counts included peak -hour turning movement counts at nearby intersections. The peak -hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of Highway 93 with Nob Hill Loop and Rose Crossing, and the intersection of Whitefish Stage Road with Rose Crossing. The raw data collected for this project may be 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 July is approximately 118% of the AADT (Average Annual Daily Traffic) in this area. In order to provide more conservative results and a more accurate assessment of peak summer traffic conditions, no seasonal factoring was performed on the traffic data collected for this analysis. The raw traffic data is included in Appendix A of this report. Historic Traffic Data Abelin Traffic Services obtained historic traffic data for the surrounding road network from the Montana DOT. This data is presented in Table 1. The traffic data history shows that traffic volumes on Highway 93 have increased at a rate of 3% annually over the last ten years. Traffic volumes along Whitefish Stage Road have remained consistent over the time period. Table 1 - Historic Traffic Data Location 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 US93Nof Reserve 16,610 16,230 15,670 16,970 16,220 16,550 16,961 20,215 19,742 #15-7B-018 US93Sof Happy Valley Dr 11,200 14,110 14,250 13,230 14,140 14,320 15,900 15,654 16,898 #15-4A-042 Whitefish Stage N of Reserve 3,540 3,580 3,170 3,300 2,460 3,609 3,834 3,803 3,860 #15-7B-078 Abelin Traffic Services 3 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Planned Road Improvements The 2006 Kalispell Area Transportation Plan predicts that traffic volumes on Highway 93 may reach 39,000 VPD by 2030 north of Reserve Drive. The plan recommends a variety of future improvements for the Rose Crossing corridor to meet future traffic demands. The update of the Kalispell Transportation Plan in 2020 will more accurately evaluate the future traffic conditions in this area and may provide updated recommendations for necessary road improvements. The details of these projects from the 2006 transportation plan are as follows: MSN 31. US Highway 93 North (Reserve Drive to Birch Grove Road) Problem: Development pressures north of the City of Kalispell have necessitated a greater deal of access control and restrictions. The majority of commercial development, along with significant residential development, is being planned for the area between Reserve Drive and Birch Grove Drive in the foreseeable future. Recommendation: MSN-31(a): Provide for a "junior interchange" at the intersection of Rose Crossing and US Highway 93 North. This location will allow excellent ingress and egress to developing land on the east side of the highway, without compromising thru traffic mobility along US Highway 93 North itself. This location will work well with the project described earlier in this chapter described under MSN-9. It should be recognized that this is a long-term vision for the crossing. In the short term, traffic signalization control may be operationally acceptable to serve adjacent land use changes and future connectivity needs. MSN 9. Rose Crossing (western Corridor Creation — Farm to Market Road to Whitefish Stage Road): Problem: Lack of east / west connectivity and future land development needs. Recommendation: This recommendation is to construct a new east / west corridor along the approximate westerly extension of Rose Crossing, between Farm to Market Road and Whitefish Stage Road. This is a long-term need and will serve future development patterns that will inevitable occur. Consideration should be given to a "junior interchange" at US Highway 93 to extend the capacity of US Highway 93 North. It should be recognized that this is a long-term vision for the crossing. In the short-term, roundabouts and traffic signalization control may be operationally acceptable to serve adjacent land use changes and future connectivity needs. The Rose Crossing future corridor should be planned for an urban minor arterial facility. This would include a minimum of 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 north -south routes. Estimated Cost: $9, 800, 000 Abelin Traffic Services 4 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Additional Developments The Kalispell North Town Center is a large commercial and residential development currently under construction along the east side of Highway 93 adjacent to Rose Crossing. The total projected vehicle trip generation from the project could reach 40,000 trips per day a full buildout. The development would address traffic issues on Highway 93 by constructing two new traffic signals at the north and south ends of the project at Rose Crossing and the project's south approach (yet to be constructed) and restricting turning movements from the project at Nob Hill road (already constructed). A traffic signal is also proposed at the intersection of Rose Crossing and Whitefish Stage Road. The Rose Crossing/Highway 93 traffic signal would be installed with the initial phases of the project. Information from the 2016 TIS prepared for the project was used to forecast future traffic demands in this area. 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 7.8. 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. Table 2 — 2019 Level of Service Summary AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Highway 93 & Rose Crossing* 64.2 F 783 F Highway 93 & Nob Hill Loop* 11.3 B 15.8 C Whitefish Stage Road & Rose Crossing 11.2/12.2 B/B 16.3/13.2 C/B * Eastbound/Westbound LOS & Delay. Table 2 shows the existing 2019 LOS for the AM and PM peak hours without the traffic from the proposed developments in this area. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C. The table shows that the intersection of Rose Crossing with Highway 93 is currently experiencing significant delay issues that will need to be address as this area continues to develop. There is not currently sufficient traffic to warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this location, but development pressure on Rose Crossing east or west of Highway 93 could quickly create sufficient traffic demand to necessitate the installation of a traffic signal at this location, as identified in the Kalispell North Town Center traffic report. The other intersections in this area are currently operating within acceptable limits at LOS B to C. Abelin Traffic Services 5 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana D. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Stillwater Bend Subdivision is proposed for development on 56 acres of land located west of Highway 93. The development would include up 25 acres of B-2 business property along Highway 93 and 31 acres of RA-2 residential property which would include (855 units maximum). The project would access onto Highway 93 at the existing intersection of Rose Crossing to the north and Nob Hill Road to the south. The interior road network would be constructed to City of Kalispell road standards and would be configured to allow future access to the adjacent properties as additional areas are developed. The development plans to configure the new connection on the west side of Highway 93 at Nob Hill Road as a right -only exit to match the existing configuration on the east side of Highway 93. The Stillwater Bend Subdivision site plan is shown in Figure 2. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. 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. Detailed land use information for the commercial area has not been developed but current plans expect up to 240 KSF of usable commercial space on the property. According to the ITE trip generation rates, at full build -out the development would produce 701 AM peak hour trips, 756 PM peak hour trips, and 8,996 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 Apartments 855 #220 Units 0.46 393 0.56 479 7.32 6,259 Business 220 Park #770 KSF 1.40 308 1.26 277 12.44 2,737 Total 701 756 8,996 Abelin Traffic Services 6 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana Figure 2 — Proposed Stillwater Bend Development --- - - - -- � r i I r. �4 ! - - . II I I I N � I I STILLWATER BEND SUBDIVISION SPARTAN HOLDINGS3 w 03SPEIL MONTA' A Abelin Traffic Services 7 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana F. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The traffic distribution and assignment for the proposed subdivision was based upon the existing ADT volumes along the adjacent roadways and the proposed vehicle trip distributions from the Kalispell North Town Center project. Drivers are expected to distribute onto the surrounding road network as shown on Figure 3. Figure 3 — Peak -Hour Trip Distribution 30% 5% Rose Crossing 10% Stillwater Bend Subdivision M rn O � 3 � a� Cn n 4- 2 Nob Hill Loop 50% j 5% G. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT Using the trip generation and trip distribution rates, 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 Kalispell North Town Center and assumes signals are installed at Rose Crossing on Highway 93 and Whitefish Stage Road. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C of this report. The table indicates that the construction of the Stillwater Bend Subdivision will not cause any additional roadway capacity problems in this area beyond those already identified in the Kalispell North Town Center traffic report. The recommendations developed from that report will be needed to ensure efficient traffic flow. The proposed lane configurations for the intersection of Highway 93 and Rose crossing may need Abelin Traffic Services 8 December, 2019 Stillwater Bend Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Kalispell, Montana to be readdressed with the extension of Rose Crossing to the west side of Highway 93 into the Stillwater Bend Subdivision. The Kalispell North Town Center traffic impact study recommended including two westbound left -turn lanes from Rose Crossing onto Highway 93. This configuration would be effective for the original `T' configuration of this approach, but may be less efficient at a four-way intersection due to the signal timing restrictions caused by dual left -turn lanes. A review of the traffic volumes with these two projects combined indicted that the most efficient lane configuration would be separate left, thru, and right lanes for both westbound and eastbound traffic on Rose Crossing and an additional northbound right -turn lane on Highway 93 at Rose Crossing to improve through traffic mobility at the intersection. The LOS issues predicted for the intersection of Highway 93 at Nob Hill Road for westbound traffic (right -turn only) from the Kalispell North Town Center Project were also identified in the TIS for that project but no mitigation strategies were provided. The Stillwater Bend project will have a minimal impact on this condition. The Stillwater Bend project would also influence when improvements become needed on Rose Crossing. The traffic signal at Highway 93 and Rose Crossing would likely be needed with the initial phases of the Stillwater Bend Subdivision if not already constructed as part of the Kalispell North Town Center project. Ultimately the Stillwater Bend subdivision will increase traffic volumes at the intersections along highway 93 by 14% percent and by 7% percent on Whitefish Stage Road. Table 4 — Proiected Level of Service With Develoaments AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) F LOS Highway 93 & Rose Crossin ** 19.8 B 21.3 C Highway 93 & Nob Hill Loop* 16.5/14.7 C/B 22.7/67.1 C/F Whitefish Stage Road & Rose Crossin ** 6.7 A 9.6 A * Eastbound/Westbound LOS & Delay. "With Installation of Proposed Traffic Signals. H. IMPACT SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS As proposed, the Stillwater Bend Subdivision would not create any new roadway capacity problems that were not already identified and planned for mitigation with the Kalispell North Town Center project just to the east of the Stillwater Bend Subdivision. Based on the reconfiguration of the Highway 93/Rose Crossing intersection with the Stillwater Bend project, the developers should work with the City of Kalispell and the Kalispell North Town Center to create an alternative intersection lane configuration and develop a more efficient lane mix for this planned future traffic signal to meet the future growth needs in this area. Abelin Traffic Services 9 December, 2019 APPENDIX A Traffic Data tuadirt .J a " Sewice6 93U S. . Stet Helena, MT 59601 File Name : Not Named 4 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/25/2019 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted - Bank 1 HWY 93 NOB HILL HWY 93 NOB HILL Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App Toni Right Thru Left Peds App Toni Right Thru Left Peds App Toga, Right Thru Left Peds App To.i Int. Total 07:30 AM 0 231 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 455 07:45 AM 0 258 0 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 0 213 0 0 213 0 0 0 0 0 471 Total 0 489 0 0 489 0 0 0 0 0 0 437 0 0 437 0 0 0 0 0 926 08:00 AM 0 176 0 0 176 1 0 0 0 1 1 183 0 0 184 0 0 0 0 0 361 08:15 AM 0 196 0 0 196 0 0 0 0 0 1 192 0 0 193 0 0 0 0 0 389 Grand Total 0 861 0 0 861 1 0 0 0 1 2 812 0 0 814 0 0 0 0 0 1676 Apprch % 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0 0.2 99.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 0 51.4 0 0 51.4 0.1 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 48.4 0 0 48.6 0 0 0 0 0 Unshifted 0 852 0 0 852 1 0 0 0 1 2 798 0 0 800 0 0 0 0 0 1653 Unshifted Bank 1 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 23 % Bank 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 (Uadirt .J a " Sewice6 i3U S. mie SfxeeE Helena, MT 59601 File Name : NobPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 7/24/2019 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted - Bank 1 HWY 93 NOB HILL HWY 93 NOB HILL Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App.Toal Right Thru Left Peds App.T.fi Right Thru Left Peds App.T.., Right Thru Left Peds App.T.., Id.TOtal 04:45 PM 0 267 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 1 330 0 0 331 0 0 0 0 0 598 Total 0 267 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 1 330 0 0 331 0 0 0 0 0 598 05:00 PM 0 313 0 0 313 1 0 0 0 1 1 389 1 0 391 0 0 0 0 0 705 05:15 PM 0 270 0 0 270 0 0 0 0 0 1 353 0 0 354 0 0 0 0 0 624 05:30 PM 0 262 0 0 262 0 0 0 0 0 1 295 1 0 297 0 0 0 0 0 559 Grand Total 0 1112 0 0 1112 1 0 0 0 1 4 1367 2 0 1373 0 0 0 0 0 2486 Apprch % 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0 0.3 99.6 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 0 44.7 0 0 44.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 55 0.1 0 55.2 0 0 0 0 0 Unshifted 0 1103 1364 Unshifted 0 99.2 0 0 99.2 100 0 0 0 100 100 99.8 100 0 99.8 0 0 0 0 0 99.5 Bank 1 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 12 % Bank 1 0 0.8 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 LOCATION:93 and Rose Crossing 7/25/2019 Passerger Cars NO'PfFTnd Eas—fund sou-fFiffo-u-nd eW stand g ru a e s ig ru a e s g ru a e s ig ru a e s 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 lu 12 17 20 39 49 35 31 131 157 211 167 278 324 326 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 Oj i 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lZb 174 242 209 227 284 252 253 J 6 11 8 10 13 10 7 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 4 5 6 19 8 9 3 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 3 11 8 14 19 15 12 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 279 356 497 418 587 697 647 Heavy Trucks L13 100'+ V LV7/ V V V V V 1/O/ 00 103J J/ V 00 1'+D 10% 90% 0% 0% 96% 4% 39% 0% 61% Northbound Eastbound Southbound Westbound Right Thru Left Pecs Right IThru Left jPecs Right Thru Left jPecs Right Thru Left jPecs TOTAL 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 12 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 01 0 Oj 0 Oj 0 Oj i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 4 0 4 0 10 0 5 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 4 3 12 0 2 4 0 Total 1 29 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 39 1 40 0 0 2 2 3% 97% 0% 0% 98% 3% 0% 0% 100% Northbound Eastbound Southbound Westbound Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Left Pecs Right Thru Left Pecs Right Thru Left Pecs TOTAL 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 4:30 4:45 5:00[__ 5:15 10 12 17 20 39 49 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 36 31 136 161 214 179 278 326 329 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 0 179 0 246 0 213 0 237 0 289 0 254 0 258 3 0 6 0 11 0 9 0 10 0 13 0 10 0 7 0 3 4 5 6 19 8 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 11 0 8 0 15 0 19 0 16 0 12 0 288 365 504 435 598 704 654 601 214 1913 0 2127 0 0 0 0 0 1806 69 1875 57 0 90 147 10% 90% 0% 0% 96% 4% 39% 0% 61% LOCATION: Rose Crossing & Whitefish Stage Road 7/25/2019 Passerger Cars NorrM=ound Easi�nd 5ouiM=o und eW sfund g ru a e s ig ru a e s g ru a e s ig ru a e s 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 b 5 4 5 15 14 10 16 8 14 11 14 32 25 25 24 2 5 1 4 0 1 3 01 01 Oj i 0 0 0 0 z 2 5 6 8 13 10 6 b 6 16 7 27 28 48 25 I 1 1 0 6 7 7 4 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 2 2 0 1 3 1 0 16 34 37 18 32 38 40 32 b 0 2 4 4 0 5 3 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 2 4 4 9 3 5 4 z5 12 11 11 8 14 24 12 lz 21 16 11 10 17 18 19 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 30 42 33 92 87 101 Heavy Trucks /'+ 1J3 17 L40 JL lOL L/ L41 7 L47 L4 z0z 31 1VV 1L4 LJJ 30% 62% 8% 22% 67% 11% 3% 88% 9% 12% 39% 49% Northbound Eastbound Southbound Westbound Right Thru Left Pecs Right IThru Left jPecs Right Thru Left jPecs Right Thru Left jPecs TOTAL 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 4:30 4:45 5:00 5:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 Oj 0 Oj 0 Oj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 4 1 0 1 2 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 50% 0% 50% Passerger Cars Northbound Eastbound Southbound Westbound Right Thru Left Pecs Right Thru Left jPecs lRight Thru Left jPecs lRight IThru Left jPecs TOTAL 7:30 5 8 3 0 2 5 1 0 0 21 6 0 0 8 12 0 71 7:45 5 14 2 0 2 6 1 0 2 34 0 0 2 12 21 0 101 8:00 4 —11 5� 0 5 16 1 0 2 38 2 �0 �4 11 16 — 0 115 8:155—-14— —10�6�7�0�0�0�18-4—-0—-4-11�11��0 81 4:30 15 32 4 0 8 27 6 0 1 32 4 0 9 8 10 0 156 4:45 14 25 0 0 13 28 7 0 3 38 0 0 3 14 17 0 162 5:00 10 25 1 0 10 48 7 0 1 40 5 0 5 24 19 0 195 5:15 16 24 3 0 7 25 4 0 0 32 3 0 5 12 19 0 150 74 153 19 246 53 162 27 242 9 253 24 286 32 100 125 257 30% 62% 8% 22% 67% 11% 3% 88% 8% 12% 39% 49% APPENDIX B Traffic Model CO CO N N c-I N .-i l0 RI, � O � lD a- i c-I � (.0N � -i w N 00 N 00 O Ln l0 N c-I L N I'D I;T O I;T Ln o0 l0 N O O 00 l0 «�14r�L M �Z�Jh 1 r► 00 'T d> O l0 l0 O O O dA 4-L N v l0 N N Ol � c-I c-I O z co L m N M .-I Ln 00 N l0 O .--i O 00 O I- M O n «� 4r4-L 41 1 4 M Z=�Jh 1 r► O N M O c-I C O N L L 7 3 0 Q) Q) 0 d Q) co -0 O C C L Q X d X 4O GA GA U cC_ cC_ L•X Ln N Ln W (n L U O l0 00 M 01 Ln O i i CD -i O VI �Z�Jh 1 r► O l0 N O O O Ln u1 -i c-I Ln Ln -i zj- 4-L Z =� Jlh 1 to O N O Ln N c-I ao ao c c O O L L U U aJ aJ (N (N O O ai N N I- Ln 'T N m .- i c-I G VI 4- d (N aJ z�Jh 1 r►z�Jh 4- a) 1 r► rm O o m o z z N 00 .-I l0 00 00 Ln I- 00 00 r-i Ln r� N M m .--I Ln I- l0 N n N l0 m N m �Z�Jh 1 �► Z�Jh 1 �► Z�Jh 1 �► Z�Jh 1 �► 00(.0 Ln Ln 00 Ln (3)Ln (.0 m m(3) Ln (o 0 O U ro > L L U L O i0 U r L O [6 (n C c U v v v 4J 0 v 4J a) m -O L So 3 4J CD L m QJ U Q Y c0 QJ U 0 D j U _> a-J L � O 0 +J U a) O (7 +J U aj O N zi�j a N a 01 Ln dA ��14r4-t N QJ Ln Ln rn N I 00 I- r- r- 'T m O O 00 m �14 �L �14r�L M �Z�Jh 1 �► Z�Jh 1 �► 00 .1 Ln 00 m i m O O I- I- N -i Il ci Ln -i -i Ol Ln U N 4- Q) Ln Ln M (.o lM .-I 01 I Ln 'T Ln m 00 00 00 'T m O O 00 m �14 �L �14r�L M �Z�Jh 1 �► Z�Jh 1 �► m N M Ln N N N O O O I- 'T Ln N n N 00 -i -i C O �-r- = O O � = O O 3 � L [o Ln Ln Ln �Ln L (o Ln Ln Q) -Cvd c N Ol v c Ol Q CO ro Q M M JQJ � d Ln 0) M M OO Q) c C QJ C QJ j U (D U (D U >aj QJ u QJ Ln Ln a— 0 Ln a z 0 a l0 r-I N l0 Ql � r-I dA 4r4-t r-I N 00 Ln Ln I- 00 Vl V1 qzt Vl r-i C4 r-i 00 00 Ql N l0 m lzt w r� r-i r-i r-I Ql M r-I 41 4- *L cn rn =z� w m O Ln W m rI O N rI r-I N r-I 00 u -0 O Z � r-I V1 r-I n 00 r- o .^-i Ln O O 00 r-i N 4 Ir4.t I- Ln Ln Ln O r-I r� c 0 U u � L L L L y (3) QJ -O +� u O u O m O 2 O _ L O c O Y O Y V) F- F- Q F- 0- a t.0 lZt O O O O c l I, qzt N m r-i qzt to 4r4-t O rO N � n O4 r-i r-i r-i V1 N u ''''? O rn r I I, m N N r-i lzt r-i m rn r Ql I- n lzt Q1 00 C4 r-i r-i \ _ u -0 r-i O z N N V1 O 00 � � r- 00 0^ m Ql r-i C14 N O O 00 r-i C14 rat , rat ht� z�Pub� � V1 C14 I- C14 l0 O O 00 r-i cn r-i r-i APPENDIX C LOS Calculations HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Rose Crossing Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Rose Crossing Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1- U 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 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Configuration L R L T TR L T TR Volume (veh/h) 44 20 0 0 856 68 0 44 984 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized No Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.56 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 44 20 0 44 Capacity, c (veh/h) 84 544 692 729 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.04 0.00 0.06 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 2.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh) 87.9 11.9 10.2 10.3 Level of Service (LOS) F B B B Approach Delay (s/veh) 64.2 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS F Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:33:56 AM 93a nd RoseAM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Rose Crossing Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Rose Crossing Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1- U 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 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Configuration L R L T TR L T TR Volume (veh/h) 76 32 0 0 1304 196 0 52 1156 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized No Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 7.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.56 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 76 32 0 52 Capacity, c (veh/h) 27 352 594 438 v/c Ratio 2.78 0.09 0.00 0.12 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 9.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 Control Delay (s/veh) 1106.3 16.3 11.1 14.3 Level of Service (LOS) F C B B Approach Delay (s/veh) 783.3 0.0 0.6 Approach LOS F Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:34:28 AM 93andRosePM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Nob Hill Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Nob Hill Loop Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1- U 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 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Configuration LR L T TR L T TR Volume (veh/h) 0 4 0 0 852 4 0 4 1032 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 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) 7.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.56 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 4 0 4 Capacity, c (veh/h) 572 663 774 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.3 10.4 9.7 Level of Service (LOS) B B A Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:32:44 AM 93a nd NobAM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Nob Hill Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Nob Hill Loop Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1- U 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 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Configuration LR L T TR L T TR Volume (veh/h) 0 4 0 0 1556 4 0 4 1252 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 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) 7.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 7.56 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.5 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.53 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 4 0 4 Capacity, c (veh/h) 336 546 415 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 15.8 11.6 13.8 Level of Service (LOS) C B B Approach Delay (s/veh) 15.8 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS C Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:33:28 AM 93andNobPM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection WF Stage & Rose Crossing Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Rose Crossing Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Whitefish Stage Road Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend 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) 4 64 20 64 20 44 16 8 152 8 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) 88 124 20 8 Capacity, c (veh/h) 665 625 1413 1537 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.20 0.01 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 0.5 0.7 0.0 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.2 12.2 7.6 7.4 Level of Service (LOS) B B A A Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.2 12.2 2.0 0.4 Approach LOS B B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:35:43 AM WFStageandRoseAM.xtw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection WF Stage & Rose Crossing Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Rose Crossing Analysis Year 2019 North/South Street Whitefish Stage Road Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Existing Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend 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) 28 192 40 20 96 76 4 100 40 20 160 4 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) 260 192 4 20 Capacity, c (veh/h) 575 631 1408 1437 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.30 0.00 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 2.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh) 16.3 13.2 7.6 7.5 Level of Service (LOS) C B A A Approach Delay (s/veh) 16.3 13.2 0.2 0.9 Approach LOS C B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:36:32 AM W FStagea nd Rose M.xtw HCS7 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information d J. 4 4 Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Sep 4, 2019 Area Type Other A_ Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Projected PHF 1.00 $ Urban Street US Highway 93 Analysis Year 2025 1 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Fr ti Intersection lRose Crossing File Name RoseAMwith.xus Project Description Stillwater Bend ti f Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 125 48 19 1 112 48 1 149 97 914 146 200 1113 48 Signal Information y 3 4 7 a Cycle, s 90.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Green 5.5 1.6 46.5 21.5 0.0 0.0 Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Yellow 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On 1 Red 11.0 10.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 8 4 1 6 5 2 Case Number 6.0 6.0 1.1 4.0 1.1 4.0 Phase Duration, s 26.5 26.5 10.5 51.5 12.0 53.0 Change Period, ( Y+R ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Queue Clearance Time( g s ), s 20.4 11.9 4.2 6.7 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 Phase Call Probability 1 1.00 1.00 0.91 1 0.99 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 125 67 112 197 97 543 517 200 585 576 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/In 1233 1686 1388 1560 1755 1772 1686 1755 1772 1746 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 8.8 2.8 1 6.2 9.9 2.2 19.3 19.4 4.7 1 20.8 20.8 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g ), s 18.4 2.8 8.8 9.9 2.2 19.3 19.4 4.7 20.8 20.8 Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.57 10.299 0.52 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.53 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 246 406 375 376 324 910 866 381 942 928 Volume -to -Capacity Ratio (X) 0.508 0.165 0.299 0.524 0.597 0.597 0.525 0.621 0.621 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/In ( 50 th percentile) 64.9 27.6 50.3 89.5 18.8 189.4 178.7 38.9 201.1 195.4 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/In ( 50 th percentile) 2.6 1.1 2.0 3.5 0.7 7.5 7.1 1.5 7.9 7.8 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d i ), s/veh 37.5 27.0 30.4 29.7 11.9 15.3 15.3 11.8 14.7 14.7 Incremental Delay ( d2 ), s/veh 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 2.9 3.0 0.4 1 3.1 3.1 Initial Queue Delay ( d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 38.1 27.1 30.5 30.1 12.0 18.2 18.4 12.3 17.8 17.9 Level of Service (LOS) D C C C B B B B B B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 34.2 C 30.2 C 17.8 B 17.0 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 19.8 B Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.29 B 2.29 B 1.89 B 1.89 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 0.80 A 1.00 A 1.44 A 1.61 B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCSTM Streets Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:57:27 AM HCS7 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information d b Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Sep 4, 2019 Area Type Other A_ Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Projected PHF 1.00 Urban Street US Highway 93 Analysis Year 2025 1 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Fr ti Intersection lRose Crossing File Name RosePMwith.xus Project Description Stillwater Bend ti f Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 143 55 22 1 129 49 1 170 98 1575 242 187 1297 49 Signal Information y 3 4 7 a Cycle, s 90.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Green 5.5 0.5 55.3 13.8 0.0 0.0 Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Yellow 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On 1 Red 11.0 10.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 8 4 1 6 5 2 Case Number 5.0 5.0 1.1 4.0 1.1 4.0 Phase Duration, s 18.8 18.8 10.5 60.3 10.9 60.7 Change Period, ( Y+R ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.1 3.1 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Queue Clearance Time( g s ), s 13.0 12.4 3.7 5.4 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 Phase Call Probability 1 1.00 1.00 0.91 1 0.99 Max Out Probability 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 143 55 22 129 49 170 98 914 903 187 677 669 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/In 1410 1772 1525 1403 1772 1502 1755 1772 1690 1755 1772 1749 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 8.8 2.4 1 1.1 8.0 2.2 9.7 1.7 37.0 39.9 3.4 21.2 21.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g ), s 11.0 2.4 1.1 10.4 2.2 9.7 1.7 37.0 39.9 3.4 21.2 21.2 Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.67 0.61 0.61 0.68 0.62 0.62 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 263 272 234 257 272 230 339 1088 1038 242 1097 1 1083 Volume -to -Capacity Ratio (X) 0.545 0.203 0.094 0.501 0.180 0.739 0.289 0.840 0.870 0.774 0.617 0.618 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/In ( 50 th percentile) 74.8 25.7 9.9 66.9 22.8 88.5 12.4 352.2 367.6 59.4 185.4 181.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/In ( 50 th percentile) 2.9 1.0 0.4 2.6 0.9 3.5 0.5 13.9 14.7 2.3 7.3 7.3 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d i ), s/veh 38.0 33.3 32.7 37.8 33.2 36.4 8.8 13.8 14.4 20.3 10.6 10.6 Incremental Delay ( d2 ), s/veh 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 1.7 0.2 7.8 9.9 2.0 2.6 2.6 Initial Queue Delay ( d3), s/veh 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 38.6 33.4 32.8 38.4 33.3 38.1 9.0 21.7 1 24.3 22.3 1 13.2 13.2 Level of Service (LOS) D C C D C D A C I C C I B B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 36.7 D 37.5 D 22.3 C 14.3 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 21.3 C Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.30 B 2.30 B 2.06 B 2.06 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 0.85 A 1.06 A 2.07 B 1.75 B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCSTM Streets Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:58:35 AM HCS7 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information d 4 4 Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Sep 4, 2019 Area Type Other A_ Jurisdiction Time Period AM Peak PHF 1.00 $ Projected Urban Street Whitefish Stage Road Analysis Year 2025 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Rose Crossing File Name RoseWFAMwith.xus Project Description Stillwater Bend ME Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 55 245 157 64 295 16 92 44 16 8 152 81 Signal Information z 3 4 5 Cycle, s 23.6 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Green 6.6 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Red 1.0 1.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 8 4 6 2 Case Number 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Phase Duration, s 12.9 12.9 10.6 10.6 Change Period, ( Y+R ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 1 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 Queue Clearance Time( g s ), s 6.6 7.8 6.4 4.7 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.3 Phase Call Probability 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 1 0.22 1 0.05 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 55 402 64 311 92 60 8 233 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/In 1085 1682 998 1783 1166 1718 1364 1694 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.9 4.6 1.3 3.1 1.7 0.6 0.1 2.7 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g ), s 4.0 4.6 5.8 3.1 4.4 0.6 0.8 2.7 Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.28 10.186 0.28 0.28 0.28 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 581 642 496 680 494 477 647 470 Volume -to -Capacity Ratio (X) 0.095 0.627 0.129 0.457 0.126 0.012 0.495 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/In ( 50 th percentile) 2.7 14 3.9 9.7 6.2 2.6 0.4 11.8 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/In ( 50 th percentile) 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.5 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d i ), s/veh 6.9 5.9 8.2 5.4 9.0 6.3 6.7 7.1 Incremental Delay ( d2 ), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0JA 0.3 Initial Queue Delay ( d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 6.9 6.3 8.3 5.6 9.1 6.4 7.4 Level of Service (LOS) A A A A A A A Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.4 A 6.1 A 8.0 A Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.7 A esults EB WB NB SB S Score / LOS 7Bicycle 1.86 B 1.86 B 1.87 B 1.87 B core / LOS 1.24 A 1.11 A 0.74 A 0.89 A Copyright © 2019 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCSTM Streets Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:59:18 AM HCS7 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information d 4 4 Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Sep 4, 2019 Area Type Other A_ Jurisdiction Time Period PM Peak PHF 1.00 $ Projected Urban Street Whitefish Stage Road Analysis Year 2025 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Rose Crossing File Name RoseWFPMwith.xus Project Description Stillwater Bend ME Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 141 577 296 20 449 76 30 100 40 20 160 108 Signal Information , "� v' z 3 4 5 Cycle, s 41.8 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Green 9.4 24.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Yellow 3.0 13.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Red 1.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 8 4 6 2 Case Number 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Phase Duration, s 28.4 28.4 13.4 13.4 Change Period, ( Y+R ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 Queue Clearance Time( g s ), s 20.4 21.5 9.3 8.2 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 2.8 2.8 0.2 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 1 1.00 0.91 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 3 8 18 7 4 14 1 6 16 5 2 12 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 141 873 20 525 30 140 20 268 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/In 892 1696 645 1754 1129 1712 1269 1678 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 4.6 18.4 1.1 7.4 1.1 2.9 0.6 6.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g ), s 11.9 18.4 19.5 7.4 7.3 2.9 3.5 6.2 Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.23 10.117 0.23 0.23 0.23 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 539 993 267 1026 257 384 368 376 Volume -to -Capacity Ratio (X) 0.262 0.880 0.075 0.512 0.365 0.054 0.712 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/In ( 50 th percentile) 16 85.4 3.6 33.5 6 23.2 3.5 55.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/In ( 50 th percentile) 0.6 3.4 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.9 0.1 2.2 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d i ), s/veh 8.6 7.4 15.7 5.2 18.4 13.7 15.2 15.0 Incremental Delay ( d2 ), s/veh 0.1 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2JB 3.2 Initial Queue Delay ( d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 8.7 8.5 15.7 5.3 18.5 14.0 18.3 Level of Service (LOS) A A B A B B B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 8.5 A 5.7 A 14.8 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 9.6 A esults EB WB NB SB S Score / LOS 7Bicycle 1.85 B 1.85 B 1.90 B 1.90 B core / LOS 2.16 B 1.39 A 0.77 A 0.96 A Copyright © 2019 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCSTM Streets Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 10:01:32 AM HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Nob Hill Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Nob Hill Loop Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed AM Peak With Development Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1- U 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 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Configuration R R L T TR L T TR Volume (veh/h) 157 58 0 87 1027 217 0 58 1051 71 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 6.9 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 6.96 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.3 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.33 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 157 58 87 58 Capacity, c (veh/h) 468 427 613 550 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.14 0.14 0.11 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 Control Delay (s/veh) 16.5 14.7 11.8 12.3 Level of Service (LOS) C I-H B B B Approach Delay (s/veh) 16.5 14.7 0.8 0.6 Approach LOS C B Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:54:23 AM 93andNobAMwith.>tw HCS7 General Information Two -Way Stop -Control Report Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Hwy 93 & Nob Hill Agency/Co. ATS Jurisdiction Flathead County Date Performed 9/3/2019 East/West Street Nob Hill Loop Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Hwy 93 Time Analyzed PM Peak With Development Peak Hour Factor 1.00 Intersection Orientation North -South Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Stillwater Bend Lanes .!41J.4-1-�lj 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 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 Configuration R R L T R L T TR Volume (veh/h) 180 271 0 88 1700 237 0 69 1327 72 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No Median Type I Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) 6.9 6.9 4.1 4.1 Critical Headway (sec) 6.96 6.96 4.16 4.16 Base Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.3 3.3 2.2 2.2 Follow -Up Headway (sec) 3.33 3.33 2.23 2.23 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 180 271 88 69 Capacity, c (veh/h) 380 302 479 296 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.90 0.18 0.23 95% Queue Length, Q95 (veh) 2.5 8.3 0.7 0.9 Control Delay (s/veh) 22.7 67.1 14.2 20.8 Level of Service (LOS) C I-H F B C Approach Delay (s/veh) 22.7 67.1 0.6 1.0 Approach LOS C F Copyright © 2019 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCSM TWSC Version 7.8 Generated: 12/3/2019 9:55:09 AM 93a nd Nob PMwith.xtw