Kalispell Annexation Policy - Trumbull Creek Crossing.::...:.... ..... ....:...
.............
.................:..
To: Kalispell City Council
From: Tom Jentz, Director
Jane Howington, City Manager
Date: January 6, 2010
Planning Department
201 V Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone: (406) 758-7940
Fax:.(406) 758-7739
www.kalisnell.com/planning
Subject: Council Work Session - Kalispell Annexation Policy -- Trumbull Creek Crossing
A request for annexation of 160 acres of land on the east side of US Highway 2 between East Reserve
Drive and Rose Crossing has been submitted for consideration. This request raises a series of issues
requiring direction from council including:
* In reviewing adopted city policy, the city has not adopted an explicit annexation policy.
• The city does have an extension of services agreement as required by state law to accommodate
all annexations. It states that any development not immediately contiguous to the city shall be
responsible for the entire cost of extending municipal services to the anticipated development.
• The city's growth policy does indicate that many areas outside the city limits, including
Trumbull Creek as suitable for urban density residential development on the growth policy
map. The growth policy however, does not have a timing policy. In other words, not all lands
are created equal. Lands close in to the city are easier and more economical to provide basic
municipal services, lands further out may not be "ripe" due to the significant cost of providing
long distance service.
• The specific implementing conditions of the Evergreen 2007 interlocal agreement have never
been accomplished and the city feels at a standstill in accomplishing there. These have costly
ramifications to the city which include:
o The city has asked Evergreen for assistance in collecting delinquent sewer bills. Note
that inside the city we have the ability to turn off the water for non-payment of a bill.
The Evergreen Sewer District has indicated that they will not use such assistance as an
enforcement mechanism for the city.
o The city pays $20,000/year as an annualized depreciate of the 100,000 gallons of sewage
effluent capacity to Evergreen, yet we are only serving a handful of properties at this
time, not the full 100,000 gallons.
o The district has indicated they would not assist us in the collection of sewer impact fees
due the city by private lot owners when these new services are hooked up. Additionally,
the district will not tell us when new services in the areas covered by the new interlocal
agreement hook up to their system. we therefore have no way of knowing when a new
customer hooks up and no way of collecting the impact fees due the city.
o The cost of services plan prepared for Trumbull Creek Phase 2 shows an annual loss of
$62,000/year as cost of services exceeds the annual collection of assessments and taxes
at full build out.
Trumbull Creek Crossing is the first major subdivision to go through the city development
process. They are requesting annexation and would like access to the 100,000 gallons/day
effluent capacity offered by the 2007 interlocal agreement.
Background
The City of Kalispell entered into an interlocal agreement with the Flathead County water and Sewer
District # 1 (Evergreen Sewer District) ) in 1990. This agreement created the contractual relationship
between the Evergreen Sewer District and Kalispell setting the basis for the city receiving sewage
flows from the Evergreen collection system. Among other things, this agreement stated that;
* The city will accept from. Evergreen a maximum of 682,000 gallons of effluent/day.
Prior to anyone from outside of the Evergreen Sewer District boundary connecting to the
Evergreen collection system., the property owner must receive authorization from the chief
executive officer of the city and must submit a written waiver of protest to annexation to the
city and a request to leave the rural fire district.
If the above requirements are met, the flows received by the Evergreen Sewer District would
not be counted against the 682,000 gallon/day capacity.
Between 1999 and 2007, a subdivision called Kelsey (later approved as Trumbull Creek phase 1) was
submitted to the County Commissioners as a development partially in and partially out of the
Evergreen Sewer District. The developer, Mr. Ferris owned land on East Reserve and felt caught in
between the city, Flathead County and the Evergreen Sewer District as he attempted to develop an
urban density subdivision at the northern fringes of Evergreen. In June, Zoo7 the subdivision did
receive final plat approval from Flathead County. At that time, the city council chose to accept a
waiver of protest to annexation from all the lot owners and required that the subdivision be developed
to urban (City of Kalispell) standards. These conditions were articulated by the city and then
implemented by the county via their subdivision review process. This process ultimately served as a
template for the interlocal agreement of November, 2007.
In November, 2007 the City Council approved a second interlocal agreement with the Evergreen Sewer
District. The basis for this agreement involved several subdivisions, which had received preliminary
plat approval from the county but were not in the Evergreen Sewer District boundaries. These
developments felt they were caught between a sewer district that could not provide them service via the
interlocal agreement with Kalispell, the county which would not approve a final plat for a subdivision
with urban densities without public sewer and the city which had the ability to allow additional
development to occur "on sewer" but struggled with the concept of supporting urban density, which
used Kalispell's sewer plant capacity but had no tangible benefit to the city at this time. The purpose
of this 2007 agreement was to allow a limited amount of development to proceed on the outskirts of the
Evergreen Sewer District to hook-up to the Evergreen sewer collection system and allow this effluent
to be transported to the Kalispell Treatment Plant. This agreement set some specific parameters as
follows:
This agreement allowed up to 100,000 gallons of effluent from property owners outside the
district to be added to the Evergreen collection system and this flow would not be counted
against the existing 682,000 gallons/day already approved.
• This agreement required such property owners to obtain written consent from the City Manager
as authorized by council, required they submit a written waiver of protest to annexation to the
city, and submit a consent to withdraw from the rural fire district.
• The city has the ability to require the property owners to enter into any additional development
agreement with the city and pay such impact fees as may be required to manage the new
demands upon city services the development may create.
• All such property owners outside the district shall become customers of the city and pay to the
city whatever fees/charges the city shall assess them as city sewer customers.
• The district will provide the city with the necessary water meter date for the city to determine
customer sewage usage.
• The district shall charge the city a monthly fee for the sewage collected and conveyed.
Please see the attached for specific information regarding Trumbull Creek Crossing.
PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE MONT"A:
REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City council
FROM: Sean Conrad, Senior Planner
Jane Howington, City Manager
Planning Department
201 1 s' Avenue East
KalispeR, MT 59901
Phone: (406) 758-7944
Fax: (406) 758-7739
www.ka H.com/planning
SUBJECT: Trumbull Creek Crossing Annexation and Initial Zoning, PUD and
Preliminary Plat request
MEETING DATE: January 11 thCouncil work session
BACKGROUND: Before the council is a request by NW Development Group, LLC for the
following:
• Annexation and initial zoning designation of R-3 (Urban Single Family Residential)
and I-1 (Light Industrial) for several tracts of land totaling 160. 5f acres. The I-1
zoning district is proposed on 30.6± acres of the 160.5± acre project site with the
remaining 129.9± acres of the project site proposed for the R-3 zoning district.
• A Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay proposal for 55.4± acres of the 129.9±
acre site proposed for the R-3 zoning.
• A preliminary plat approval for 176 single family residential lots on a 55.4± acre
portion of a 160.5f acre project site. The subdivision is known as Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 2. Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 was approved in the County in
2007 and is immediately south of phase 2.
The general boundaries of the 160.5 acre site include the southern boundary located along
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase l with the north boundary made up of Rose Crossing.
The western boundary of the project site includes approximately 2,000 lineal feet of
frontage on US Highway 2 and the eastern boundary of the project site is made up of
existing farm land and portions of Trumbull Creek and Spring Creek. The 160.5 acre
project site can be described as Assessor's Tracts 3A, 3B, 3BA, and 7F in Section 28, and
3C in Section 27, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Principle Meridian, Montana.
The project was heard by the planning n Ing board at its November 10thmeeting. During that
meeting the planning board was provided a brief overview of the project by staff. The
developer's consultant reviewed 12 conditions which the developer wanted the board to
consider amending. The amendments to each of the conditions are listed in the attached
minutes of the meeting. No one from the public spoke either for or against the project.
After the public hearing was closed the planning board discussed each part of the project
they are required to make a recommendation on. The planning board first recommended
initial zoning for the 160.5 acre project site upon annexation be R 3 (Urban Single Family
Residential) and I-1 (Light Industrial) . This motion was unanimously approved.
The planning board then discussed the requested Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay
zoning district. Significant discussion was held on recommended condition number S which
requires a buffer plan to be provided to the planning department for those lots which are
immediately adjacent to land zoned light industrial in the county. The background and
reasoning for this condition can be found on pages 19-21 in the attached staff report.
During discussion of the condition the planning board voted to keep condition S in the
recommended PUD conditions. The board also recommended the addition of "landscape
buffer" into the condition at the developer's request to increase the number of options the
developer would have to provide for a buffer between the two land uses.
The motion to recommend approval of the PUD with the conditions as amended by the
planning board was unanimously approved.
The discussion on the preliminary plat for phase 2 of Trumbull Creek crossing, included
the review of condition. number 35. This condition requires a 1 oo--foot building setback
from the high water mark of Trumbull Creek and Spring Creep. The developer was
seeking to redefine the 100 -foot setback measurement to the rear of future housing
instead of the rear lot line. The planning board concurred with staffs recommendation on
a vote Of 4 to 3 to leave condition 35 as written in the staff report. The majority of
planning board members did not see additional circumstances that warranted a change in
a condition which has been placed on other prelm* nary plats in the past. Specifically, the
Willow Creek subdivision had the same condition placed on it but instead of a 100 -foot
setback willow Creek had a Zoo -foot setback based on the impaired water quality
conditions currently in Ashley Creek.
The recommendation to approve the Trumbull Greek Crossing Phase 2 preliminary plat
with the conditions as amended by the planning board was unanimously approved..
Following the discussion of the preliminary plat several planning board members were
having trouble with the location of this project as it relates to the City of Kalispell - being 2
to 2 1/2 miles from the closest boundary of the city. One planning board member felt the
city is setting itself up by annexing yet another island. Therefore, a motion was made and
seconded stating the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission encourages
the Kalispell City Council to proceed with caution on the annexation of Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 2. The motion passed on a vote of 4 to 3.
The three planning board members voting against the motion noted this property is
already within the growth policy boundaries for the city. It is contiguous to other urban
areas and Evergreen will be a part of Kalispell at some point. One of the three members
also stated that if the planning board is going to drag a line in the sand (where the city
should not consider annexing land because it is too far outside the current city limits) with
the council, the board needs to have standards to determine when is it too far out.
The initial purpose of scheduling the Trumbull Creep Crossing project for the work session
is to provide the council with a brief overview of the proposed project and answer any
questions. The developer and his representatives 'Will be present at the work shop to make
a presentation of their project to the council and answer specific questions along with
staff. However, the primary focus of the workshop should be for council to give general
policy guidance to staff on homer to proceed with the various options of annexation
including direct annexation, creation of an annexation district, accepting a waiver of
protest to annexation at a future date, etc. These options were anticipated when the city
entered into an agreement with the Evergreen Seger District to allow users outside the
Evergreen Sewer District to transport up to 100,000 gallons of effluent per day as Kalispell
customers.
RECONIIE1 DATION: Staff recommends that the council use this opportunity to become
better informed about the Trumbull Greek Grossing project and give policy direction to
staff as to hour to proceed.
FISCAL EFFECTS: None at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council.
Respectfully submitted,
Sean Conrad Jane Howington
Senior Planner City Manager
Report compiled: January 4, 2010
Attachments: Staff Report
Minutes of the Nov. 10 planning board meeting
c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk
NW` Dev. Group, LLG, 4260 Galewood Street, Ste. B, Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Sands surveying, Attn: Erica Wirtala, 2 Village Loop, Kalispell, MT 59901
Planning Department
201 1st Avenue Fast
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone: (406) 758-7940
Fax: (406) 758-7739
www. kalis peII.com/plan ni n
REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council
FROM: Sean Conrad, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Cost of Services Analysis - Trumbull Creep Crossing Annexation
MEETING DATE: January 11, 2010
BACKGROUND: This is a cost of services analysis based on a request to annex
approximately 160.5 acres. Approximately 55 acres of the 160.5 acre site includes a
proposed subdivision called Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2. The general boundaries of
the 150.5 acre site include the southern boundary located along Trumbull Creek Crossing
Phase 1 with the north boundary made up of Rose Crossing. The western boundary of the
project site includes appro-S=* ately 2,000 lineal feet of frontage on US Highway 2 and the
eastern boundary of the project site is made up of existing farm land and portions of
Trumbull Creek and Spring Creek. The attached vicinity map provides a visual
description of the 160.5 acre site requesting annexation.
Once annexed to the City of Kalispell, full city services would be made available to the
property owner. Any necessary infrastructure associated with this development would be
required to be constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Design and
Construction for the sewer lines and the Evergreen Water and Sewer District's design
standards for water lines. Development of the if 0.5 acre site would also be required to be
developed in accordance with any other development policies, regulations or ordinances
that may apply.
Out of the 160.5 acres, 30.5 acres would be devoted to industrial land uses and the
remaining 129.9 acres would be designated as residential. The future industrial land uses
are unknown at this time as is much of the residential portion of the site. The attached
cost of services analysis and conclusion contained in this memo are based on the
residential development of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 which incorporates 55 acres
of the 129.9 acres requesting residential zoning.
Trumbull Creep Crossing Phase 2 includes single-family homes on lot sizes varying
between 4500 square feet to 10,000 square feet. A total of 175 residential lots would be
created if the subdivision is approved. With this information a cost of services analysis
was completed for this portion of the property.
The cost of services analysis for Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 is only an estimate
based on a variety of assumptions. This information does not take into consideration the
build --out time or changes in methods of assessment and estimated costs associated with
services. The information can only be used as a general estimate of the anticipated post of
services and revenue: A. complete and accurate calculation of impact fees will be
completed at the time a connection to water and sewer is requested and/or a building
permit is applied for as the necessary information would be available at that time.
CONCLUSIONS.
Initial annexation: Once the undeveloped 160.5 acres of land is annexed into the city, the
current property owner would pay general city taxes and assessments for street, storm
sewer and urban forestry of approximately $8, 100 per year for the entire 160.5 acres.
This amount will change once development of phase 2 and additional phases occur.
Phase 2 Residential Development: The cost of services for the 176 lot subdivision,
once fully built out, is estimated to be $264,954 per year. It is anticipated that
approximately $202,623 will be generated from assessments and taxes. Based on these
estimated figures, there would be negative net revenue to the city of approximately
$62,331 per year. Again, these figures represent the theoretical development at the final
build --out stage.
In addition to annual assessments and taxes, a one-time impact fee for water, serer,
stormwater, police, fire and transportation would be paid by each lot at the time of
development. It is estimated that the total impact fee payment based on today's schedules
would be $1,192,576. Please refer to Exhibit A for more details.
Industrial phases: Although not mentioned in the cost of services analysis, the 30 acres
recommended for light industrial zoning has the potential to contribute substantially to
the city's general fund. This is based on the principle that industrial and commercial
development more than pay for themselves in associated taxes collected and that entry
through moderate level residential developments rarely cover their costs in taxes collected
because we have a property tax system that is based on value, not impacts.
Respectfully submitted,
J
Sean Conrad
Senior Planner
Analysis compiled: January 4, 2010
Attachments: Vicinity map
Exhibit A - Cost of Services Analysis for Trumbull Creel
Crossing Phase 2
c : Theresa White, Kali sp ell City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
ESTIMATED COST OF SERVICES ANALYSIS (Residential land over 112 acre capped)
Project Name: Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2
Date:December 2009
Calculated By. Kalispell Planning Department
Number of dwelling units proposed to be annexed:
Estimated increase In population: 2.20
Expected number of people per acre: 43560
Average square foot per lot:
Taxable market value per property: 72525,0001
176.
.387.2
<- approximate # of people per acre
5,900
0.68 $148 500
-- -
-
-
Per ca - - costs d_ _ r se h _Muor�-_
387
SERVICE _......_..... — ._.........._..................
-
._.....
POPULATION ...
COST - -
COST (.2
I TOTAL
Ft
397.2
plie _.... _ ....
- _ _ _
--.._.. 3€7,2
_ ...._............. �.22
$47F467
inistr- do ........
- 14
Solid Waste(norm for 5 ; ems ..... _........ .
..__.....
_ 7 2
C�lr� � - - � -
dwpIFin _ r it r E LUv f ResdW'rd1 U(ERU)-._
76
SERVICE
-
O. OF UNITS I
COST 2009
TOTAL
Roma
-
T�
-- --=---=:���
- -
$0T1a 7
._-.rater
-----
1
10,E
_
- er
v
Wastewater Treatment-
176
163.00$
8,
Sto eater
176 --
87AD
$. 5 1_ -
Parks
-
-
17 - _ __ _ _
7'1.01�
$I 4 6
-........ -__ _____.-..__._._.. .-._............ _._..... ..... ..
TOTAL ANTICIPATED COST OF SERVICE =
__._- ..........
T . .. . ......... ....... ... .
$,9
VANT{iG I ..A R � .l=N I RA'7ED�r_�' >�.
-
Mk:"` --:•.ti
��,. _•,,
„t�; r; ,.:t:,..r.N
_
Assessments based on avers e square foot per lot:
5 900
ASSESSMENT
NO. OF
DWELLING UNITS
AVE SQ FT
2009 ASSESSMENT
TOTAL
Storm sewer assessment(cap 21,780 sq ft :
176
5,900
0.005569
$5 783
Street maintenance assessment(cap 21780 s ft :
176
5,900 1
0.01222 1
$12,689
Urban forestry assessment(cap $150 :
176
5,900
0.00171
$1,776
Light maintenance assessment ca 15U :
17fi
5,900
0.003
N,115
S cial assessment:
176
5,900
$0
AVERAGE BILL 2009
Average sewer bill
176
279,67
$49 222
TOTAL ANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM ASSESSMENTS
=
$72,585 • .
Taxable market value pe"rop
$148 500
NO. OF UNITS
PROPERTY VALUE
TOTAL.
Total assessed value:
176
$148,500
$26 136 000
TOTAL ASSESSMENT
2009 REAL ESTATE TAX
TOTAL
Total taxable value:
$26,136 000
0.0293
$765,785
TOTAL TAXABLE
2009 MILL LEVY
TOTAL
Total additional revenue based an 169.81 mill le
$765,785
0.16981
$130 037.92
TOTAL TAX REVENUE W
$130,038 .:
Equivalent Residential Unit ERU Determination Schedule
TYPE OF BUILDING AND SEINER USE
# OF
FIXTURES
ERU
UNITS
TOTAL
1. ISingle Family Residence 176
1.00
each
TOTAL ERU
176.000
176.000: .
Total ewer Impact Fee
2499.00
$/eru
W9,82 R.OQ
Totalater I mpact ree
2213
$3119,488T04
Total term Impact Me
1121
$1197.296.00
JTotal Police Impact Me
44
$7 744.00
o a Fire Impact Fee
547
$96,27E00
IMM Traffic Impact Fee
352
61,952.I�Q
Summary
r - _ - --- = - _ - -- _ .. _ _ _ _ _ -
-- -
8.._.NETa 1U TO_T ; ;� ;;: _ _-- -- - - - - - - _-
.....-.....:::
Livia
'UD
r,.
SUP
slid
rrr a
•� +we.aer,•.,r ��
ems- R! �' ......•�-�- �gem
rr1.ti,,rrw
tie • a..
MrtM• �} wwrrsa�cnrw.x, ���
:luL'Jujul13o3lln:l
VICINITY MAP S CALE i" = 1700'
NW DEV GROUP, LLC/TRUMBU CREEK CROSSING
REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & INITIAL ZONING OF R-3 (URBAN SINGLE
FAMILY) & I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) FROM COUNTY SAG-10 (SUBURBAN
AGRICULTURAL) ON APPROX. 160.5 ACRES, FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT & TRUMBULL CREEK CROSSING, PHASE II
A 176 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON APPROX. 54.6 ACRES OF THE STTF
PLOT DATE 9/15/09
FILE# KA-09-04 H:\gis\site\ka09_04 1rumbull.dwg
40*
-3E.R
0
eni
4A-U
I L
rr
4A
4C-,fl 4AKF r a -,AArt
5+
County
I AG-80
4CE
3AR
MP
MCA
r3 -cc -3
A 14
Al MCC
2D wwffiffik� 2- .--
-3AC MCA
3cc:91
OGNAGAMULA
d
its
i
c-
ts . 3jB
1 -3ccc
icti� 9
FAD
.9
49
NW DevelORment Groyp, LLC
REQUEST FOR INITIAL ZONING OF R-3 and I- 1 UPON ANNEXATION
STAFF REPORT #KA-09-4
REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT #K PUD-D9-3
REQUEST FOR 'T'RIJM33ULL CREED CROSSING PHASE 2 SUBDIVISION
STAFF REPORT #IPI'w 49 -1.
KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NOVEM33ER 49 2009
A. report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding:
Initial zoning designation of R-3 (Urban Single Family Residential) and I--1 (Light
Industrial) upon annexation for tracts of land totaling 100.5± acres. The 1--1 zoning
district is proposed on 3 0. 6± acres of the 160.5 acre project site with the
remaining 129.9± acres of the project site proposed for the R-3 zoning district.
® A Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay proposal for 55.4± acres of the 100.5t
acre project site
® A preliminary plat approval, for 176 single family residential lots on a 5 5.4± acre
portion of a 1 60.5± acre project site. The subdivision is known as Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 2. Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 was approved in. the County
in 2007 and is immediately south of phase 2.
A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for November 10, 2009,
beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The planning board will
forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action.
]BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The developer initially submitted a petition for
annexation and initial zoning classifications of R-3 (Urban. Single Family Residential
and 1- 1 (bight Industrial) along with a PUD (planned unlit development) and subdivision
application in 2007, After a cursory review by the city staff the developer elected to put
the entire project on hold until the project engineer could work out a proposed storm
water plan for the subdivision.
The developer's consultants resubmitted the project this August. The project has been
modified slightly from its original proposal in 2007. The resubmitted project now
includes 160.5 acres for consideration of annexation with a subdivision proposal.
requesting 175 single-family residential lots on a portion of the site. The previous
proposal requested approximately 140 acres for annexation and a subdivision request
for 202 single --family residential lots.
This staff report will address all three requests; initial zoning, planned unlit development
overlay zoning district and preliminary plat that the developer is seeking on the property.
Each request will be reviewed with a recommendation and unified set of conditions at
the end of the report on page 46. Throughout the staff report references are made to
application materials submitted for the project including exhibit maps. A copy of this
information is available -at the Kalispell Planning Office.
1 - Background
A. Petitioner and Developers, NW Development Group, LLC
4260 Galewood street, Suite B
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
(503) 620-3100 ext. 101
'technical Assistance: Sands Surveying, Inc.
2 village Loop Road
Kalispell, MT 59901
(406) 755--6481.
OASIS Environmental
PC Box 1384
Bigfork, MT 59911
Carver Engineering
1995 Third Ave. Bast
Kalispell, MT 59901
G111I Group
3021 Palmer
PCB Box 1.6027
Missoula, MT 59808-6027
Applied Water
Po Box 7667
Kalispell, MT 59904
B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The project site is comprised of
160.5 acres. The southern boundary of the project site is located at the northern
terminus of Mountain view Drive located in Trumbull creek Crossing Phase 1.
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 is located on the north side of East Reserve
Drive, just over x/4 of a mile east of the intersection. of Us Highway 2 and East
Reserve Drive. The project site continues north from the northern boundary of
Trumbull creek Crossing Phase 1 to Rose Crossing. The western boundary of the
project site includes approximately 2,000 lineal feet of frontage on US Highway 2.
The eastern boundary of the project site is made up of existing farm land and
portions of Trumbull Creep and Spring Creek. The 160.5 acre project site can be
described as .Assessor's Tracts 3A, 3B, 3BA, and 7F in Section 28, and 3C in
Section 27, Township 29 Forth, Range 21 West, Principle Meridian, Montana.
2 - Background
Exhibit 1: Aerial photo of the 160.5 acre project site and surrounding area. The project
site is outlined in red and filled with the cross hatching. The associated floodplains are
also shown along Trumbull Creek, Spring Creek and a historic drainage channel.
Trumbull Creek Crossing Project Vicinity Map
C. Existing Land Use and Zoning: The property is currently in the County zoning
jun*sdiction and is zoned SAG- 1. o (Suburban Agricultural) with a minimum lot
area requirement of 10 acres. The SAG-1 o zoning district preserves agricultural
functions and provides a buffer between urban and unlimited agricultural uses,
encouraging separation of such uses in areas where potential conflict of uses will
be minimized, and provides areas of estate --type residential development.
The 1 Rio. 5t acre project site is nxlinimally developed with one house and half a
dozen out buildings located centrally within the project site and one house and
detached garage located on the north side of the project site. The centrally
located home site is accessed by an existing driveway off of US Highway 2. The
home site located in the north side of the project site is accessed off of Dose
Crossing.
3 -- Background
Current land use of the 160.5 acre project site consists of farming the southern
half of the site with the northern half, including the two existing home sites, left in
an undisturbed Brooded pasture land.
D, AtAjacent Land Uses and zoning:
North: Commercial and residential uses; County 1--1 and unzoned lands
Bast: Farmland; County SAG-- I 0 zoning
South: single --family homes; County R-2 and R--2 j PUD zoning.
West: Single --family homes and commercial businesses across US Highway
2; County 1--1 H, B--2 and I- I zoning
E. General Land Use Character: The area includes a mix of land use types and
densities with largely rural residential development with larger tracts of land
located north and ,west of the project site. Also west of the site are commercial
and light industrial businesses located along the US Highway 2 corridor. Varm
land is located to the east and wrest with higher density single --family residential
development located south of the project site.
FV
O.
The 160.5t acre project site is located well Within. the County. The nearest city
limits line is just over 1.3 miles as the crow flies and the nearest drivable distance
to the current city limits is just over 3 miles.
Utilities and Public services:
Sewer:
Evergreen. Sewer District
Water.-
Evergreen water District
Refuse:
Private contractor
Electricity:
Flathead. Electric Cooperative
Gas:
Northwestern Energy
Telephone:
Centu yTel
Schools:
Helena Fiats School District and Kalispell School. District # 5
Fire :
Kalispell Fire Department
Police:
City of Kalispell
Overall Project Description,
The project involves 1 60.5± acres of land generally located between Bast Reserve
Drive and Rose Crossing with US Highway 2 acting as the western. boundary. The
request from the developer is to bring the 1 6 0.5± acres of the project site into the
city limits with the requested zoning designations of R-3 and I-1. The I--1 zoning
would include an area 30.6 acres in size, on the wrest side of Trumbull Creek and
bordered on the west by US Highway 2. There are no specific plans for
development of this site. The remaining 12 9.9± acres of the project site are
proposed with the R-3 zoning designation with the southern 55.4 acres of land to
be included in a subdivision and PUD zoning overlay district.
The proposed subdivision, Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2, would be the
northern continuation of the existing Trumbull Greek Crossing subdivision
currently located in the County. Trumbull Creek Crossing was final platted in the
County in 2007 and included 54 single-family residential lots with open space
4 - Background
and trails located along an existing drainage running north to south through the
development. This subdivision was predominately outside the Evergreen water
and Serer District. It was built to Kalispell urban standards and the city
approved the sever extension in exchange for a waiver of protest to annexation.
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 is broken up into six subphases. The phasing
chart below shows the subphase, number of associated lots in that phase and
tentative completion date.
sub tease
Number of lots
Tentative com letion date
2A
139
SpringSpn*ng 2011
B
rin .014
2C
26
S ring 2017
2D
52
L§P ring 2021
2B
10
rin 2024
F
21
S ring 2028
As part of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 the developer is requesting a PUD
(Planned Unit Development) overlay zoning district to coincide with the 55.4 acres
of land included in the subdivision. The PUD will not be extended over the
remaining 105.1 acres of the project site.
The PUD request includes the following deviations from the R-3 zoning district:
• Reduce the front and side corner setbacks from 20 feet to 10 feet
® Increase the permitted lot coverage from 40% to upwards of 48%
• Reduce the minimum lot width from 60 feet down to 43 feet
• Reduce the minimum lot size from 7,000 square feet down to 4,300 square
feet.
The PUD requests to deviate from the subdivision regulations by permitting lots to
be created which do not have the minimum 40'x40' building pad located on each
of the lots. There is also a request to modify the requirements for a second vehicle
access into and out of the proposed subdivision.
As part of the project the developers have proposed a common area along
Trumbull Creek and Spring Creep. This common area will be minimally
developed with only a bike path, interpretive signs and possibly benches along the
common area. Two parks, one just over an acre the other 3.4 acres in size, are
proposed to be developed within the subdivision. The developer is also proposing
a number of storm water retention areas which will be irrigated and landscaped.
These retention areas will also provide for active and passive open space activity
when not wet.
5 - Background
�. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA FOR' INITIAL ZONING .AND
PROPOSED PUD OVERLAY
The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 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, 1'1 '. C.A. and Section 27, 30. 020, Kalispell
Zoning Ordinance.
1. Does the requested zone comp 1 with the growth policy?
Can February 18, 2003 the Kalispell City Council adopted the Kalispell Growth Policy
which designates approximately 130 acres of the 160.5 acre project site as Suburban
Residential with the remaining 30.5 acres as Industrial. The developer has requested
the R-3 zoning district to coincide with the Suburban Residential land use
designation and the 1--1 zoning district to coincide with the Industrial land use
designation.
The Suburban Residential land use designation anticipates a density of up to 4
dwelling units per gross acre. The area is proposed for the R-3, Urban Single Family
Residential, zoning designation that anticipates single-family homes as the primary
use on lots not less than 7,000 square feet in size. The R--3 zone generally complies
with. the Suburban Residential growth policy designation and associated density.
The proposed I-1, Light Industrial, zoning district complies with the Industrial land
use designation. Furthermore, policy 5. c. in chapter 4 of the Kalispell Growth. Policy
states, "These areas (Industrial Districts) should have adequate access to rail,
highway, and airport facilities and be of sufficient size to allow for future expansion."
Tree property proposed for the I- Z zoning has US Highway 2 and a rail line along its
western border. Glacier International Airport is 3 to 4 miles to the north on the west
side of US Highway 2. The location and size of the proposed I- I conform to the above
cited. policy.
The requested PUD would deviate from several of the R--3 zoning district's
development standards. One of these is the lot size requirement which would
allow lots to be created as lour as 4,300 square feet. This could have the potential
to increase the overall density of the subdivision and exceed the stated density
parameters of the Suburban Residential land use designation.
The Kalispell Growth Policy, chapter 3, policy 9 states in part that suburban
housing densities should not exceed two to four dwellings per gross acre.
However, the proposed PUD limits the development density on the site to 3.2
dwelling units per acre to comply with the density p axameiers in the growth
policy.
The proposed PUD maintains the single-family residential character of the
proposed subdivision as well as existing residential development south of the
project site. The proposed PUD would provide for varying lot sizes ranging from
4,300 square feet to 10,300 square feet. The PUD application notes that an
average lot size within the PUD would be 5,369 square feet.
6 - Initial Zoning
Chapter 3, policy 9. c states that the Suburban Residential designation should
include single --family houses as the primary housing type. The proposed PUD
does this by restricting development in the subdivision to single-family residential
lots only. No other housing types have been proposed.
Based on the above cited policies in the Kalispell Growth Policy, the requested
zoning districts can be found to comply with the existing land use designations
and the growth policy.
2. Is the reguested zone desi ed to lessen congestion in the streets?
It can be anticipated that the proposed zone change of the property will increase
traffic impacts in the area due to the relatively low density of the area currently and
the relatively higher density allowed .under the proposed zoning districts. As part of
the overall project proposal the developer has proposed two potential alternative
accesses to the subdivision. This would help to diffuse traffic into and out of the
subdivision to surrounding roads.
The proposed I--1, R--3 and PUD zoning districts would allow increased development
and in turn higher densities that will have an impact on surrounding streets.
However, development on the I- 1 zoning district will most likely be directed towards
the highway. On the remainder of the project site, through the PUD and subdivision
review process, conditions will be recommended to insure that existing streets are
upgraded and new traffic routes are provided to lessen congestion *n the streets. A
full discussion of the traffic impact study and recommended mitigation measures can
be found under section II, Evaluation of the Planned Unit Development Proposal and
section III, Review of Trumbull Creep Crossing Phase 2, of this report.
3. Will the requested zone secure safety from lire, panic, and other dan emirs?
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 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
safety codes of the City which relate to fire and building safety. All municipal
services including police and fire protection, water and sewer service is available
to the property.
4. will the requested zone promote the health and general welfare?
The requested zoning classification of I- l will promote the health and general
welfare by restricting land uses to those which 'would be compatible with the
adjoining properties. This zoning district would encompass 30.6 acres of land
with the western boundary a major highway, US Highway 2 and existing
industrial zoning districts to the north and south. To the east are Trumbull Creek
and a drainage channel. Due to the manmade or natural barriers, existing zoning
and land use designations, adequate separation exists to separate potential
incompatible uses between the proposed I--1 zoning and the R-3 zoning requested
on the remainder of the project site.
The proposed R-3 and PUD zoning districts will promote the health and general
7 --- Initial zoning
welfare of future residents within the project site and to existing land uses
immediately south, north and east of the site. However, there is land located
immediately crest along a portion of the proposed R-3 zoning which is zoned in the
County as I-- IH (Light Industrial -- Highway). This light industrial zoning district
permits or conditionally permits uses that may be at odds with adjacent
residential development and could negatively affect the health and general welfare
of future residents in the Trumbull Creek subdivision. Recommended conditions
of approval in the PUD will address this issue to insure the proposed R-3 zoning
will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the future residents living in this
zoning district.
5. will the requested zone provide for adequate -light and air?
Setback, height, and coverage standards for development occurring on this site
are established in the Kalispell Zoning ordinance and through the requested PUD
to insure adequate light and air is provided.
6. Will the reguested zone prevent the overcrowding of landP
This area has been anticipated for primarily residential development with the light
industrial land uses concentrated along US Highway 2. The anticipated densities
and development of the proposed zoning districts fall within the land use
designations for the site. All public services and facilities will be available to
serve the project site. An overcrowding of land would occur if infrastructure were
inadequate to accommodate the development in the area. This is unlikely to
occur.
70 Will the reguested zone avoid undue concentration of People.
An increase in the number and concentration of people in the area will likely result
after this land has been converted from a county agricultural zone to city industrial
and residential. zones. These city zones (1- 1, R--3 and PUD) allow for greater intensity
.and density when developed. However, the intensity of the uses of the property 'would
be in direct relationship to the availability of public services, utilities and facilities as
well as compliance with established design standards. The design standards and
availability of utilities would provide the infrastructure needed to insure that there
will not be an overcrowding of the land or undue concentration of people. Minimum
lot standards and use standards as well as subdivision development standards
will avoid the undue concentration of people at the time the property is further
developed.
8, Will the reguested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation-, water,
sewera e schools arks and other public re uirernen.tsP
Public service, facilities and infrastructure would be made available to the developer.
New improvements to the property such as streets, water, sewer, parks and drainage
would be installed in accordance with city policies and standards at the developers'
expense thereby insuring that there is adequate provision of services to the site prior
to development. A brief evaluation of who will provide each of the above listed
services to the property once annexed is as follows:
8 -- Initial Zoning
Transportation -- streets developed within the property seeking annexation and initial
zoning will be installed by the developer to city standards. The streets will be owned
by the city and maintained by the Public works Department. The Public works
Department did note that with the maintenance of the future streets, the
department's street maintenance resources will be further stretched to provide
adequate, timely maintenance to all streets within the city.
Water -- water will be provided by the Evergreen water and Sewer District. water
lines within future development on the site will be built and installed to Evergreen
Water and Sewer District specifications and maintained by the District.
Sewer - Sewer lines will be built and installed to Evergreen water and Sewer District
specifications. However, the city's Public works Department will review and comment
on. plans. The Evergreen water and Sewer District would maintain the sewer lines
within the development annexed into the city until such time as a city sewer main
extends to the development and the sewer lines hook up to that city main per the
interlocal agreement, sewer lines outside of the area annexed by the city would be
maintained by the Evergreen water and Sewer District.
The project site is outside of the Evergreen. Water and Sewer District however the city
council created an interlocal agreement allowing up to 100,000 gallons of sewer to be
transported through the Evergreen water and Sewer District's lines for processing at
the Kahsp ell Sewage Treatment Facility. Future development on the project site
would take advantage of this 100,000 gallons of sewage allotment.
Schools - Children from future subdivisions on the site would most likely attend
kindergarten through. Sthgrade at the Helena Flats School, located at the intersection
of Rose Crossing and Helena Flats Road. High school education would be provided at
Glacier High School.
Parrs - The Parks and Recreation Department is recommending all parkland in the
proposed subdivision on the site be maintained by the homeowners association. The
department is also recommending a parks maintenance district be formed with the
filing of each final plat for the subdivision. The parks maintenance district would
provide funding to the Parks and Recreation. Department if the department is tasked
with maintaining the parks and common areas within the subdivision.
Fire -Kalispell fire and ambulance services would respond to emergencies within
the subdivision. Response time is still within acceptable levels for residential
development. The Fire Department indicates responses will be fear as it is a new
development built to the latest building and fire codes. Fire response will be more
critical in future phases which would involve commercial or industrial
development.
Police -- The police department will serve the development, however, in doing so will
further stretch the capacity of the services the police department provides to the
residents of Kalispell. One of the main concerns with serving the 160.5 acre site is
that it includes portions of Rose Crossing and US Highway 2. The police
department would be expected to respond to calls along this section of US
Highway 2 for accidents. Issues surrounding response to calls on. US Highway 2
include accidents being more severe along this stretch of the highway given. the
9 -- initial Zoning
higher speeds requiring more police officers per accident.
9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the articular sultablll of the
prop er for articular uses?
The 160.5± acre site is fairly level throughout with two streams, Trumbull Creek
and spring Creek, and drainage channel located on portions of the site. The
proposed PUD and subdivision includes utilizing setbacks and open space areas
along Trumbull Creek and spring Creek to mitigate potential impacts to water
quality. Conditions of approval for subsequent subdivision will need to address
setbacks to the creek and any changes 1n land uses for the area.
10. Does the reguested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the
district?
The general character of the area is a mix of rural residential development, farmland
and higher density single-family residential development. The proposed I-1 zoning
allows for those more intense commercial and light industrial uses to take advantage
of the highway and rail lines located along the wrestern border of the project site.
The proposed R--3 and PUD zoning will be able to take advantage of the availability of
public water and sewer to the area. This would expand on the existing residential
development located south of the project site in the county. It appears that -the
proposed rezoning gives reasonable consideration to the character of the district.
1 1. will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings?
Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the I- l zoning will
allow for commercial or industrial type of development which is already in place
on the wrest side of the highway. Any new construction will be required to meet
the architectural guidelines for the city.
The development anticipated under the proposed R--3 and PUD zoning is more
intensive than the land uses currently surrounding the project site. City standards
will insure that infrastructure built to serve the subdivision is adequate and the PUD
zoning will provide for design standards within the project site, which will insure the
value of buildings and homes is protected, maintained and conserved.
12. will the requested zone encourage the most a ro riate use of the land
throughout the municipally?
The proposed 1-1 zoning district would expand on the industrial zones within the
city and place those uses next to a major highway and rail line. The Kalispell
Growth Policy recognizes the need for industrial expansion with goal 6 of chapter
4, Land Use: Business and. Industry stating, "Provide adequate areas within the
community for commercial and industrial expansion and development."
The requested R-3 zoning is consistent for the suburban Residential land use
designation on the 130 acre portion of the 160.5 acre project site. The requested
PUD would allow a mix of residential lot sizes on the 55.4± acre portion of the
project site which includes the subdivision. Residential development is
10 -- Initial zoning
encouraged in areas where services and facilities are available or can be extended
to serve such development such as the subdivision being proposed in conjunction
with the annexation, initial zoning and PUD request. The proposed zoning
districts are consistent with the growth policy plan.
H. EVALUATION DP THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL;
Project Narrative: Nature of the Request: This is a request for a planned unit
development (PUD) zoning overlay on a 5 5.4t acre portion of the 160.5 acre project
site to be known as Trumbull Creek Crossing. The property is currently zoned SAG-
10 (Suburban Agricultural) in the county. The developer has requested annexation
into the City of Kalispell with the initial zoning of R.--3 on approximately 129.9 acres
of the project site. The remaining 30.6 acres is proposed with the I--1 zoning. The
PUD request includes only land proposed for the R--3 zoning district. In addition to
rezoning the land R--3 upon annexation the developer is also requesting a
subdivision known as Trumbull Creek Crossing Please 2. The boundaries of the
subdivision and the proposed PUD coincide.
The PUD application states that Trumbull Creek Crossing is intended to be a .
planned community with a variety of housing options that are tied together with a
cohesive theme and amenity package. The application notes the amenity package
includes an extensive park plan with open space, bike/ pedestrian paths and
recreation areas designed to allow easy access to all of the homes within the
community.
Based on the developer's application for a planned unit development the following
list is the request of deviations from the zoning ordinance and subdivision
regulations:
1. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06,020 and 27.06.030 (Permitted and
conditional uses in the R--3 zoning district)
2. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (1)(Minimum lot area in the R-3
zoning district)
3. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (2)(Minimurn lot width in the R--3
zoning district)
4. Kalispell Zoning ordinance, section 27.06.040 (3) (Minimum building setbacks)
11 - PUD
5, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (5) (Maximum lot coverage)
6. Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Section 3.06, E (Minimum building site}
7. Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Section 3.08, D (Multi ingress and egress into a
subdivision)
Criteria for the creation of a Planned Unit Development PUD District
The following information and evaluation criteria are from Section 27.21.020(4), of the
Kalispell Zoning ordinance. The intent of the planned unit development provisions are
to provide a zoning district classification which alloys some flexibility in the zoning
regulations and providing the option to mix land uses and densities while preserving and
enhancing the integrity and the environmental values of an area. The zoning ordinance
has a provision for the creation of a PUD district upon arnzexation of the property into
the city.
Review of Application Based Upon PUD Evaluation Criteria: The zoning regulations
provide that the -planning board shall review the PUD application and plan based on the
following criteria:
11 The compliance of the proposed PUD with the city growth policy and in
particular the density and use policies of the plan;
The proposed PUD would allow single --family residential lots to deviate from the
development standards required by the R--3 zoning district in the city's zoning ordinance.
The PUD would also permit a sales office for lots and / or homes within the subdivision
and a request to modify the standards relating to secondary ingress and egress into the
subdivision.. The PUD's requested deviations from the R-3 zoning district are intended to
provide for a variety of single --family housing types for, as the PUD application states,
"entry level and / or first move -up buyer." The housing density of the PUD and
accompanying subdivision is proposed at 3.2 dwelling units per acre.
The Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map designates the 55.4 acre area
proposed for the PUD zoning district as Suburban Residential. Chapter 3, policy q of
the Kalispell Growth Policy lists the following parameters around development in the
Suburban Residential land use designation:
a. Densities should be appropriate to the limitations of the particular site,
and should not exceed two to four dwellings per gross acre.
b. The suburban residential designation is intended to reduce density and
development impacts in sensitive areas and existing; rural neighborhoods.
C. Single-family houses are the primary housing type.
d. These areas should have paved streets, public sewer and water and access
to services. New subdivisions located in or near Kalispell should generally
include sidewalks where appropriate and installation of low intensity street
lighting appropriate to the area.
12-PUD
The proposed PUD's land use and density limitations comply with the above policies of
the suburban Residential land use designation.
2. The extent to which the PUD departs from the underlying zoning and the
reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to he in the public
interest, and the mitigating conditions that the PUD provides to address the
deviations;
The developer is requesting five deviations to the R.-w3 zoning district regulations. Below
are the five deviations requested with the consultants reasoning on why such departures
are deemed to be in the public interest. Planning staff has provided its comments in
italics.
A. Kalispell zoning Ordinance, section 27. 06. 020 and 27. 06, 030 (Permitted and
conditional uses in the R--3 zoning district)
This section does not permit or conditionally permit a model home/ sales office to
be located in the R--3 zoning district. The developer is requesting that a model
home/sales office be permitted within the R- 3 zoning as part of this PUD. The
sales office would be opened during the day and possibly into the early evening to
accommodate potential clients. The office might also be open on weekends.
Temporary model homes also used as sales offices are generally found in larger
subdivisions. Trumbull Creek Crossing phase 1 currently operates a model home
and sales office within that subdivision. Planning .Department staff does not have
an issue with this type of use occurring for the sale of homes and lots for Trumbull
Creek Crossing Phase 2 only. The sales office cannot be turned into a general real
estate office serving clients for the greater Flathead Valley. These types of sales
offices are generally temporary in nature moving out once all or a majority of the
homes in the subdivision are sold. Planning Department staff recommends the use
of one of the loss as a model home and sales office cease once all of the built lots
within Trumbull Creek Phase 2 have been sold.
B. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27. 06.040 (1) (Minimum lot area in the R--3
zoning district)
This section requires a minimum lot size in the R-3 zoning district to be 7,000
square feet. The developer is requesting lot sizes down to 4,300 square feet to
provide for a variety of housing options within the PUD plan.
Planning Department staff can support such reduction in the lot size as there is a
variety of lot sizes within the project ranging from 4,300 square feet to 10,300
square feet. The variety of lot sizes would in burn provide for the variety of house
size and prices creating a neighborhood with individuals and families from different
sections of the income sector of a society. Mixing of income levels is generally a
well accepted means to create a lively, livable neighborhood.
C. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27. 06. 040 (2) (Minimum lot width in the R-3
zoning district)
This section of the zoning ordinance requires a minimum 60 foot lot width in the
R--3 zoning district. The developer is requesting this width be reduced down to a
minimum of 43 feet. The lots with this small width include lots 2--5 and 8-11 in
Block 6 and lots 2-5 and 8-11 in Block 10.
The Planning Department does not have a problem with the reduced width in lot size
based on the developer's intention to provide a variety of housing options within the
development. Planning Department staff recommends that the two blocks with lots
having the narrowest widths, .docks 6 and 10, incorporate alleys and require
garages to be built and access off of the alleys. This achieves several things when.
you have narrower lot widths:
1. Removes the presence a two car garage would have on the adjacent street and
makes the focus of the lot the house.
2. Provides for on -street visitor parking in front of the home since no driveway is
there to prohibit on -street parking
3. alleviates issues with snow plowing in the winter time. With narrow lots a large
portion of the lot's frontage is taken up with the driveway. Consecutive narrow
lots in a roue limits the amount of boulevard space to place snow from the
adjacent street. The snow then ends up in the homeowner's driveway. This is
already occurring in subdivisions in the city that have been built with large
driveways adjacent to one another and limited boulevard space between the
driveways.
If alleys are required for these blocks the Public Works Department is recommending
the alleys be privately maintained and included in the maintenance plan required
forphase 2.
D. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (3)(Minimum building setbacks)
The section requires front, side corner and rear yard setbacks of 20 feet. The
owner is requesting the front and side Garner setbacks be reduced to 10 feet.
The developer has requested the reduced setbacks in order to bring portions of the
future homes closer to the street to have more interaction with the streetscape and
better pedestrian interface. The Planning Department would encourage house
oriented streets instead of garage oriented streets. staff would also agree that
reduced setbacks would provide for better interaction with surrounding homes, the
streetscape and pedestrian traffic. The Planning Department recommends, and the
developer has indicated in the application, that the 10 foot setbacks only apply to
the house. As noted in the PIUD application, the garages would need to meet the 2 a-
foot setback provided for in the R--3 zoning district to allow cars parked in the
driveway adequate room so as to not block the driveway.
B. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06. 040 (5)(Maxi'mum lot coverage)
The R.-3 zoning district has a maximum lot coverage of 40%. The developer is
requesting the permitted lot coverage be increased to 45--48%. The application
14-PUD
infers that with the smaller lots the maximum lot coverage may be exceeded with
the homes that the developer would like to construct within the subdivision.
.Planning staff does not have an issue with the requested increase in lot coverage for
the lots. .Past projects udthin the city have had to request tot coverage increases for
their lots because at 40% on a smaller tot, this may not afford the builder or lot
owner the flexibility in design for a home and garage. Planning Department staff
would recommend the planning board and city council consider increasing the lot
coverage to 50%. 'his standard increase will be easier to manage with future
construction in the subdivision and would still maintain the building setbacks
requested through this .PUD zoning district. In addition, the proposed amount of
parks, open space and improved retention ponds located throughout the subdivision
would off -set the decrease in useable yard space for recreation purposes.
The PUD application states that the requested deviations can be found to be in the
public's interest because the deviations allover the developer to create a community that
has affordable yet livable homes. The PUD application further states that the requested
deviations provide for a variety of home products in a beautiful landscaped, park -laden_
setting with access to a network of bike /pedestrian trails.
Planning staff agrees that the deviations do contribute to providing a variety of lots,
which in turn will allow the developer to offer various home sizes to families with
different income levels. The Planning Department also recognizes that to offer a "variety
of home products" alley loaded homes for two of the blocks would, in the Planning
Department's opinion, further the developer's goal in this respect as opposed to various
home sizes with all front loaded garages and the design that that implicitly carries.
3. 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 developer is requesting two deviations to the subdivision. regulations. Below are the
two deviations requested with the consultants reasoning on why such departures are
deemed to be in the public interest. Planning staff has provided its comments in italics.
A. Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, section 3.06, B (Minimum building site)
This section of the code requires a lot to have a minimum building site of 40 feet
by 40 feet. The requested PUD would allow a building site of less than the
minimum 40 foot by 40 foot. The developer is requesting narrow lot widths, from.
60 feet down to 43 feet, with the associated building site on these lots decreasing
down to 33 feet,
The Planning .Department can support such a reduction to allow a mix of housing
product types and provide for a mixed neighborhood. Upon reviewing the proposed
project the Building Department recommends staking be in place prior to and during
construction of homes on lots less than 6, 000 square feet in size to assure setbacks
are being met. This recommendation is based on the difficulty of enforcing setbacks
forfoundations and homes in a tight knit development where typical building lot
15 - PUD
u idths have been reduced as well as the setbacks.
B. Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Section 3.08, D (Multi ingress and egress into a
subdivision)
This section of the code requires two or more vehicular accesses or separate multi
ingress --egress into a subdivision when one or more of the following considerations are
present:
l . Mere the primary access road is over, 1,500 feet long.
2. where a primary access road is 1,000 to 1,500 feet long and it serves
initially or in the future at least 20 residential lots or 40 residential dwelling
units.
3. where safe and convenient access and emergency vehicle circulation
dictate.
Two of these considerations (numbers 18s2) will be present with the construction
of phase 2A. The developer is requesting the city to consider two proposals to
comply with the above regulation in order to obtain final plat approval for phase
2A.
The first proposal, proposal A, would be to construct a roadway from phase 2
south to an existing road in the Granite View subdivision. The Granite View
Subdivision is located immediately east of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase l and
has a road constructed from Bast Reserve Drive to a point approximately 40 feet
south of the south boundary of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2. The developer
would pursue an agreement with the owners in the Granite View Subdivision as
well as a land owner who owns a 20--foot wide strip of land between the end of the
road right-of-way in Granite View and the south property boundary of Trumbull
Creek Crossing Phase 2. The developer would pave the roadway from Trumbull
Creek Crossing Phase 2 to the existing roadway in the Granite Vier Subdivision..
The developer is also proposing a breakaway gate at the top of the cul-de-sac in
the Granite View subdivision ensuring that the roadway would only be used in
the event of an emergency.
The second proposal, proposal B, would require the developer to construct
Mountain View Drive to the northern boundary of the project site, where it
intersects with Rose Crossing. The developer is requesting the road, outside of
phase 2A, be constructed to the clty's rural standard, 24 foot travel surface, and
the road be constructed to an all Breather surface instead of paved. If the road is
paved the asphalt will have to be ripped up as future utilities are needed for
future phases. The developer has offered that if an all weather surface is
approved, the homeowner's association would include dust abatement language
into their documents to maintain a reduced dust environment.
Exhibit 2: Proposed plans to provide a second vehicle access.
IGIEVO i
The Public Works Department has reviewed the two requested secondary access
proposals. Both proposals fail to meet the requirements under section 3.08(D) of the
subdivision regulations.
For proposal A. section 3. os(D) of the subdivision regulations are clear that a second
vehicle access, not an emergency access, needs to be provided. This means no
breakaway gate as the developer is proposing. The second access needs to allow
the free flow of regular residential traffic and, during the construction phase of the
subdivision, construction related traffic may use this second access as well. This
proposal also utilizes an existing road that does not meet current city standards.
Granite View .Drive is approximately .26 feet wide, paned with no curb, gutters,
landscaped boulevard or sidewalks. Permitting this proposal will significantly
deviate from the subdivision regulations and city standards.
For proposal B, the developer is requesting that the roadway built north ofphase phase .2A
be permitted as a rural road section and not be paved. The subdivision regulations
only permit the rural road section if the average net residential density of a
subdivision is 1 acre. The subdivision using this road is proposed at a much higher
density. The proposal also requests that the roadway not be paved and the
homeowners association will take care of the dust issues. Where is no standard in
the subdivision regulations or the Public Works .Department's standards for design
and construction of city streets which permits an unpaved street.
17 - PUD
The Public Works Departments comments on each of the proposals are as follows. -
Proposal A - Road extension through the Granite View Subdivision
The subdivision regulations are clear that when one or more of the
considerations listed in section 3. o8(D) occur a second vehicle access is
required. Wherefore, no breakaway gates are permitted because this
secondary access is not for emergency vehicles only, rather far the general
traffic which results from the development of the Trumbull Creek Crossing
Phase 2.
The Granite View Subdivision road does not appear to be constructed to City
standards, i.e., the road sub -grade and asphalt were unlikely to have been
constructed to City standards.
The developer will need to create an agreement with the Granite View
residents or County indicating the improvements that the developer will make
in order to use this roadway. The City will not require a reconstruction of
Granite View Drive, but will require an agreement showing how the developer
will address any requirements from the homeowners of Granite View or the
County. As part of the agreement it will need to acknowledge that Granite
View Drive will be used for the free flow of regular residential traffic and,
during the construction phase of the subdivision, construction related traffic
may use this second access as well.
Proposal B -- Extension of Mountain View Drive north to .dose Crossing
0 Ordinance 1139 states, "Within the City of Kalispell, no person, or
government or private entity shall allow the construction of a new street or
road unless the street or road is paved. " If .Mountain View Drive past phase
2A is not paved this creates a problem for the developer and City in meeting
the requirements of ordinance 1139. Furtherrn.ore, relying on an .BOA to
mitigate the dust would, in the Public Works Department's opinion, be
unworkable and unenforceable.
e .Mountain View Drive may be constructed to the city's rural standard north of
phase 2A due to the unimproved nature of the remaining land outside of the
subdivision at this time. Approval to use a. rural standard must be given by
the city council. Upon final platting of subphases 2B and 2C, those portions
of Mountain View Drive needed in those subphases shall be brought up to
city street standards (curb, gutter, landscaped boulevard, sidewalk). With
the final plat of subphase 2D the remaining length of .Mountain View Drive
still built to the city's rural standard shall be upgraded to the city's street
standard.
The comments provided by the Public Works Department will be incorporated into
the conditions of approval for the secondary access.
4. 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 linable neighborhoods;
The PUD provides for a singe -family residential subdivision known as Trumbull
Creep Crossing Phase 2. The PUD includes 176 single --family residential lots 5.2
acres of parkland., 3.8 acres of common area and 6.1 acres of retention ponds for
storm water purposes. Block lengths vary from just under 300 feet to
approximately 500 feet except along the east boundary of the site. The shorter
blocks compliment the good internal road design to provide vehicles and
pedestrians adequate routes to move from one place within the subdivision to
another.
The PUD is bounded by primarily undeveloped land. The land is currently
undeveloped or used for farming to the north, east and crest. south of the PUD
are two existing residential subdivisions in the county, Trumbull Creep Crossing
Phase I and granite View. The PUD proposes smaller lots than lots located in
Trumbull Creep Crossing Phase 1 and Granite View but mixes in larger storm
grater retention areas along the southern boundary to help off -set the more
compact housing proposed. The retention areas are proposed to be irrigated and
landscaped to function more as a manicured open space area when the retention
areas do not have standing water in them.
Along the western border of the proposed PUD the developer is proposing nine
residential lots (lots 1 w9 of Bloch 5) which would be adjacent to unimproved land
within the county zoned light industrial. Currently access to the portion of light
industrial land adjacent to the proposed PUD and subdivision .s limited due to an
existing drainage channel. This drainage channel runs from north to south and
acts as a physical barrier to that area on the east side of the channel for light
industrial uses.
Exhibit 3 : Aerial photo of the PUD and subdivision boundaries and adjacent
development.
19 - PUD
With the development of the PUD and subdivision, two city streets would provide
direct access to the light industrial zoned property immediately to the west. This
may open up development potential for light industrial uses on this property that
may have previously been avoided due to the investment needed to cross the
drainage channel. The potential light industrial development that could occur
immediately west of the nine residential lots may negatively impact the future
homeowners of these lots.
Chapter 2, Growth Management, policy 6 of the Kalispell Growth Policy states,
"Design and locate development to protect public health and safety; insure
adequate provision of services; be compatible with the character of its
surroundings and encourage the most appropriate use of land," Based on this
policy, staff would recommend modifying the design in this section of the PUD
plan to provide a greater buffer from the western boundary of the. PUD. As a
recommended condition of approval, the developer would be required to present a
buffer plan to the Planning Department for its review and approval prior to the
development and final plat of phase 2A of Trumbull Creek Crossing. The
additional buffer would help to mitigate the potential public health and safety
20 --- PUD
issues that could arise when a residential zone is adjacent to a light industrial
zone.
Pedestrian and vehicle connectedness throughout the PUD is achieved by smaller
block lengths accompanied by street connections every 200 to 500 feet. The PUD
also proposes a trail system., both in the two parrs shown on the plan, Parks A
and B, and along the common area adjacent to 'Trumbull Creek and spring Creek.
The proposed PUD achieves a livable neighborhood by creating a neighborhood
that is both pedestrian friendly, offers a variety of housing types and creates a
healthy and attractive environment. The variety of housing sizes and types
provides options for individuals and families to enter the neighborhood and move
up or down in douse size within the sane neighborhood as their family or lifestyle
changes. Pedestrians are provided sidewalks, shorter block lengths and
pedestrian paths that tie the parrs, residential lots and open space along the east
side of the project together.
The innovative design of the PUD includes the use of storm water retention areas
as open space areas for active recreation during most of the year. 'These retention
areas are proposed to be irrigated and landscaped to achieve a look that invites
the neighborhood to use these areas for playing ball or family picnics. They meet
the needs for storm water retention for the subdivision and add to the
neighborhood aesthetics and recreation opportunities for the future residents of
the area.
One recommendation the Planning Department staff has to achieve a more
traditional design character for the PUD is to incorporate alleys on. Blocks 11 and
16, adjacent to Mountain View Drive. These lots are slightly over 50 feet in width
and the lots on the west side of the block face Mountain. View Park, the largest
park proposed in Phase 2. In. a traditional neighborhood parks generally have the
houses facing the park and the house was the primary focus of the lot. Garages
were either located to the rear of the House off of an alley or homes may have had
a single car garage. This type of house design reinforces a pedestrian oriented
street and places more "eyes on the street and park" as the living space in the
homes across from the park is not reduced due to a garage competing for space
off of the street.
5. The nature and extent of the public parks and common open space in the
PUD, the reliability of the proposal for maintenance and conservation of
these areas and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of
the parks and open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling
types proposed in the PUD;
The PUD site is 55.4± acres and if approved, would allow a subdivision known as
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 to construct 176 single --family homes. As part
of the PUD plan the developer has included a total of 15.2t acres of common
space, opera. areas (storm water retention areas) and parkland within the project
site. This equates to approXi ately 2 7% of the project site. The PUD plan
proposes 3 developed park sites shown as parks A., B and D on the preliminary
plat. A parrs master plan has also been submitted, under. tab 10 of the
development application., which outlines development of each park and open
2 1- PUD
space area.
The largest park is Mountain View Park (Park A) at 3.43 acres and is located in
the west half of the PUD site. This park includes a hard surface basketball court,
a pavilion style shelter and three playgrounds. Each of the playgrounds will
encompass approximately 1,200 square feet with two of the playgrounds located
centrally in the park and the third located on the southern end of the park.
Irrigation, landscaping and hard surfaced paths will be incorporated into
Mountain View Park.
Park 13, Weimar Park, is proposed to be just over one acre in size located on the
south end of the PUD site. Two child play areas, picnic tables and an area
suitable for bocce, volleyball or similar grass court sports are the main amenities.
This park will also incorporate irrigation, landscaping and hard surfaced paths.
Park D, Trumbull Creek Park, is a linear park located on the eastern boundary of
the PUD site and includes an area approximately 0.74 of an acre in size. This
linear park will include an interpretive trail and connect trails within the common
area to the south and sidewalks on streets located west of the park.
Approximately 3. S acres of common area are included in the PUD. The common
areas are located in the southeast corner of the PUD site including land on the
east and merest sides of Spring Creek and two small linear strips of common area
on the east ends of blocks 6 and 10, The common area around Spring Creek will
include a trail which connects the sidewalks along dark Fork Drive to the trail
proposed in Park D, located north of the common area.
The proposed trail plan is shown under tab 10, figure 3 of the parks master plan.
A review of the trail plan by the Planning Department noted that there are trail
connections from the trail within park D and common area A to the adj oinang
streets at intervals of approximately 500 feet. This is consistent along blocks 3
and 1.4. However, block 13 has one trail access point south of lot 1 and another
north of lot 11. Between these two lots is a distance of approximately 870 feet.
Pedestrian trail connections need to be placed at intervals which coincide with
comfortable walking distances, 300 feet to 500 feet. Therefore, planning staff
recommends one additional trail connection from the trail in park D through the
storm grater retention area south of lot 4 in block 13 to dark Fork Drive.
In addition to the common area the PUD includes 6.1 acres of storm grater
retention areas. These retention areas vary in size from 13,000 square feet to just
under 32,000 square feet. The 12 retention areas are spread throughout the PUD
site and based on information submitted by the consultant, will be developed with
irrigation and landscaping to act not only for storm water retention but be used
for playing and other leisure activities. Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 already
has a large storm water retention area that will function like the ones proposed in
Phase 2. The photo below illustrates the improvements which can be expected
within these retention areas.
22 -- PUD
Exhibit 4: A photo of the existing storm water retention area in Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 1
The proposed 15.2 acres of common area, open space and parkland is adequate
to provide for the active and passive recreational uses within the residential PUD.
The PUD request would allow 176 residential lots if the PUD is approved.
Section 27.21.030(2) (6) (a) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance requires the
developer to provide a minimum of parkland or open space equal to 0.03 acres
per dwelling unit. This equates to 5.28 acres of parkland required for the
proposed 176 residential lots. The PUD meets this requirement with the three
proposed parrs, A, B and D and the associated improvements to each park as
discussed in the parrs master plan. The improvements of the storm water
retention areas . add to the useable open space within the development bringing
the total amount of parks and open space within the PUD plan to 11.3 acres.
In the parrs master plan submitted with the application it indicates the Trumbull
Creek Crossing homeowners association will be in charge of maintaining the
parks, open space and common areas. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions for Trumbull Creek Phase 1 and an On -site Reserve Study and
Maintenance Plan for phase 1 were submitted with the application (tabs 8 and. 9
of the application) . These give the planning board and city council the general
outline of how the open space areas are already being maintained in phase 1. As
a recommended condition of approval planning staff would require the developer
to submit similar documents prior to final plat of phase 2A to show that the
parks, storm grater retention areas and common areas in all of phase 2 will be
23 - PUD
maintained. For the common area and park D along Trumbull Creek and spring
Creek, the maintenance of these areas will need to be limited to mowing or geed
control just adjacent to the paths.
The Parks and Recreation. Department reviewed the proposed parrs master plan
in the application and generally agrees with the park sizes, locations and
improvements. The Department is recommending that all trails within the PUD
be hard surface and meet city's trail standards.
Section 7, Trails and Pathways, of the parks master plan notes that the trail
connection from phase 2 to East Reserve Drive would require a bike lane or
pathway connection through Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 which does not
presently exist. Phase 1 includes a 20-foot wide homeowner's landscape buffer
along the eastern boundary of the subdivision. This landscape buffer is intended
for a bike path connection however it was not installed in phase 1 because the
path would not have lead anywhere. As a recommended condition of approval the
Parrs and Recreation Department is requiring that the path be installed in the
homeowner's landscape buffer in. phase 1 prior to final plat approval of phase 2A.
This would alloy homeowners in phase 2A the opportunity to bicycle or walk to
East Reserve Dave on a separate path other than the sidewalks along Mountain
View Drive. with this recomr.mended condition in place the PUD plan will need to
be amended to carry the 20--foot landscape buffer up through Block 2 of phase 2A
to connect with Ashleigh Avenue.
The Parks and Recreation Department concurs with the parks master plan that
the parks, common areas and open space areas be owned and maintained by the
homeowners association. The Department is also recommending that a condition
be added to the PUD which would incorporate the parks and trail system, within
the common areas be included in a park maintenance district in the event the
homeowners association fails to maintain those properties and associated
amenities. The Department is further recommending the park maintenance
district be formed in accordance with. section. 7-12 -4001 Montana Code
Annotated prior to the final plat of each phase of the project. The park
maintenance district would only begin taxing residents of the subdivision in the
event that the city takes over a portion or all of the park and trail systems,
6. The manner in which the PUD plan makes adequate provision for public
services, provides adequate control over vehicular traffic and furthers the
amenities of recreation and visual enjoyment,&
A. Public services
The extension of water and sewer to the site will be required to serve the development.
There is an existing water main located south of the site within the Mountain View Drive
right-of-way. water needs for the subdivision will be met by extending the existing crater
main of the Evergreen water and Sewer District from. Mountain View Drive into phase 2.
Eight -inch water main lines will be installed within the street right-of-ways in the
subdivision. The potential water main design is shown on the attached preliminary plat
at the back of the application binder. A detailed study of water needs and necessary
infrastructure to serve the proposed subdivision will be required as part of preliminary
plat approval of the project.
RZ13HURE
The application states that sewage collection will be provided by the extending existing
waste water lines in the Evergreen wastewater collection system. in Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 1 in accordance with the interlocal agreement between the City of
Kalispell and the Evergreen Water and sewer District. The agreement allows properties
outside of the original Evergreen water and Sewer District to convey their wastewater
through Evergreen lines to the City's wastewater treatment plant.
The existing wastewater lines and lift station located in phase 1 will be able to serve the
first three subphases (2A, 2B and 2C) of phase 2 through a gravity flow system. The last
three subphases (2D, 2E and 2F) will require a lift station within phase 2 as the
wastewater lines will be unable to use gravity to transfer the effluent water to the
existing wastewater line and pump station in phase 1. This new lift station in phase 2
will be able to serve the lots in the north half of phase 2 and future development west of
Trumbull Creek Drive, outside of the proposed PUD and subdivision boundaries.
The existing lift station serving Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 has or can be
upgraded to accommodate the capacity for both phase 1 and phase 2. Lift stations and
sewer trunk line seg rents further south of the subdivision site do not have adequate
capacity at this time to serve all lots within both phases 1 and 2. The consulting
engineer has discussed this with the Evergreen water and sewer District and potential
remedies include replace existing pumps, piping and appurtenances and ' stalling
larger diameter severer lines to increase the capacity of the system. The application notes
that the Evergreen Board acknowledged the fact that proposed future developments in
the area will overload the existing collection system but explicitly deferred consideration
of system alterations until such time as actual/final development plans are presented.
A detailed study of the sewer needs and capacity of the existing severer lines will be
required as part of preliminary plat approval of the project. Any necessary
infrastructure improvements will be determined after a detailed severer assessment is
completed for the project. Improvements would be completed prior to final plat in
accordance with approved plans and completion schedule by the Public Works
Department.
As stated in the application, a lift station is needed within the subdivision to serve the
last three phases. Although necessary, lift stations are generally unsightly and may
appear out of place in a well developed and landscaped environment. Therefore, the
Planning Department is recommending that a landscaping plan to help screen the lift
station and associated security fencing from residents, pedestrians and vehicular traffic
be developed. A recommended condition of approval for the PUD would require a
detailed landscaping plan be approved prior to the installation of the lift station.
A storm water drainage report will be required to address the difference between post
development and predevelopment stormwater flow. The post development stormwater
flow will need to be detained or retained on site. Knowing this the consulting engineer is
proposing 12 storm water retention areas throughout the PUD site. All of the proposed
storm water ponds were sized to provide the required treatment volumes for contaminant
removal prior to discharge and flood control volumes for disposal of the storm. water. A
recommended condition of approval will require the developer to provide a storm water
drainage report, designed in accordance with city standards that will be reviewed and
approved by the Public works Department.
The City of Kalispell has required past subdivisions to complete a minimum of two-
thirds of the necessary infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, etc.) prior to filing the final
plat. This has been a condition on previous developments to ensure 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. In the
past, the city has allowed subdivisions to file a final plat and subsequent home
construction to begin prior to a majority of the infrastructure installed. Problems have
occurred when new homes were occupied and there was insufficient water for fire
suppression and. / or sewer mains were not working properly. Therefore, in order to
provide adequate services to the subdivision at the time the lots axe created, staff is
recommending a condition requiring a minimum of two --thirds of the infrastructure be
installed prior to final plat and that both the water and sewer systems serving each
phase of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 be operational.
B. Control over vehicular traffic
The developer hired WG Il i Group, Inc. to conduct a traffic impact study for the proposed
project. The study can be found under tab 11 of the application. The traffic impact
study is over two years old and takes into account the entire build out of the 160.5 acres
requesting annexation.. housing types reviewed in the study include single --family
homes, townhomes and apartments. Although the study is larger In scope than the
proposed number of dwellings units in the PUD, the study shays that the majority of
traffic will dead south through Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1, with the majority of
traffic then heading west on East Reserve Drive.
Page 25 of the traffic impact study lists the conclusions and recommendations of the
study. The study recommends that improvements are required at the intersection of
East Reserve Drive and US Highway 2 to mitigate the traffic generated by the proposed
Trumbull Creek Crossing. The improvements include widening the westbound East
Reserve Drive approach to provide a separate left -turn lane; reassigning traffic on the
eastbound approach so that it operates as a separate left --turn lane and a combined
through./right-turn lane; and traffic signal modifications.
The study concluded that the projected 2020 traffic operations at the intersection of East
Reserve Drive and US Highway 2 include a level of service (LOS) of F, or failing, on
several intersection movements with or without the development of Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 2. The study also concluded that each of the site access points, East
Reserve Drive and Rose Crossing, are projected to operate at good levels of service
without intersection improvements.
James Freyholtz, Kalispell Area Traffic Engineer, from the Kalispell office of the Montana
Department of Transportation (MDT) reviewed and commented on the traffic impact
study. Mr. Freyholtz notes that the traffic impact study's recommendation to reassign
eastbound traffic was already completed by MDT in 2007. He continues by stating that
the widening of the east approach at the intersection of East Reserve Drive and .US
Highway 2 for a separate left --turn lane is needed to mitigate traffic impacts from this
development. Further analysis would need to be done to determine what traffic signal
modifications may be needed and when they would be implemented.
Mr. Freyholtz concluded his comments by stating, "Without additional updated analysis
included in the traffic impact study (TIS) it is difficult to determine when the left -turn
lane for the east approach needs to be installed if it is not done with the first sub -phase
0 21111
(2A) as the TIs is taking into account the full build out of the development (all 160.5
acres) . The TI s does indicate that currently the intersection is functioning at an
acceptable level of service. Note that the level of service shown for the eastbound traffic
would not be accurate as the modifications completed in 2007 are not taken into
account in the TI S and this change may also decrease the current delay for westbound
traffic shown in the TIS. In. addition, the timing of a connection road such as the road to
Rose Crossing would affect traffic distribution.
Without an updated traffic impact analysis, MDT cannot specify at this time when the
left --turn lane (at the intersection of East Reserve Drive and US Highway 2) could wait to
be done if it is not installed with the first sub --phase (2A). MDT welcomes the
opportunity to work with the city and developer to ensure the impacts to the
transportation system are mitigated appropriately."
Based on the comments submitted by MDT planning staff is recommending a condition
of approval requiring the developer to submit an updated traffic impact study prior to
final plat approval of phase 2A to MDT. The updated study should include just traffic
and associated impacts of phase 2 for MDT's review. Based on MDT's review the
developer may have to mitigate traffic impacts to the intersection of East Reserve Drive
and US Highway 2 in a time frame approved by MDT.
The project includes internal roadways constructed to city design standards. This
includes a 32-foot wide driving surface with two foot curb and gutter. flab 6 of the
application shows a cross section of the typical 35-foot wide street. The Public Works
Department is recommending that the sidewalks be moved to the furthest edge of the
right-of-way thereby increasing the boulevard width from. 5 feet to 7 feet.
The main access streets into -anal out of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 will be
Mountain Vier Drive. Mountain. View Drive is currently constructed to city standards in
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1. It extends from East Reserve Drive north, through
phase 1, for approximately 1,300 feet ending at the northern boundary of phase 1,
which is the south boundary of phase 2. The developer intends to continue Mountain
View Drive through phase 2 and ultimately up to Rose Crossing. This could happen by
the final plat of phase 2A as discussed under section 3 of section II, PUD review, of this
report. If an alternative second vehicle access can be established through the Granite
View subdivision, Mountain Vieux Drive will not be fully constructed until phase 2D as
indicated in the application.
Tab 6 of the development application has a cross section of Mountain View Drive. This
same cross section applies to Trumbull Creek Drive. The cross section has both streets
within a 78--foot wide right --of way with. two 20--foot one --moray travel lanes separated by a
10-foot wide boulevard. Five-foot landscape boulevards would separate the on. --street
parking from the sidewalk. This roadway, once completed, will connect East Reserve
Drive to Rose Crossing. Currently within the approximate mile distance between US 2
and Helena Flats Road, this north --south connection that Mountain View Drive would
create would be the only one save for US Highway 2 and Helena Flats Road.
Given this potential increase in traffic and the maintenance the city would assume 'n
this street the Public works Department is recommending the following modifications be
made to Mountain View Drive and Trumbull Creep Drive;
27 -- PUD
® Remove the 10-foot center boulevard
* Reduce the right--of-way down to 60-Meet
• Construct a city standard street
• Revise the block design for blocks 11 and 16 to incorporate alleys
• Place curb bulb outs at both the north and south sides at the intersection of
Mountain View Drive and McKenna Avenue
The Department is recommending the center boulevard be removed for easier
maintenance of this section of the street. The Department is willing to work with the
developer and allow for a short section of Mountain View Drive, from Branden. Avenue to
Magdalena Avenue, to have the 78-Moot wide right-of-way with the cross section shown
under tab 6.
The Department is also recommending alleys on these two blocks to allow traffic to flow
more smoothly on this street. As mentioned. above, Mountain View Drive wi11 be the only
north -south connection from. Bast Reserve Drive to Rose Crossing besides Helena Flats
Road and US Highway 2. It will act by and large as a collector street through this
subdivision.. Prohibiting individual access onto this street is supported by policy 6,
chapter 10, Transportation, in. the Kalispell Growth Policy. This policy states, "Provide
access to individual lots by way of local streets to the maximum extent feasible and
avoid granting individual access on to collectors and arterials." Here again, if alleys are
required the Public works Department is recommending they be privately maintained by
the homeowners association.
Having one street through a subdivision which functions more as a collector than a local
street, with limited access points, has been required on previous PUD projects. The
Silverbrook PUD and subdivision included Silverbrook Drive. Silverbrook Drive extends
through the 325 acre site and connects Highway 93 to Church Drive. This street does
not have individual driveways off of it, only local streets.
The ,'Dillow Greek PUD and subdivision was also approved with one major north --south
street, Willow Greek Drive, which would connect Foys Lake Road and US Highway 2.
This street was also required to provide alleys for lots abutting it to prohibit individual
driveways onto the street and allow the traffic to flow through the subdivision..
Exhibit 5: PUD plans for both Silverbrook and Willow Greer. The main street through
28 - PUD
the development is labeled and, although lots are located adjacent to the main street,
individual access onto Silverbrook Drive and Willow Creek Drive was prohibited.
Silverbrook PUD
[ l -_.�r �+4'15��7"�TRR �C�R ■. wwo.�rwlnw.++,'. �.r+rr i..�i+++R�•!r�
\.
1 �
1
L'_ • � }nJ � 1
�
�
■ i
r 1. R■.1�*'
Silverbrook Drive
Willow Creek PU D
Although moving traffic through phase 2 is important it is also important to recognize
that this is a residential neighborhood. The developer has incorporated a street design
that breaks up Mountain View Drive by offsetting Mountain View Drive by the two
proposed parks, parks A and B. This will indirectly slow down traffic moving through
the subdivision. To directly slow down traffic on that portion of Mountain View Drive
from Magdalena Avenue to Scott Avenue, the Public works Department is recommending
curb bulb outs to neck down the street to a 20--foot travel surface. This naturally slows
down traffic approaching intersections and allows for a shorter street crossing for
pedestrians.
With the recommended reduction in right--of-way width for Mountain View Drive and
Trumbull Creek Drive the Planning Department is recommending the streets still be built
to the 36-foot travel surface as opposed to the 32--foot wide street in the rest of the
subdivision. The reason for the wider street is that this street dimension provides for
on --street parking on both sides of the street per the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations,
chapter 3, Table 1. Since both Mountain View Drive and Trumbull Creek Drive are
adjacent to park A, on --street parking is important to serve not only the adjacent homes
but future users of the park. In this situation. the Planning Department and Parks and
Recreation Department are recommending on -street parking next to park A an lieu of an
actual parking lot based on guidelines for neighborhood park development in the city's
Parks and Recreation. Comprehensive Master Plan. The 36--foot wide travel width for
Mountain View Drive and Trumbull Creek Drive would only apply to the two streets from
Scott Avenue on the north to Magdalena Avenue on the south.
C. Visual enjoyment
The developer has proposed a variety of housing types on the project site. Included in
the application are elevations depicting the style of homes to be constructed on the
project site if the PUD is approved. These elevations are shown under tab 6 of the
application. These elevations have been included to provide housing standards to
maintain the visual quality of the entire project.
The Planning Department is also recommending the use of alleys on the smaller lots in
29-PUD
blocks 6 and 10 as well as blocks 11 and 16. As discussed in previous sections of this
report the use of alleys provides for a house design which makes the focus of the lot the
house. This house focused design also reinforces a pedestrian oriented street and places
more "eyes on the street" for a safer neighborhood environment.
As part of the Trumbull Creek Crossing PUD the developer has included a fencing plan
to illustrate the type and height of fencing to be used. The proposed fencing to be used
in the project can be found under tab 6 of the application. The fence would have a
maximum height of five feet and provide a visual continuity throughout the subdivision.
D. Recreation
The park, common areas and open space areas will provide the recreational amenity
within the development. A full discussion of these amenities is found under section 5 of
this PUD report. Amenities include playgrounds, ball fields and a trail system
connecting this project to phase 1 to the south and eventually to development north of
this project site.
7. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the PUD plan upon the
neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established in concert with the
underlying zone;
The project is proposed in an area of Flathead County which is in transition from rural
residential development and farmland to residential development with suburban or
urban densities and characteristics. To the immediate south of the PUD site is phase 1
of Trumbull Creek Crossing and the Granite view Subdivision. Lots within these
subdivisions average 8,000 square feet and 1/2 acre respectively. To the north is
unimproved land within the larger 160.5 acre site seeking annexation into the city. East
of the PUD site is farmland. The development is both separated and buffered by the
farmland due to the presence of Trumbull Creek and Spring Creek. If this development
is approved its association with the farmland to the east would be minimal as no street
or pedestrian connection exists. West of the PUD site is a combination of light industrial
zoned land currently used as farmland and a portion of land owned by the developer.
A discussion of the issues surrounding the boundary between the R--3 /PUD zoning the
developer is requesting and the adjacent light industrial zoning district is found under
section 4 of this PUD report. To briefly summarize, the light industrial land to the west
of block 5 has no immediate access from the east and is somewhat land locked, by an old
stream channel to the west segregating a linear strip from direct access to Us Highway 2
to the west. However, with the development of the proposed PUD and subdivision., two
city streets would provide direct access to the light industrial zoned property
immediately to the west. The potential light industrial development that could occur
immediately west of block 5 may negatively impact the future homeowners of the nine
lots located in that block. Therefore, planning staff would recommend modifying the
design in this section of the PUD plan to provide a greater buffer from the western
boundary of the PUD.
The proposed project and associated residential uses and densities are slightly denser
than phase 1 of Trumbull Creek Crossing and significantly denser than the Granite vier
Subdivision and other surrounding land uses. However, with Trumbull Creek and
Spring Creek separating the PUD development from land to the east and with. buffer
_O_ f
requirements for the industrial zoned land to the west, impacts on the immediate
neighbors should be minimized.
The Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map designates the 55.4± acre PUD project
area as suburban Residential for which the map provides a density not to exceed 4
dwellings per gross acre. This Suburban Residential land use designation was designed to
lessen the impacts future city growth may have on surrounding agricultural lands and rural
residential development. The densities proposed within the Trumbull Creek Crossing PUD
are under the maximum allowable dwelling units per acre.
8. 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 SPUD*
The developer is proposing the subdivision in six phases over the course of 19 years.
Tab 7 includes the proposed phasing plan for all of please 2. The phasing plan shows
phase 2A being completed by spring of 2011. Subsequent phases would be completed
every three years or earlier depending on market conditions with the last phase, 2F,
anticipated to be completed. by 2028.
Part of the requirements of a 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.
One of the required future infrastructure improvements recommended by the Public
Works Department and Planning Department are two future right-of-ways for street
connections to the property immediately east of the PUD site. The two right-of-ways are
recommended in phase 2F, the last subphase of the subdivision, with a projected time to
final plat in 2028. with such a long time frame for final. platting of the last phase, 19
years, the Planning Department has concerns about obligations of actual construction of
the streets within these two right-of-ways.
Typically, these right --of ways are set aside by today's developer because the time frame
for final platting and development of the proposed subdivision usually occurs much
faster than adjacent undeveloped land with no subdivision approvals. The time frame
for please 2 is stretched fairly far and there is the potential for the undeveloped farmland
to the east to develop faster than this phase. If this does occur, and the adjacent land to
the east provides right-of-ways to link that future subdivision with phase 2F, then the
developer who final plats their subdivision last should be obligated to complete that
street connection.. For the length of phasing time, this could require the developer of
phase 2F to complete that street connection. 'Therefore, Planning Department staff is
recommending a condition on the PUD which would require the developer of phase 2F to
construct the street connections to the adjacent land if the following occurs:
The land immediately east of phase 2F provides public right-of-ways ,which
connect with the recommended right-of-ways in that phase.
The land immediately east of phase 2F receives final.`plat approval with a
residential density equaling or exceeding that of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase
BOND"A �
2.
9. Conformity with all applicable provisions of this chapter.
No other specific deviations from the zoning ordinance or subdivision regulations can be
identified based upon the information submitted with the application other than those
addressed in sections 2 and 3 of this PtJD report.
M. REVIEW AND FINDINGS of FACT FOR THE PRELIAH A RY PLAT of
TRUAMULL CREEK CROSSING`ir PHASE 2
The proposed subdivision, Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2, would be the
northern continuation of the existing Trumbull Creek Crossing subdivision
currently located in the County. Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 is proposed on
55.4± acre project site and broken up into six subphases with a combined total of
1.76 single --family residential lots. The phasing chart below shows the subphase,
number of associated lots in that phase and tentative completion date.
Sub hale
Number of lots
Tentative cam letion date
2.
S rin 2 011
2B
.39
28
S ring 2014
2C
26
S ring 2017
2D
52
SpringSprijIg 2021
2E
10
ring 2024
2F
21 1
S rin 2028
The proposed subdivision is reviewed as a major subdivision in accordance with
statutory criteria and the Kalispell City Subdivision Regulations.
A.. Effects on Health and Safety:
32 -- Subdivision
Fire: This subdivision would be in the service area of the Kalispell Fire
Department once annexed into the City. The property would be considered to be
at low risk of fire because the subdivision and homes within the subdivision
would be constructed in accordance with the International Fire Code and have
access which meets City standards. All of the lots within the subdivision would
abut a street that has been constructed to City standards. Hydrants will be
required to be placed in compliance with the requirements of the International
Fire Code and approved by the Fire Marshal. The fire access and suppression
system should be installed and approved by the Fire Department prior to final
plat approval because of potential problems with combustible construction taking
place prior to adequate fire access to the site being developed.
Flooding: Along the eastern portion of the 55.4± acre project site are Trumbull
Creek and Spring Creek. The current Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) shows
the 100-year floodplain associated with each of the creeks. In July of 2007 the
developer had Applied water Consulting Inc. conduct a study and submit a
request for a letter of map revision to the current FIRM map. A copy of this
information is found under tab 13 of the application. The request was seeking to
narrow the width of the 100--yeax floodplain along both creeks from what is
currently shown on the adopted FIRM map.
A letter dated July 15, 2008 from the Federal. Emergency Management Agency
states that the letter of reap revision request has been approved and subsequent
FIRM maps will be amended to show the approved 100--year floodplain widths
along the study boundaries of Trumbull Creek and spring Creek.
The preliminary plat shows the too -year floodplains, along both of the creeks. All
lot boundaries are shown well outside of the floodplaira s in accordance with
section 3.05 of the Kalispell subdivision Regulations. As a recommended
condition of approval the floodplains will be required to be shown on the final
plats of those phases adjacent to the creeks.
Access: Access to the subdivision will be provided by Mountain View Drive and
one additional access into and out of phase 2. Mountain View Drive is currently
built to city standards in 'Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 with curbs, gutters,
landscaped boulevard and sidewalk. Mountain View Drive intersects with East
Reserve Drive on the south end of phase 1. East Reserve is a collector road and
carries traffic to and from US Highway 2 located merest of the project site. The
second access may be obtained in one of two proposals submitted by the
developer. A brief discussion of the proposals is below.
The Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.08, D (Multi ingress and egress
into a subdivision) requires two or more vehicular accesses or separate multi
ingress --egress into a subdivision when one or more of the following considerations are
present:
1. where the primary access road is over 1.,500 feet long.
2. Where a primary access road is 1,000 to 1,500 feet long and it serves
initially or in the future at least 20 residential lots or 40 residential dwelling
touts.
33 -- Subdivision
3. where safe and convenient access and emergency vehicle circulation.
dictate.
Two of these considerations (numbers 18s2) will be present with the construction
of phase 2A, The developer is requesting the city to consider two proposals to
comply with the above regulation in order to obtain final plat approval for phase
2A.
The first proposal, proposal A, would be to construct a roadway from phase 2
south to an existing road in the Granite View Subdivision. The second proposal,
proposal B, would require the developer to construct Mountain Vier Drive to the
northern boundary of the project site, where it intersects with Rose Crossing. A
full discussion of the two proposals can be found under section II, Evaluation of
the Planned Unit Development Proposal, section 3. The Public Works Department
is recommending conditions on the PUD to allow the developer to pursue either
proposal A or B however one of the proposals will need to be in place prior to final
plat approval of phase 2A.
The recorded plat for Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 indicates that Mountain
View Drive is a private road. In addition to that statement there is a certificate of
private roadways explanation also on the plat stating that the roadway is for the
use of Trumbull Creek Crossing lots only. Upon annexation, all of the streets
within phase 2 will become public with no restraints on who can use the streets.
In order to allow the general public to travel to and from the streets within phase
2 the Public Works Department is recommending that the developer provide the
Department with a recorded document creating a public easement over the
existing 60--foot right-of-way for Mountain View Drive in phase 1. This would
allow the general public the right to use the street and sidewalks in phase 1 to
travel to phase 2.
Internally, the subdivision would have city streets providing access to the
individual lots. These streets would be constructed within a 60--foot road right-of-
way. A detailed discussion of road designs proposed for the internal streets can
be found under section D, Effect on Local Services, Roads of this report.
Be Effects on Wildlife and. Wildlife Habitat: Trumbull Creek and Spring Creep are
both located east of the proposed lots within phase 2. Trumbull Creek meanders
through the larger 160.5 acre site requesting annexation into the city however for
phase 2 it is east of the project site boundary with the creek only- corning as close
as 30 feet to the eastern boundary line of the subdivision. Trumbull Creek is a
perennial stream as shown on USGS quadrangle map for Rose Crossing. During
a site inspection in late September, Trumbull Creek vas observed to be
approximately S to 10 feet wide with a stream flow of about six inches. Slopes
adjacent to the Trumbull Creek were fairly level, less than 10%.
Spring Creek is also located on the east side of the subdivision boundary with
approximately Soo linear feet of Spring Creek cutting across the southeast
boundary of the subdivision site. Spring Creek is shown as a perennial stream on
the USGS quadrangle reap for Rose Crossing. Slopes on the east and west banks
of the stream are upwards of 3 5% with areas of dense vegetation. Spring Creek is
larger than Trumbull Creek with the creek width spanning 15 feet or more.
Several large pools several feet deep are located on the section of Spring Creek
34 - Subdivision
within the project site. During the site inspection in late September beaver
activity in the form of fallen trees was observed along the banks of the creek.
Exhibit 6: A photo of Spring Creek from the subdivision site looking south.
The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) commented on the
proposed subdivision with the Department recommending a minimum 100 foot
building setback with the first 50 feet as an undisturbed riparian buffer. These
setbacks are recommended to be measured from the high water mark of the
streams. The Department's conunents also noted the developer's intent to keep
the majority of the recommended buffer area in common ownership and that the
developer has placed lots away from the edge of the terrace along Spring Creek.
These designs incorporated into a subdivision are what FwP is encouraging. The
Department followed up their setback recommendation with recommending any
paths be located beyond the first 50 feet of the building setback to the creek and
mowing of grass and fertilizers should be prohibited in the first 50 feet of the
building setback.
Chapter 7 of the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 lists the following Goals and
Policies:
Goal l
ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH OR ENHANCES
NATURAL RESOURCE VALUES INCLUDING AIR, WATER, SOIL AND
VEGETATION.
Goal 2
35 - Subdivision
DEVELOPMENT NEAR ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS SHOULD BE
ACCOMPLISHED SO THAT THESE FEATURES ARE LEFT IN A RELATIVELY
UNDISTURBED STATE.
Goal 6
PROTECT WETLAND AND RIPARIAN AREAS SINCE THEY ARE IMPORTANT IN
FLOOD PROTECTION, MAINTAINING WATER QUALITY AND PROVIDING
HABITAT.
Policy 3
Development in environmentally sensitive areas including 100--year floodplain,
wetlands, riparian areas, shallow aquifers and on steep slopes may pose
inherent development limitations and design should be managed to avoid and
mitigate environmental impacts and natural hazards.
Based on the above goals and policy and the recommendations from the Montana
Department of Fish., wildlife and Parks planning staff is recommending the
following conditions to mitigate impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat:
Rear lot boundaries on blocks S, 13 and 14 be a minimum of 100 feet from
the highway water mark of Trumbull Creek and spring creek.
Paths located in park D and common area A as shown on the preliminary
plat reap shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from the high water mark
of Trumbull Creek and spring Creep.
The developers Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be amended
to prohibit mowing and fertilizers within S 0 feet of Trumbull Creek and
Spring Creek.
By placing the land within the project boundaries of phase 2 into a park or
common area, which the developer is proposing, complies with the following
policies in the Kalispell Growth Policy,. -
Chapter 7, The Natural Environments Policy 10
Protection of wildlife and wildlife Habitat should be encouraged through
conscientious actions such as avoiding loose dogs, feeding large wild animal
species along with maintaining established important habitat areas.
Chapter 7, The Natural Environment, Policy 11
Wildlife travel corridors should be conserved and maintained possibly through
easements or other voluntary restrictions.
As part of the application submittal the developer had RLK Hydro, Inc. conduct a
wetland delineation for the entire 160.5 acre site requesting annexation, of which
phase 2 is a part of, The wetland delineation can be found under tab 12 of the
application.. The consultants dug 10 test pits to help them determine soil type
and hydrology of the area. The types of vegetation is the third indicator that a
certain area on the project site may be considered a wetland.
Eased on their delineation, the consultants concluded that there are two areas
within the 16 0. 6 acre project site containing jurisdictional wetlands. One is a
36 -- Subdivision
4.45 acre area along Trumbull Creek Crossing north of phase 2. The other is a
0.61 acre area along Spring Creek within the boundaries of phase 2. This
wetland is located in the proposed common area in the southeast corner of phase
2 and will be protected from the development of the subdivision. 'Therefore, no
further mitigation is needed at this time. However, future open space or common
area requirements will most likely be needed to protect the wetlands along
Trumbull Creek which are north of the proposed subdivision b ound a.ry .
C. Effects on tide Natural Environment:
Surface andgroundwater: Trumbull Creek and Spring Creek are located along or
just east of the eastern boundary of the project site. Setbacks recommended by
the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and parks would mitigate impacts to
water quality if the proposed project is approved.
To determine groundwater levels in phase 2 the developer installed a series of
ground monitoring wells throughout the proposed subdivision boundaries. A reap
of the well locations and engineer drawings indicating the high seasonal ground
water are attached to the back of the application binder,
In the application submittal, under tab 1, the consultants state that ground water
levels have been monitored for this site for the past three years (2007, 2008 and
2009) . The highest ground water levels recorded were an 2008 and those
elevations were -used on the reaps provided in the application.
The 2008 ground water elevations shove seasonal high ground water between
approximately 8 to 11 feet below the finished grade of the subdivision. In
addition to the relatively high ground water, the U SG S soils survey reaps for this
area indicate the Kiwanis fine sandy loam. (Kzd) soil type .is present on the
southeastern third of the subdivision site. This includes blocks 2, 3, 8 and 13
and the eastern portions of blocks 7, 9 and 12. This soil type calls for very
limited use of basements for residential development. With these two factors
present on the project site, the Planning Department is recommending against
basements unless each lot owner has a geotechnical report conducted on their
property with an engineer recommending a basement design. This basement
design will most likely need to be water tight. This will help to insure property
owners who would lake a basement will construct one that will not have water
problems in the future.
Drama : Curbs and gutters will be installed within the subdivision and an
engineered storm drain management plan .will have to be developed to address the
runoff from the site. There is no storm drain system in the immediate area.
Therefore, the application states that the site will be graded to drain to designated
low spots where storm water will be collected in catch basins and conveyed to
stormwater ponds through buried pipelines. As a recommended condition of
approval, the stormwater plan will be required to be reviewed and approved by
the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to installation.
There are 12 stormwater retention ponds located throughout the subdivision. The
application states that the storm water system will be maintained by the
homeowners association but upon annexation by the city these facilities will be
transferred to the City of Kalispell for maintenance. The Public Works
Department has stated that they will not be maintaining the stormwater facilities.
Such maintenance will need to be on --going by the homeowners association,
37 -- Subdivision
I]. Effects on Local Services,
Water: There is an existing water main located south of the site within the
Mountain ViewDrive right-of-way. water needs for the subdivision will be met by
the Evergreen water and Sewer District by extending the existing water main from
Mountain View Drive into phase 2..Eight--inph water main lines will be installed
within the street right-of-ways in the subdivision. The potential water main
design is shown on the attached preliminary plat at the back of the application
binder. A detailed study of water needs and necessary infrastructure to serve the
proposed subdivision will be required as part of preliminary plat approval of the
project.
Sewer: The application states that sewage collection will be provided by extending
existing waste water lines in the Evergreen wastewater collection system. in
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 in accordance with the interlocal agreement
between the City of Kalispell and the Evergreen water and Sewer District dated
Zoos. The agreement allows properties outside of the original Evergreen water
and Seger District to convey their wastewater through Evergreen lines to the
City's wastewater treatment plant up to 100,000 gallons per day.
The existing wastewater lines and lift station located in phase I will be able to
serve the first three subphases (2A, 2B and 2C) of phase 2 through a gravity flow
system. The last three subphases (2D, 2E and 2P) will require a lift station within
phase 2 as the wastewater lines will be unable to use gravity to transfer the
effluent water to the existing wastewater line and pump station in phase 1. This
new lift station in phase 2 will be able to serve the lots in the north half of phase
2 and future development wrest of Trumbull 'Creek Drive, outside of the proposed
PUD and subdivision boundaries.
The existing lift station serving Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase I has or can be
upgraded to accommodate the capacity for both phase I and phase 2. Lift
stations and sewer trunk line segments further south of the subdivision site do
not have adequate capacity at this time to serve all lots Within both phases I and
2. The consulting engineer has discussed this with the Evergreen water and.
Sewer District and potential remedies include replace existing pumps, piping and
appurtenances and installing larger diameter sewer limes to increase the capacity
of the system.. The application notes that the Evergreen Board acknowledged the
fact that proposed future developments in the area will overload the existing
collection system but explicitly deferred consideration of system alterations until
such time as actual/final development plans are presented.
A detailed study of the sewer needs and capacity of the existing sewer lines will be
required as part of preliminary plat approval of the project. Any necessary
infrastructure improvements will be determined after a detailed sewer assessment
is completed for the project. Improvements would be completed prior to final plat
in accordance with approved plans and completion schedule by the Evergreen
Water and Sewer District and Kalispell Public works Department.
Roads: The project includes internal roadways constructed to city design
38 - Subdivision
standards, This includes a 32 -foot wide driving surface with two foot curb and
gutter, Tab 6 of the application shows a cross section of the typical 36--foot wide
street, The Public works Department is recommending that the sidewalks be
moved to the furthest edge of the right-of-way thereby increasing the boulevard
width from. 5 feet to 7 feet.
The main access streets into and out of Trumbull Greek Grossing Phase 2 will be
Mountain View Drive. Mountain View Drive is currently constructed to city
standards in Trumbull Greek Grossing Phase 1. It extends from East Reserve
Drive north, through phase 1, for approximately 1,300 feet ending at the northern
boundary of phase 1, which is the south boundary of phase 2. The developer
intends to continue Mountain View Drive through phase 2 and ultimately up to
Rose Grossing. This could happen by the final plat of phase 2A as discussed
under section 3 of Section II, Evaluation of the Planned Unit Development
proposal, of this report. If an alternative second vehicle access can be established
through the Granite View Subdivision, Mountain View Drive will not be fully
constructed until phase 2D as indicated in the application.
The Planning D ep artm.ent and Public works Department are also recommending
modifications to Mountain Vieux Drive and Trumbull Greek Drive. These
modifications include the following:
• Remove the I0-foot center boulevard
® Reduce the right-of-way down to 60--feet
• Construct a city standard street
® Revise the block design for blocks 11 and 16 to incorporate alleys
® Place curb bulb outs at both the north and south sides at the intersection,
of Mountain View Drive and McKenna Avenue
A full discussion on this issue can be found. under section 6. B of Section II,
Evaluation of the Planned Unit Development proposal, of this report.
All the streets within Phase 2 will be dedicated to the public and designed to city
standards. The Public works Department will require the street designs to be
reviewed and approved by them prior to installation of the streets. Once
completed, the streets will be ream* tained by the Department. It should be noted
that with the maintenance obligation for the streets within please 2 and its current
location approximately 3 miles east of the current city boundary, the existing
resources the Department has to maintain streets within the city will be further
stretched.
The subdivision is proposed in an area that is changing from one once totally
dominated by farming and large tracts of land to an area seeing more suburban
and urban scale residential and commercial development. As this area changes
development proposals now must tape into account the need for additional street
connections to adjacent undeveloped properties.
The subdivision proposes two street connections to the land 'Immediately west of it
in phases 2A and 2B. There is also undeveloped farmland to the east of the
subdivision separated by Trumbull Creek and Spring Greek. Policy 4 of chapter
10, Transportation., in the Kalispell Growth Policy states, "Discourage routing
39 ---- Subdivision
heavy traffic and through --traffic in residential areas by creating a more thorough
grid system when possible." The developer has provided additional streets to the
wrest to continue the grid system through this development to potential
development to the wrest but not to the east.
Discussions between the Planning Department and Public works Department
staff and an on --site inspection of the subdivision site have lead to staff
recommending the developer provide two future right-of-ways along the eastern
boundary of the subdivision site. The first is located between lot l of block 14 and
lot l l of block 13 where a 3 o-foot wide pedestrian path is proposed. The second
is located on land outside the subdivision boundary, immediately north of lot 8 of
block 14. These two locations have been recommended because of the relatively
flat topography and both would cross Trumbull Creek, which is smaller in scale
than Spring Creek. with these two future right-of-ways in place the subdivision
can be found to comply with the above cited policy in the Kalispell Growth Policy.
Schools: This development is within the boundaries of the Helena Flats School
District for K-8th grade education and Kalispell school District #5 for high school.
The school districts could anticipate that an additional 88 school aged children
might be generated into the district at full build out.
The consultants state in the application that they have met with the former
superintendent of the Helena Flats School. During that meeting the
superintendent informed the consultants that a bond had recently passed for $3
million which would allow for expansion. of the Helena Flats school campus, The
application also notes that the developer contacted the superintendent to inquire
about what could be done to mitigate possible impacts to the school. To date, the
developer has not heard back from the school district.
Planning staff also notified both the Helena Flats School and Kalispell School
District of the requested subdivision in a memo dated September 11, 2003. To
date, no comments have been received by the Planning Department.
Although the proposed subdivision may have an impact on the school districts,
section 70-3- 608(l) of Montana Code Annotated states "a governing body may not
deny approval of a proposed subdivision based solely on the subdivision's
impacts on educational services."
Parks and Open Space: The subdivision site is 55.4± acres and if approved,
would allow a subdivision known as Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 to
construct 176 single --family homes. As part of the PUD and subdivision plan the
developer has included a total of 15. 2± acres of common space, open areas (storm
water retention areas) and parkland within the project site. This equates to
apprommately 27% of the project site. The subdivision proposes 3 developed
park sites shown as parrs A, B and D on the preliminary plat. A parks master
plan has also been submitted, under tab 10 of the development application.,
which outlines development of each park and open space area.
The largest park is Mountain. View Park (Park A) at 3.43 acres and is located in
the wrest half of the PUD site. This park is to include a hard surface basketball
court, a pavilion style shelter and three playgrounds. Each of the playgrounds
40 - Subdivision
will encompass approximately 1,200 square feet with two of the playgrounds
located centrally in the parr and the third located on the southern end of the
park. Irrigation, landscaping and hard surfaced paths will be incorporated into
Mountain Vieux -Park.
Park B, Weimar Park, is proposed to be just over one acre in size located on the
south end of the PUD site. Two child play areas, picnic tables and an area
suitable for bocce, volleyball or similar grass court sports are the main amenities.
This park will also incorporate irrigation, landscaping and hard surfaced paths.
Park D, Trumbull Creek Park, is a linear park located on the eastern boundary of
the PUD site and includes an area approximately 0.74 of an acre in size. This
linear park will include an interpretive trail and connect trails within the common
area to the south and sidewalks on streets located west of the park.
Approximately 3.8 acres of common area are included in the PUD. The common
areas are located in the southeast corner of the PUD site including land on the
east and wrest sides of spring Creek and two small linear strips of common area
on the east ends of blocks 6 and 10. The common area around spring Creek will
include a trail which connects the sidewalks along Clark Pork Drive to the trail
proposed in Parr D, located north of the common area.
The installation of the parks and trails within the subdivision is proposed to
coincide with the phasing plan for the subdivision found under tab 7. Based on
the phasing plan, Weimar Parr (Park B) would be completed as part of phase 2A.
Phase 2B would start improvements on the southern '/4 of Mountain Vieux Park
(Park A) . Phases 2C, 2D and 2E would confinue the improvements on Mountain
Vieux Park as well as the trail located in park D and the common area along
Spring Creek. All park improvements would be completed by phase 2E. the trails
along park D and the common area would be completed by the last phase 2P.
The Parks and Recreation Department concurs with park and trail locations and
park improvements. The Parks and Recreation Department is recommending
some minor modifications to the improvements schedule for Mountain Vieux Parr.
Based on the conceptual design of Mountain Vieux Park located in the parks
master plan, tab 10 of the application, the Parks and Recreation Department is
recommending the hard surface basketball court be completed by phase 2B. The
phasing plan is proposing the installation of the basketball court in phase 2D.
The Department felt that the court needed to be installed in an earlier phase to
serve the residents in phases 2A and 2B as well as residents in phase 1. The
developer has the option to relocate the basketball court further south in
Mountain View Park or, based on the conceptual park plan, build more of the
park in phase 2B.
The Parks and. Recreation. Department is recommending that all final
improvements proposed be reviewed and approved by their department prior to
installation, This would include the trails located on the east side of the
subdivision.
Police: This subdivision would be in the jurisdiction of the City of Kalispell Police
Department once annexed to the City. The department will provide service to this
41 ---- Subdivision
subdivision, however the cumulative impacts of growth within the City further
strains the department's ability to continue to provide the high level of service the
department is committed to.
Fire Protection: Fire protection services will be provided by the Kalispell Fire
Department once annexed to the City, and the subdivision will be required to
comply with the International Fire Code. The Fire Department will review and
approve the number and location of hydrants within the subdivision as well as
fire flows for compliance with applicable fire codes. Although fire risk is low
because of good access and fairly level terrain., the Fire Department is
recommending that access to the subdivision and the hydrants are in place prior
to final plat approval and / or use of combustible materials in construction. The
Fire Department did not have any concerns with providing service to the future
homeowners in this subdivision should it be annexed.
Mail Delive section 3.22 of the Kalispell subdivision Regulations provides
some general parameters for the mail delivery pullout areas. The section states
that the facility shall be offset from the edge of the traveled roadway a minimum
of 8 feet and at a minimum provide a pullout area for at least 2 vehicles. As a
recommended condition of approval the developer will be required to contact the
post office and coordinate mail delivery sites within the subdivisions prior to final
plat approval.
Solid waste: solid waste will be handled by a private hauler in accordance with
State statues and taken to the Flathead County Landfill. 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 approximately 4.5
miles from the site.
E. Effects on agriculture and agricultural mister user facilities: The site has been
used in the past for either crop production or pasture land. During a site
inspection in. late September a crop of wheat had been recently harvested. There
was also an overhead electrical line which may have seared a well house and
irrigation system at some point but no well was found.
The developer submitted information indicating there are two water rights to the
land, one from Trumbull Creep and the other a well water right. If the city was
providing the water to the subdivision the Public works Department has begun to
recommend to the city council that these water rights be turned over to the city.
However, the Evergreen water and sewer District is serving this subdivision and
in a letter received from the district dated September 15, 2009 no such request
for water rights was mentioned.
Although the property is currently used for an agricultural use, development over
the past several decades has started to turn this area along East Reserve Drive
into a suburban residential setting. with the development of Trumbull Creek
Crossing Phase 1 and Granite View Subdivision to the south the residential
density in the area is increasing; removing ghat once may have been productive
42 -- Subdivision
agricultural lands.
The Kalispell Growth Policy, chapter 5, Land Use; Agriculture, policy 2 states,
"Encourage urban growth into areas which are not environmentally sensitive or
productive agricultural lands."
Figure 7.7, Important Farmlands Kalispell growth Policy Area, of Appendix A,
Resource and Analysis section of the Kalispell Growth Policy indicates a small
amount of land designated as "prime farmlands if 1M* gated" in the southeast
portion of the project site. The Agricultural Soils Classification reap does not
show any other areas on or immediately surrounding the project site as either
prime farmlands or prime farmlands if irrigated. 'Therefore, - due to the residential
development in the area and rather limited productive farmland on the project
site, placing the 55.4± acre project site into residential development will not have
a significant impact on agriculture in the Flathead valley.
Immediately east and vest of the subdivision site are lands currently used for
agricultural. production. By creating residential lots immediately adjacent to
these farm lands, future residents will need to be aware that farming of this land
will take place and from time to time potential nuisances such as noise, dust,
odors, and irregular hours of operation are to be expected. Therefore, the
Planning Department is recommending placing a note on the final plat notifying
future property owners of the agricultural nature of the surrounding lands.
F, Relation to the Kalispell Growth Policy The growth policy for Kalispell was
adopted in February of 2003. The adopted growth policy map designates the
55.4± acre site as Suburban Residential. Areas designated as Suburban
Residential are anticipated to be served by community water and sewer and have
good access to services and public facilities.' This land use designation
anticipates a density of up to 4 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed subdivision has a density of approximately 3.2 dwelling units per
acre. This does not exceed the anticipated density under the suburban
Residential land use designation. In addition to the density of the subdivision,
the recommended conditions of approval for the subdivision will promote the
goals and policies within the Kalispell Growth Policy. with the conditional
approval of the subdivision, 1t can be found to be in compliance with the Kalispell
Growth Policy.
G. Compliance with zoning: The owners have requested annexation and initial
zoning of R--3 for the entire 55.4± acre site. The developer has also requested a
PUD zoning overlay district which would allow five deviations from the Kalispell
Zoning ordinance. If the requested PUD is approved as proposed the project
would be in compliance with the requested R--3 zoning district. A full discussion
of these deviations can be found on pages 13 - 15 of the PUD report
H. Compliance with the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations: The owners have
requested a PUD which, if approved, would allow two deviations to the Kalispell
Subdivision Regulations. Provided the requested PUD is approved the subdivision
would comply with the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. A full discussion. of
43 -- Subdivision
these deviations can be found on pages 15-1 S of the PUD report.
Section 3.04.G, Planning Considerations, of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations
requires the subdivision design to take into consideration the following:
When only a portion of an ownership is to be subdivided and development is
contemplated for the remainder, the subdivider shall provide a reasonable
development plan indicating the intentions for the remainder. Such a plan shall
show in a general fashion: proposed roadways, residential lot location., and parks
or common areas.
In the application submittal, under tab 7, the developer has provided a
conceptual land use plan for land outside of phase 2. The plan calls for a mix of
townhome, single --fancily and multi -family development to the east and north of
phase 2. Park and open space areas are shown as well as a tentative street
network. Further development outside of phase 2 will require subdivision
approval and most likely an additional planned unit development overlay zoning
district. Development of these lands will be'reviewed in accordance with the
regulations at the time a development proposal is subiDitted.
�tAl NIil U.. I% it1419
1. The overall design of this proposal appears to be very good. Staff is submitting
conditions and mitigating measures to address those specific design issues that
need to be addressed to bring the project into compliance with our adopted rules,
regulations, policies and agency continents.
2. To date no public comment either for or against this project have been received..
3. Because of the projects significant distance from the current city limits, the
provision of basic services in an efficient and economical method is an issue.
Below is a summary of how these would be accomplished.
Water: The Evergreen water and Sewer District will provide the water service, no
impact to the City of Kalisp ell .
Sewer: Severer lines and, lift station within the development will be built by the
developer and owned and maintained by the Evergreen water and Sewer District
until such time as a city sewer amain extends to the development and the severer lines
hook up to that city main per the interlocal agreement. Effluent will be transported
to the Evergreen collection system for transit to the Kalispell plant. Lot owners as
city residents will pay a treatment fee to the city for treatment,
Storm water: The developer will build the storm water system. Public works is
recommending that the homeowners association maintain the system of pipes and
storm water detention ponds. In this scenario, there would be no cost to the city.
Parks: The developer is setting aside 15.2 acres of open space, common area and
parks. The developer will build the two public parks. The Pans and Recreation
44 - Subdivision
Department is recommending -that the homeowners association maintain the 15.2
acres of parrs, common areas and open space facilities. Tinder this scenario
there would be no impact to city of Kalispell. The Parks and Recreation
Department is also recommending that a parks maintenance district be formed
should the homeowner's association concept cease at some point. Homeowners
would then be billed on an annual basis for, park, common area and open space
maintenance for their facilities,. Impact to the city would then be revenue neutral.
Fire: Kalispell fire and ambulance services would respond to emergencies within
the subdivision. Response time is still within acceptable levels for residential
development. The Fire Department indicates responses will be few as it is a new
development built to the latest building and fire codes. Fire response will be more
critical in future phases which would involve commercial or industrial
development.
Police: Kalispell police will respond to calls within the subdivision. Repose tunes
Will be long and this will serve to strain the current service capabilities of the
department.
Streets: The developer will install all internal subdivision streets. City staff will
provide all street maintenance and snow removal. Maintenance will be paid
through a street maintenance assessment as residents of the city of Kalispell.
City staff will have extra travel time to the development. This will be more critical
in winter for snow removal. City staff will travel through Trumbull Creek Phase 1,
a county development privately maintained, to get to Phase 2. If Phase 2 is
annexed, Phase 1 should either be annexed. (they have submitted a waiver of
annexation to the city) or the private snow removal program in Phase 1 could be
extended to Phase 2,
1IFCOAUdENDATIONS:
I. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
45 - Subdivision
adopt staff report KA--09--4 and recommend that initial zoning of the 160.5± acre
site be I--1, R-3 and R--3 / PUD as shown on the zoning district map for the
property.
II . Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
adopt staff report KPUD--09-3 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell
City Council the PUD for Trumbull Creek Crossing be approved subject to the
conditions listed. below;
III. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
adopt staff report KPP- 09--1 as Endings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell
City Council that the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision be approved
subject to the conditions listed below:
CONDMONS OF APPROVAL
PUD Conditions
1. The Planned Unit Development for Trumbull Creek allows the following deviations
from the Kalispell subdivision Regulations and the Kalispell Zoning ordinance:
A. Kalispell Zoning ordinance, Section 27. 06.020 and 27.06.030 (Permitted
and conditional uses in the RM-3 zoning district)
Permits one lot within phase 2 to be used as a, model home/sales office.
The lot shall be identified on a revised PUD plan. The use of the lot as a
model home and sales office shall cease once all of the built lots within
Trumbull Creek Phase 2 have been. sold.
B. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (1)(MiDimum lot area in the
R-3 zoning district)
Allows the minimum lot area to be reduced from 7,000 square feet to 4,300
square feet. '
C. Kalispell Zoning ordinance, section 27.06.040 (2)(Minimum lot width in
the R-3 zoning district)
Allows the minimum lot area to be reduced from 60 feet to 43 feet.
D. Kalispell Zoning ordinance, Section. 27.06.040 (3)(Minimum building
setbacks)
Allows the front and side corner setbacks to be reduced to 10 feet. Such
reduction shall only apply to the douse. The garage door shall be a
minimum of 20-feet from the front setback line.
Note; All setbacks are measured to the eve line of the structure
E. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.06.040 (5) (Maximum lot coverage)
46 -- Conditions
Allows the maximum lot coverage to increase from 40% to 50%.
F. Kalispell subdivision Regulations, section 3.06, E (Minimum building site)
Eliminates the required 40'x40' building site requirement.
G. Kalispell subdivision Regulations, section 3.08, D (Multi ingress and
egress into a. subdivision)
Allows the developer the following two options to provide a second access
into phase 2A prior to final plat approval of that phase:
Option A - Construct a roadway from phase 2 south to an existing road in
the Granite View subdivision. There shall be no emergency gate to restrict
daily traffic into and out of the subdivision. The developer shall create an
agreement with the Granite View ` residents or County indicating the
improvements that the developer will make in order to use this roadway.
Also, as part of the agreement, it shall acknowledge that Granite View Drive
will be used for the free flow of regular residential traffic and, during the
construction phase of the subdivision, construction related traffic may use
this second access as well. The agreement shall show how the developer
will address any requirements from the homeowners of Granite View or the
County for upgrades to Granite View Drive.
Note: If this option is not used the developer shall still provide a 60--foot
public road and utility easement in line with the existing road easement in
the Granite View subdivision.
Option B - Construct Mountain Vier Drive north to Rose Crossing.
Mountain View Drive north of phase 2A shall be constructed to the city's
rural standard which includes, in part, a 24 foot paved travel surface.
Upon final platting of subphases 2B and 2C, those portions of Mountain
View Drive needed in those subphases shall be brought up to city street
standards (curb, gutter, landscaped boulevard, sidewalk) . with the final
plat of subphase 2D the remaining length of Mountain Vier Drive still built
to the city's rural standard shall be upgraded to the city's street standard.
Vote: All necessary stream crossing permits and an access permit onto
Rose Crossing shall be obtained by the developer prior to construction of
the roadway.
2. Uses within the PUD are limited to detached single-family houses except for one
lot to be used temporarily as a model home/ sales office.
3. The development of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision shall
substantially comply with the following maps and elevations submitted as part of
the Planned Unit Development application:
A. Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 preliminary plat
B. Douse elevations
C. street cross --sections
1
Note.
A. Portions of Trumbull Creek Drive and Mountain Vier Drive shall be
47 - Conditions
modified in accordance with conditions in the PUD
B. All sidewalks shall be located on the outer edge of the rightw-of way
line
D. Fencing
E. Phasing plan
F. Conceptual land use plan for the entire 160.5 acre site
4. A revised PUD plan incorporating all of the conditions of approval for the PUD
and subdivision shall be submitted to the Planning Department for its review and
approval prior to final plat approval of phase 2A.
5. Blocks, 10 11 and 1 shall incorporate alleys meeting city standards into the
block designs. Vehicle access onto the adjacent street from the lots within these
blocks is prohibited. Garage and driveway access shall be off the alley only.
Note:
A. Alleys shall be privately maintained and a note shall be placed on
the final plat of each phase including alleys stating that the alleys
shall be privately maintained.
B. If the alleys are placed within an easement over each of the lots, the
building setback shall be taken from the easement boundary, not
the lot line.
6. Mountain View Drive and Trumbull Creek Drive, between Magdalena Avenue and
Scott Avenue, shall be a built to provide a minimum 36--foot travel surface.
7. staking by a licensed surveyor for each lot under 6,000 square feet shall be in
place prior to and during construction of homes on the lots to assure setbacks are
being met. Staking for building foundations shall be offset from the foundation to
assure stakes are in place during and after excavation of the building pad.
S. The developer shall provide a buffer plan to the Planning Department for its
review and approval prior to final plat approval of phase 2A. The plan shall
reconfigure the lots in block 5 so that no lot boundary is adjacent to the western
property boundary of the subdivision. The buffer may include the use of streets,
storm water retention areas, open space or any combination thereof.
9. ' The minimum amount of developed park area shall equal 5.23 acres.
10. All parks and common areas shall be developed in substantial compliance with
the lnfornl ation and figures provided in the Trumbull Creek Crossing Park Master
Plan. Final approval of all park and common area development shall be provided
by the Parks and Recreation Department.
Note: All trails shown in the park master plan shall be hard surface trails built
in accordance with city standards.
11. One additional trail connection shall be provided in. Park D from the trail in the
park to Clary Fork Drive. The trail shall be located south of lot 4 of block 13 and
be constructed to a standard approved by the Parks and Recreation Department.
The location of the trail shall be reviewed and approved by both the Planning
Department and Parks and Recreation Department prior to installation.
48 -- Conditions
12. A trail shall be installed in the landscape buffer area along the eastern boundary
of Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1 prior to final plat approval of phase 2A. The
trail shall run the length of the eastern boundary of phase 1 to connect East
Reserve Drive to Ashleigh Avenue in phase 2A.
Note:
A. This trail shall be hard surface and built in accordance with city
standards.
B. Bloch 2 shall be modified to continue the existing 20--foot wide
landscape buffer north, through block 2, to connect with Ashleigh
Avenue.
13. The storm crater retention areas shall be irrigated and landscaped to create a park
like setting in accordance with a plan to be reviewed and approved by the Parks
and Recreation Department and Planning Department. The approved plan shall
be installed prior to final plat approval of the phase the storm grater retention
area is serving.
14. A Homeowners Association shall be created for the maintenance of the common
areas, stormwater retention areas, parkland, landscaped street medians and
alleys within the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision.
15. The On -Site Reserve Study and Maintenance Plan (homeowners association
budget plan) for phase 1 submitted with the development application shall be
amended to include phase 2 and the required maintenance of those areas and
facilities listed in condition 14.
16. A park maintenance district shall be formed incorporating all the lots within the
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision and implemented only at such time
as the homeowners association fails to maintain the parks and common areas
and/or the city council directs the Parks and Recreation Department to take over
the maintenance of those areas. The taxes levied within the maintenance district
shall be determined by the Parks and Recreation Department with approvals by
the Kalispell City Council. Such a district ' shall become effective upon recording
the final plat of phase's 2A-2F of the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2
subdivision.
1.7. A landscape plan for the lift station shall be provided to the Planning Department
and Parks and Recreation Department for review and approval. The plan shall
provide for a visual screen containing a combination .of trees, bushes and green
groundcover and specifying tree and shrub type and size at the time of planting.
Fencing around the lift station shall be the same fencing referenced in the
conditions of this PUD. The approved landscape plan and fencing shall be
installed in accordance with a time frame agreed to by city staff and the
developer.
13. A minimum of two --thirds of the necessary infrastructure for each phase of this
subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal for each phase. The
minimum of two --thirds of the necessary infrastructure shall include the extension
of ,water and sewer mains to the site and the necessary lift station to transport
effluent back to the city sewage treatment plant.
49 w-- Conditions
19. The developer shall provide the Montana Department of Transportation with an
updated, traffic impact study prior to final plat approval of phase 2A for its review
and approval. The study shall address all impacts associated with the Trumbull
Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision.
Note: Development of phase 2 may require the developer to make intersection
improvements at US Highway 2 and Bast Reserve Drive,
20. The final plats for the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision shall be filed
consecutively from phase 2A through phase 2F. The first phase shah be filed
within three years of approval of the effective date of this PUD. Each successive
phase shall be filed within three years of final plat approval of the previous phase.
21. The developer of phase 2F shall construct the street connections from the two
right-of-ways required under condition. 34" to existing streets with development
east of phase 2F if the following occurs:
A. The land immediately east of phase 2F provides public right-of-ways
which connect with the required right-of-ways in phase 2F and;
B. The land immediately east of phase 2F receives final plat approval
with a residential density equaling or exceeding that of Trumbull
Creek Crossing Phase 2.
22. A development agreement shall be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney between.
the City of Kalispell and the developer outlining and formalizing the terms,
conditions and provisions of approval. The final plan as approved, together with
the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall, constitute the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning for the site.
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 Subdivision Conditions
General Conditions:
23. That 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. (Kalispell subdivision Regulations, Appendix C --- Final Plat)
24. street lighting shall be located within the subdivision and shall be shielded so
that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. (Kalispell
Subdivision Regulations Section 3.09(L)).
Prior to final lat of each sub horse:
25. New infrastructure required to serve the subdivision shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and
Construction and Montana Public works Standards; the design shall be certified
in writing by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Montana. All design
work shall be reviewed and approved in writing by the Kalispell Public works
Department prior to construction.. This infrastructure shall include but not be
limited to streets, street lighting, street signage, curb, gutter, boulevard and
50 - Conditions
sidewalks. (Kalispell Design and Construction Standards)
26. Prior to final plat approval of phase 2A the developer shall provide the Public
Works Department with a recorded document creating a public easement over the
existing 60--foot private road and utility Tight -of -way for Mountain. View Drive in
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1. (Findings of Fact section A)
Note: The lot owners in Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 shall share in the
maintenance of Mountain View Drive in phase 1 unless the city accepts ownership
and maintenance of the street,
27. Water and sewer main extensions shall be designed and constructed in
accordance with the Evergreen water and Sewer District and City of Ka.lispell's
Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public works Standards.
The grater and sewer main extension plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Kalispell Public works Department. Prior to final plat, a certification shall be
submitted to the Public works Department stating that the water and sewer
mains have been built and tested as designed and approved. (Kalispell Design
and Construction Standards)
28. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public works Department for review
and approval a - stormwater 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. (Kalispell Design and Construction Standards)
29. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public works Department prior to
construction, a city construction storm water management plan for review and
approval and a copy of all documents submitted to Montana Department of
Environmental Quality for the General Permit for Stormwater Discharge
Associated with Construction Activities. (Kalispell Design and Construction'
Standards)
30. A letter from the Evergreen water and Sewer District and Kalispell Public works
Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been
accepted by the Evergreen water and Sewer District or City of Kalispell or a
proper bond has been accepted for unfinished work. (Kalispell Design and
Construction. Standards)
31.. The approved 100--year floodplain boundary shall be shown on the final plats for
phase 2A, 2C, 2E and 2F. (Findings of Fact Section. A)
32. A note shall be placed on the final plat and within the covenants, conditions and
restrictions for phase 2 stating that basements are prohibited on each lot unless
the lot owner has a geotechnical report conducted on their lot with a certified
engineer's recommendation on a basement design. The findings of the report and
basement design shall be incorporated into the building designs for the house and
submitted with .the building permit application. (Findings of Fact Section C)
51- Conditions
33. Mountain View Drive shall be fully constructed to city standards from phase 2
north to Rose Crossing prior to final plat approval of phase 2D. (Findings of Fact
Section D)
34. Prior to final plat approval for phase 2F, two 60--foot wide public road and utility
right -of ways shall be provided from the right-of-way for Clark Fork Drive to the
eastern boundary line of the subdivision in the following locations:
• Between lot 11 of block 13 and lot 1 of block 14
• Immediately north of lot 8 of block 14
(Findings of Fact Section. D) .
35. A 100--foot building setback, measured from the high water mark of Trumbull
Creek and Spring Creek shall be shown on the final plats of phases 2A, 2C, 2E
and 2F. within the 100-foot building setback the first 50 feet adjacent to the
creek shall be protected with natural vegetation.. A bike/pedestrian. path within
the 100--foot setback shall be permitted provided the path is located outside of the
first 50 feet adjacent to the creek. Prior..to installation of the bike/pedestrian
path the developer shall obtain a written approval from the Montana Department
of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. (Findings of Fact Section B)
Note:
A. The 100--foot building setback shall coincide with the rear lot
boundaries of the adjacent lots.
B. The high water mark for each creek shall be deternvffied by City staff
and the developer's consultants
C. The developers Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be
amended to prohibit mowing and fertilizers within 50 feet of
Trumbull Creek and Spring Creek.
36. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department and so
certified in writing by the Fire Department: (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations,
Section 3.20).
a. water mains designed to provide minimum fire flows shall be installed at
approved locations. Minimum fire flows shall be in accordance with
International Fire Code (2003) Appendix B.
b. Fire hydrants shall be provided per City specifications at locations approved
by this department, prior to combustible construction.
c. Fire Department access shall be provided in accordance with International Fire
Code (2003) Chapter 5.
d. It shall be noted on the face of the plat that hazardous weed abatement shall
be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10--8.
e. Street naming shall be approved by the Fire Department,
37. The developer shall provide the Parks and Recreation Department with a park
improvement and trail 'improvement plan. The plan shall include the following:
0 Weimer park completion by final plat approval of phase 2A.
0 Trail development plan for each phase of the subdivision
0 Mountain View park improvements to include the basketball court by final
plat approval of phase 2B
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Department
with the approved improvements plan for the parks and trails completed prior to
52 - Conditions
the final plat of the respective phase of the project. (Findings of Fact Section D)
38. A letter shall be obtained from the Parks and Recreation Department approving a
landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the
landscape boulevards of the streets serving the subdivision. The approved
landscape plan shall be implemented or a cash in lieu payment for installation of
the street trees and groundcover provided to the Kalispell Parrs and Recreation
Department. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.11) .
39. The roads within the subdivision shall be named and signed in accordance with
the policies of the Kalispell Public works Department and the Uniform 'Traffic
Control Devices Manual and be subject to review and approval of the Kalispell
Fire Department. A letter shall be obtained from. the Kalispell Public Works
Department stating the naming and addressing on the final plat have been
reviewed and approved.. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section. 3.09)
40. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final plat.
Utility easements for City water and sewer shall be provided to allow for the logical
-extension of utilities from this subdivision to adjoining properties. A letter from the
Kalispell Public works Department shall be obtained stating that the required
easements are being shown on the final plat. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations,
Section 3.18)
41. Prior to filing the final plat a letter front. 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 designed in accordance wide
section 3.22 of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations and installed or bonded for
prior to final plat. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall be
included in the preln* m*nary 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. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section. 3.22)
42. The following note shall be placed on the final plat for each please: "This
subdivision is located in an agricultural area and potential nuisances such as
noise, dust, odors, and irregular hours of operation are to be expected. As such,
the right to farm on adjoining properties shall not be restricted as a result of the
development or occupancy of this subdivision." (Findings of Pact, Section. E)
43. 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
(Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.18(E))
On going conditions:
53 --- Conditions
44. All utilities shall be installed underground. (Kalispell Subdivision regulations,
Section 3.17)
45. All areas disturbed during development shall be re --vegetated with a weed --free mix
immediately after development.
54 --- Conditions
....... . . ..
UO 1st Avenue WN
P.D. Box 579
Kalispell, NIT
59901
406-755-74013
Fax 406-755-7478
September 30, 2009
To: Kalispell and Country Officials
From.& Mark Lalum
Re: Michael Anders proposed Development
! have worked with Michael Anders on the Trumbull Creek development for the past 3-4 years. We
looked at it as a possible location for moving our Elevator and Fertilizer plant out of town. 1 support
completely his proposed development. 1 feel it is well planned out and will fit rice into that area. 1 like
it because it keeps the development close to Evergreen and keeping development close to the center of
population within our valley. The industrial area is its a good location because of the tracks and one of
the last reas that would allow us to move and for other companies to utilize the tracks.
Mark Lalum
General Manager CFls Kalispell
ww.chskallspell,com a www.kalispellpolarls.com • www.chsinc.com
Michael Anders
From: Doepker Landscape, Inc. [doepkerlandscape a@montanasky.com)
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 8:34 AM
To: Michael Anders
Subject: Tru mble Creek Crossing, Letter of Support
Jim Doepker
Doepker Landscaping
605 Capistrano Dr.
Kalispell, MT 59901
City of Kalispell Planning Board, Mayor Pam Kennedy, and the
City of Kalispell Council Members,
My family and l would like to express our support for the Trumbull Creek Crossing Development.
My wife and I have lived in this areas for 32 years and have lived down the road from Trumbull Creek for
22 years. our children were raised in the Helena Flats School District. We have watched the area grow
and evolve from a farming community to a mixture of farming and residential development. We love the
feeling of this area especially the wide open space. It is a popular place to live because it is close to town
but still feels country.
The first phase of Trumbue Creek Crossing is complete. It is a great addition to our neighborhood. The
development is a nice mix of homes and open park areas, including bike pathes, large park lawns, and
trees. They do an excellent job of maintaining the grounds so it looks good all the time. The community
feel of the subdivision is evident when you drive in the entry. The homes are both pleasing and well built
but still affordable.
Based on the work completed in the first phase, we feel the future plans will be a nice addition to the
community. We especiall like the large park areas that are part of the plan.
Jim and Bonnie Doepker
605 Capistrano Dr.
Kalispell, MT 59901
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www,avg.com
Version: 8.5.421 1 Virus Database: 270.14.312413 - Release Date: 1 D111199 18:34�00
10/12/2009
EVERGREEN FIRE RESCUE �
2236 Highway 2 East (P.O. box 5008) Kalispell, MT 59903 (406)752-4636 Fax (406)752-1540
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Br &atit-t; f3re'sdent Clark
Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59901
RE: Trumble Creek Crossing
I am writing to express concerns related to emergency services to the area in
question. This area is far outside the boundaries of the city of Kalispell -- in the
middle of the southern portion of the Evergreen Fire District (EFD).
The existing Trumble Creek subdivision (57 lots) is under the protection of EFD for
EMS (two minute response) and fire (three minute response) calls. When the City
enforces the waivers to protest annexation and the election to withdraw from a
fire district received on the existing subdivision, the responses times would
significantly increase. If the City built another fire station near the development,
it would most likely be located within 2-3 miles of Evergreen's Station 81 or 82.
Stations 51 & 52 are three miles apart and they are each about 3.5 to 4.0 miles
from EFD Station 81. EFD station 82 is 4.5 miles north, at Birch Grove and Hwy Z
East. Additionally, existing Trumble Creek properties are assessed their
proportionate share of the bonded indebtedness for Evergreen's new station 81
until the year 2029. Likewise, phase II and future developments will incur some
indebtedness (MCA 7--33--2129). }
In the future, QAD based dispatch would send nearest available EMS and fire
units. Though EMS is covered by user fees, fire protection costs are taxpayer
supported. EFD could be providing fire protection to existing municipal locations,
••e. Village Greens Villa e.. Loop, Edgerton School and other -,.surrounding
ments as well as future m�unici al areas :without :•com■r},r,,�lensation, Y:or
develop _ p a: i
- E._ iT.� �F- \: :L. .r _ rJ!: ti: ,�'.. .fr.i� �-�:'r :S•� �+'� �1"�'•.t:.i .'}u JL1' -- - .t ^S'� -
•J•' '�'r-- �c.'� •.. : r � .S . S ._ . � +'�L... 1 �=i`.. r 1 :.}�f'e Y' - j: •yy' _ L.: - _
.: t• i,.' t. .`'1:, ,y�. �r�.�• � •.�r.``: �t �� ,w, � �x' �r . "_'ri S�• .S_ r.'- �_a, is �.'. •:r
- � .. :-Y? :1• ''r� r �' .-J.: , f-• k�r. }, . !� ..•,, fJ•� `�'�.. _ _ -�='fir, �
• 'fir. ,. :.�� _ �• .....� ..Y _- -� �,7.
• ■ :r.� • "1 �� i
hroug h :mach others rotectiori �._�F:--v-=_
vel t _
.tiff
�F�D.tra
:. � �':and:E � _
cons�deraton...,Currentl the_C t � _ _
. ., ..�'... ._..,, .rR ._ tom. ._ .. •,,. r.� ti .._t,�� ..._ - t. , - - _ -
- ti 1. ..... r r•�t .. �.. r+ xd i u, ii.�+ �� i. v � �.- = f�=.4!�a's,.--
�. -, _.7-ter-�. .4 .. .. i. y,,�,;T�� _ - - =_� --
.. !,_ .. -t.[ -LF`• _ ti .a .. y ...-. . , r 5... r mow'.. -}.. 15F�. -- � • � i E ■ .' •� •.
• f� c fir: _
EMS or fire. T__Ths_�s rqya-..elnt _I: _ -
v c ils whether=
:-a
to res ect a a==_
respond -- - -_ -.
areas to .. .._ _ =r .._p g��. ,. • A - - - -' •.� -- - - -
i r' . r •...... ,
,ri'�a '] v iouth,
.__,:.._.a�q _ F�_�,_,,+• ....{ ,...c_.i _-.�r . _ �
Tr.- *y-- _ .rt_-r e. D 'zw . ilf� "�:b g g g Pg -#th�f�v'--.:. a e Raa d of=�l�Jest �R�s�.r�e : _rve � � h - _ � n of..INh�tef�sh St_ _ the sect o.� __ _ .--. _-� -- - �..__ - _ - - - - g= �= t_
.. , _ •. � , . ... �. .. _ Via..[..- - - - -
•S. -..-- t r' _ .. .. r,r 'fr] �.._:- . _r ._-,.� .. .-=gym -r _•..._� . ...rr: z. r-` - ..z - - - - - - -
�a
...- _ _ .. ... _...- ..._��'. ,-�.-ter::.- .„r.: � .• � -==�r..�'•._•. � .-. •
F� -
��-
�:'.�•. .. _ _ - - -
pEMS .andfre_:services AFT - {r rFa
n ernent ior. ro n - _ - -
s a res o s�be arra _ _ _ _ � -- . . _ - - - - -- --
err,
u e s t E o n . l s t h � n � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � F - - - - - _ _ - �.� _ ��� _ _FF�� �• � �F�� - . _ ,.
--
..-.._ -. .. ._ _... ._.•_.:- - _... °Yr�e.-r - - ,mac.'-�......
f
R a:
,_ ...._, r.._ ._. �.__.. __.. -� - _....F. -..- • .. �F .. ter• . � - -- - -- - �i.� - - - - - "'�"_ - __
{
- 3 �� 1. .. .. r• ._-. ...-�-... x_ ..-r. .5 ._.. .. _..�. .._ �. r.. ... ram- s!- �. - - i - _ _ -€ - - _.€-:._.-'� _ _ _ -
i �{x
F
_ _......- .. _ ... _ ...�.-ems_.. _-.� �. r _ � - - :_�.� �:�.,"r�-,,�".. - - - _ - •"a-. ,.e: - � e
.�"a;r. _..�.. �..._... ._ TAB..._..... _.. . �. - _ � - - � • - - - -- -- ..� - - -
-
.-
-r
•��( }_.. ..fir=,+;�: " ... .:. .... ��,�;�.._��
..
vv _. -..
r-:
Ey
aR 'icy 3� ct,=c T
- .. _ .._. _ :. - . -F_. r ._ _ - ...z :�`_ - 'K .._ .. - - -- - . '-ems"--_ r-.rF.-_ �-': - 9-r= - _ - -. F''.�. � ;, L:•-�[.':{:�j `.P'.�`".: _,!�F.�_!.��.' .:.
c
f : s:
y Y� . ..; ..-. :xF. :.__..�-:.fir: off �: '•e ��'�- �F,..rc.F :_t
. _ 1 ♦ .-... .... ..
Ten to fifteen years age, the relationship between EFD, Kalispell and the Kalispell
Fire Department (KFD) was uncooperative, maybe even hostile. The Kalispell and
KFD relationship with the other rural fire districts would be described with the
same words and to some extent continue to this day. During the last five years
the working relationship between EFD and KFD has improved tremendously,
primarily because they have needed to rely on each other for EMS backup and
support. The fire side of the picture has benefited also, but the interaction on
the fire side is less frequent. EFD is staffed 24 hours providing 24/7 ALS and fire
services with 21 paid full-time and part-time personnel. The responders have
worked together to develop the same/similar protocols, supplies, equipment and
practices to make expectation somewhat seamless because of the number of'
times they are supporting each other on responses.
This period of cooperative spirit has occurred during a time when EFD has not felt
its jurisdiction and revenue sources to be threatened. At the least, Trum ble
Creek Phase 11 and any future developments may threaten revenue sources for
EFD operations. A dependence/reliance of backup and support has developed
between EFD and KFD -- a relationship that can be fragile and requires careful
understanding for the safety of the communities to which we have each become
responsible. Brutal transparent discussions and honesty need to occur in areas
of overlapping jurisdiction — what's more important -- revenue, jurisdiction,
safety, response times, and/or who-s the customer? EFD has developed a strong
training program for EMS/fire services. KFD has benefited from individuals that
got their start in the EFD.
immediate annexation or annexation without consideration to EFD will
undermine the efforts of the last few years.
Thank you for your time considering these issues.
r -
Craig Williams, Fire chief
Evergreen Fire District
xc: Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning Commissions members
Kalispell Mayor and City council members
Kalispell city Manager,
• � 't. - _ •�. - - _ '•t r' ^}� �•� `-f. _ .��, r t:�i.��..'., ram"-T'. • :1
Representative � Jon Son■, , _ �F ^ �`.i': ,��:.r:SY''.:-+���-.r �_ ,r�.,� �L,Y'-•':.- �:F}� 'S%r•i�iy.:
t- _- 'i'- ..��S.. ^:r I. i" s•,j-,:;1-. .�F:%_.x �r` ¢ 't`=" _'�;'
�2 � r f ^-•,} �'a =er' �i,, ,.,, ' -.'s :• ` '•f, ; :: -` is _ :`i:3.'.� �i
- ��- �_ �l �� +Jy'.,. .if,`'• - e.V �?_+U�.tF• .f, ri.:-i -:7'Iv.� Ir '-a .r... _ �y..,.
t r
• - + •^ ••� i I•; �{ - _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _,� 1.
7 1FY • F.. L x L r• _ _
.. . .. .. 7. � _ _ ... ... -•. i. .� .0 . ..- _..-.. __ - - _.E.- - - __ �_4'_y,='mot eF.r'r: ;'
}
R4 r. - , sue::' �'� .. •1 . � Y F'r r Y,Y' � _ :�t
_ .. .. � i... -•• . , _. .. . 5.. ,, _ a .i- _ .. , ..-..st .. _.. ..._ .c.-,=_..._', _ _ _ .�a'�'z-._R r,-°-'.`.F�r.'e.;.:5�-- '�: � 1 - �i. .�`�•.:"' -
v .. .. . .. t .. ! „ 1{ � .._- ..-_ r. .-_..-._,.._ _.. .. -. _F�_ '�Jr==�. +..F _ __ _ �.:::r�z -•Y.r nl� �'• t,
'7ct'~_T17.�. -
- .._-
.^
_ .. .;r . .� - 3 � ... ... . . _�_. .,�. ,-... �'•
1 i 4
=
.--.
.. I � � . � _ .. r r r _ •.-•- F -., . � . s+?�• ...._ . _-.• - ..��: �-. _.dri"?.. ...�lF`F- - - - F'a:== titti � s �. -
.- r - .L1 ..'� k .. ._._ •t-_.tr _ .- ..... _.. _.._ o <. ... . -,. � r - r. - _ -__. .. r ;� _ ��""• �Y=:''--.r..P:.:,::_v..a�Er'.i:_r�_.•..
r r• .. •.-.. ..7[ .. .-..f i a .-... rrt[ :.-. .... __-`_' i•f.r.rW .--. .�` .5 �. - - � � - - - ':.� - :7� ''f['`� -
�F.
n - r-
t cry`
y ., a:
M1 7 r. _..... r.....- .._ R............- .-_.._ . �'� �.. .. .ram .. _.. .- '_ __� = -i.: rr.- :c�..• .
2
-.. =�:.
_ . ._. - .... _.._ .._. _-._ .r=-•--�._. __. _._... .__ . ..,..-. ..,:- .. -. - .2a. . - .��:-` - -- �f _ -�a�.t _ .i. _�� ,r{•. rti:
1 . .L 1. � .. ._...• .�.-..... ,... ,.__.. ._�. ..__ - ..... .�_ _ =r.�w.
.- ... ._. .. _. _.r..-....s,_. ... .-T•,�_ _- _ •T. ... ___.. .......+-.•:"... - --_F?.':: r� __ �. ►i-0•�.:.E��- �1
r F .3:
i . . • .. .. _.. ...... ....: ..:..- r - . ..- ,- .-._,=a4. . s... --. ^F_._ - . - _[f _. 3 J... .._ _ _ ..._.'_#?: :1�1.'c- - ,-P-if- - - - - - • 21 r ��
-
,
- `y�`:-�� r -y•
F•.. _ .. :ram r _ .. �>7 ==�.- � .
s ti s -�' 1 •
n.:.a•.� � �:�: �_�N• Y=Y l~' t ,ice
. _ _ ti � , F< .� .__ �..-:'.fir.. _ .:.r:'-=_._�. r ��� •-:�£:� ..rix .. -
r
-.. .. ,. �.��__.. .�.-. _ ..� ram.-.. -- •_�`-`�:•- - �,c�.�-r•.:.__. -_- -- _ _ _..y:-..; _:.i�__ - ��f� - _ r. 37� _ .-. .. __.. .. ... ._,._., _ ..-.... .-.. _... -::•ate.- - ,.. ?:
nr s .,.
._ lr T .. ._ o•.i-.. ..�_ .. .. .•_.-. _=r. _ ...�. ._.. __. -. _. _r-.. ._ ._ ...-. ....F==. F�_ - - - __-+.`.:-�=_.:. ��.'�'�.'F 1-[Pr ••S \'. `'' ..Fj' _- - -
] .....- .... .¢- .� ..r.-• - .. arc =r':.- _ -.. .. .. ��:._.__':..� ��15_ -_i• r'\
- _ -.�:_ ec... !-f _� a •:._:. .-._ �.�_._:.. �. ... -. ..- r_.-.-_,,-.2_.. .-..� _=.=L _-. 1 -� .. .._. _. _.._-�._,.- :: t� - .. _..-,.._TT'._r-. -. r =.-_ ..�.. .... 's j=: r srl - r .4, .. _ ,
- ALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
OF REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 10, 2009
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL
The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board
CALL
and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7: 00 p.m.
Board members present were: Bryan Schutt, John Hinchey,
Rick Hull, C.M. (Butch) Clark, Chad Graham, Troy Mendius
and Richard Griffin. Seam. Conrad, P.J. Sorensen, and Torn
Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There
were approximately 70 people in the audience.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Clark moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the
minutes of the September 9, 2009 meeting of the Kalispell
City Planning Board and Zoning Commission.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No one wished to speak.
MITSCH ZONE CHANGE -
A request by R. Disk Mitsch for a zone change from. P-1
P-1 TO B-2
(Public) to B--2 (General Business) for 2 tracts of land
totaling 1.78 acres located on the west side of US Highway
93 South in Kalispell just south of the Kelly Road
intersection.
STAFF DEPORT KZC-09-04
Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning
Department reviewed staff report KZC-09-04.
Conrad said this is a zone change request on property
located on Highway 93 South which is approximately 2
acres in size. The planning board reviewed this property
earlier this year when a zone change took place from B-2 to
P-1 to accommodate a potential pre --release center which is
no longer proposed to be located on this site.
The property owner is now requesting that the business B--2
zoning be restored to the property. Conrad reviewed the
location of the property and surrounding uses.
Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board
and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KZC-09--04 as
findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council
that the zoning for this property be changed to B-2 (General
Business) .
BOARD QUESTION'S
None.
APPLICANT/ CONSULTANTS
None.
PUBLIC HEARING
No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 1 of 31
has had plenty of contact with the board members and they
always talk about the wonderful economic development -- for
them. salaries haven't increased in 10-20 years; we have
the lowest salaries in Montana. Low and middle class people
have to work 60--80 hours a week to pay rent. Every bit of
this dream to expand the airport is stopped by one fact -
the people who they want to buy the land from said they are
not selling.
Shoredahl said she believes what has been going on that
the public doesn't know is the way they have been
threatening that family to get the land. she believes there
has been underground dealings to get the property and is
concerned the government is not being transparent. She
added include us, keep it transparent, and listen to us. We
are not rich and we get left out of this formula, every single
time. she said how about TeleTech promising to raise the
wages to $10 but as soon as they got here the gages were at
$7.50 like everyone else in the valley. Every box store works
their employees' four hour shifts 3 times a weep and this is
called economy? The land isn't for sale but she bets they
will get it anyway.
Dolores Aadsen submitted a letter for the record a copy is
attached to the minutes.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Hinchey said given the fact that events are taping place that
will most likely impact the redevelopment plan, such as the
open house on November 30rh and the request by the City
Manager to hold even more meetings, he feels it is
premature for the board to act on this plan at this time.
MO'T"ION
Hi.nchey moved and Clark seconded a motion to table the
South Kalispell Airport Redevelopment Plan.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
TRUA93ULL CREEK
A request by NW Dev Group, LLC for annexation and initial
CROSSING PHASE 2 -
zoning of I--1 (Light Industrial) and R-3 (Urban Single Family,
INITIAL ZONING, PLANNED
Residential) on. a 160.5 acre site. The property is currently
UNIT DEVELOPMENT &
zoned SAG- 10 (Suburban Agricultural- 10 acre minimum) in
PRELIMINARY PLAT
the county. In addition to the zone change the owner is
requesting a planned unit development (PUD) overlay
district on an approximately 55 acre portion of the 160.5
acre site. The PUD is proposed in con junction with the R-3
zoning and a subdivision, known as Trumbull. Creek
Crossing Phase 2, which would create 176 single family
residential lots ranging in size from. 4,400 square feet to
10,300 square feet. The project site extends from East
Reserve Drive on the south boundary of the site north to
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 17 of 31
Rose crossing and includes approximately 1,100 lineal feet
of frontage on Highway 2.
STAFF REPORTS KA-09-04, Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning
KPUD-09-03 & KPP-09-01 Department, reviewed the staff reports for the board.
Conrad said before the planning board is the Trumbull
Creep Crossing project. The board will be looking at initial
zoning on a 160 acre site along with a Planned Unit
Development overlay zoning district and a subdivision.
request. Conrad reviewed the location of the property along
Us Highway 2 East/Rose Crossing/East Reserve Drive and
the proposed zoning and land uses. The proposed
subdivision, Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 includes 176
single --family residential lots, just over 15 acres of common
area, open space and parkland, and a bike/pedestrian trail
along the east boundary also connecting south to the trails
in Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1.
Conrad noted there were two work sessions on this project
and the board discussed the western property boundary
and how the lots interface with the light industrial zoning
immediately west. A condition was added, Condition #S,
which addresses that concern.
Conrad continued the second issue discussed at the last
work session was the second access into phase 2A.. In
accordance with the subdivision regulations the developer
needs to provide a second access in and out of phase 2A.
The first option would be connecting a street with phase 2A
through the Granite View subdivision and back to East
Reserve Drive. The second option would be taking Mountain
View Drive north through phase 2 and extending the drive
up to Rose Crossing. There was a request by the developer if
they selected option B it would include an all-weather,
unpaved surface. However, the city's Public works
Department would require that the secondary access be
paved under Condition # 1 g.
Conrad noted when they look at subdivisions they always
consider connectivity to adjacent properties and the staff
report recommends two future 60 foot wide public road and
utility R/W's. One across from McKenna Avenue and the
other across from Scott Avenue which is included under
Condition #34.
Conrad concluded with the review of the elevations that
were submitted with the development application to give the
board an idea of what they could expect the future
residential development house types to look like.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and
zoniniz Commission adopt staff re -port KA-09-04 and
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 18 of 31
recommend to the Kalispell city Council that initial zoning
of the 160. 5+ acre site be I-1 & R-3 and as shown on the
zoning district neap for the property.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and
Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD--09--03 as
findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell city council
the R-3 / PUD for Trumbull Creek crossing be approved
subject to conditions 1--22 listed in the staff report.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and
Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-09-01 as
findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell city Council
that the Trumbull Creek crossing Phase 2 subdivision be
approved subject to conditions 23 - 45 listed in the staff
report.
BOARD QUESTIONS Clark asked hour the alley situation was addressed on the
small lots and Conrad said that is addressed under
Condition # 5 of the PUD conditions. The 2 blocks that had
the narrow width lots, blocks 6 & 10 shall incorporate alleys
meeting city standards in the block design and limiting the
vehicle access from the alleys.
Schutt asked Conrad to indicate the location of blocks 6 &
10 for the board which he did and then Conrad noted that
blocks 11 & 16 were also recommended for alleys to allow
Mountain View Drive to be redesigned to allow easier traffic
flow.
Clark said he had concerns with connectivity to the crest
into the industrial area and asked hove that was addressed.
Conrad said at this point staff is recommending that block 5
be redesigned and if the developer still wants to have the
connections he would be allowed to do that. However if that
is a concern it is something the board can be discuss.
APPLICANT/ CONSULTANTS Erika Wirtala, Sands Surveying reviewed proposed
amendments to the conditions of approval, as suggested by
the developer. The requested changes are as follows:
1.A. Permits the developer one community information
center/ sales office for the entire Trumbull creek crossing
Phase II. Builders who purchase large portions of the
community may be allowed to construct one or more model
home(s) to demonstrate their product. The model homes are
temporary in nature.
PUD plan The use of the lot as a model home and sales
office shall cease once the lots have been sold.
I.B. Allows the minimum. lot areas to be reduced from.
7,000 square feet to 4500 square feet.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 19 of 31
1. C. Allows the minimum lot area widths to be reduced
from 60 to 45 feet.
2. Uses within the PUD are limited to detached single-family
houses except for model homes and the community
sales office to be used temporarily.
5. Blocks 651, 1. Q , 11 and 16 shall incorporate alleys meeting
city standards into the block designs. Vehicle access onto
the adjacent street from the lots within these blocks is
prohibited. Garage and driveway access shall be off the alley
only.
Presentation on amendment to Conditions #5, wirtala
said in addressing the requirements for alleys on blacks 6 &
10, which were the smaller lots, Mr. Anders thought by
dropping 4 lots out of those blacks it would increase the
minimum lot width to approximately 51.5 feet and by
proposing garage standards they could alleviate the board's
concerns with having a roar house look or wall of garages.
This would increase the minimum lot size to 4500 square
feet and increase the minimum lot width to 45 feet. wirtala
said they would be agreeable to having alleys in blocks 11 &
16 which are the long blacks parallel to the large park.
S. (lust sentence) The buffer may include the use of streets,
storm water retention areas, open space, landscape buffer
or any combination thereof.
12.B. Block 2 shall be modified to continue the existing 20--
foot wide brlC%ed trail 1a 5 r e b1r -rfef. north, through
Black 2, to connect with Ashleigh Avenue.
13. The storm water retention areas shall be irrigated and
landscaped to create apark-like setting. -tea plho
Jen area is serving.
17. A landscape plan for the lift station shall be provided to
the Planning Department
�a`�ent for the review and approval.
19. insert 2B in ,,place of 2A.
Presentation on amendment to Condition. 19. A traffic
impact study, that was included in the original proposal,
was completed by wGM Group for all 600 lots which were
originally proposed. Condition # 19 requires an updated
traffic impact study be submitted prior to the final approval
of phase 2A. They felt since the TIs had been completed for
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 20 of 31
a far greater number of traffic vehicle trips per day that
having one completed for just phase 2A, with approximately
39 lots in the first sub -phase wouldn't change the analysis
very much and if it was lengthened out to phase 2B that
might provide clearer results and give them a better idea of
what the true impacts of the traffic may or may not be at
that time.
Schutt clarified then the developer is proposing that the
recommendations of the TIS be postponed until final plat
approval of sub --phase 2 B and Wirtala said yes.
35.A. The 100-foot building setback shall coincide with the
be��4=��s e€�� ��e��Ie�& back wall of the
structure on the adjacent lots.
Presentation on amendment to Condition 35A. wirtala
said this condition is referring to the setbacks from the
creek that runs along the eastern edge of the property site.
Fish, wildlife and Parks had made a recommendation when
they were in the initial planning stages that they could
measure 100 feet back from the high crater mark to our
building setbacks. The staff report asks that they measure
100 feet from the back lot line to the high grater mark which
changes the plan considerably. Therefore they are asking to
go with the setback required by Fish, wildlife and Parks and
they would get the 100 foot setback protection they asked
for.
36.a. Water mains shall be designed to provide fire
flows as determined by the ire department. Wate
40. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated
on the face of the final plat. TT+;';+�r oµ.,oyyy�r*� ��± r:� ..ut„�
r
Utility easements for City water and sewer
shall be provided to allow logical extension of utilities
from this subdivision to adjoining properties.
41.... ...The sidewalk and boulevard will he modified only
to the extent required by the US.PS..It will still a I to w
the sidewalk and boulevard to function normallg.
wirtala noted in the staff report under Background,
Information it notes that after a cursory review by the city
staff the developer elected to put the entire project on hold
until the project engineer could work out a proposed storm
water plan for the subdivision. wirtala clarified the city
asked them to design the proposed subdivision to the storm
water regulations that had not come into affect vet and still
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 21 of 31
have not been adopted by city council. She said they then
had to completely go back to the drawing board and
reconfigure/ redesign the project in its entirety to meet these
somewhat difficult storm water drainage regulations. It was
a tremendous effort and took them a long time so it was not
a completely arbitrary and capricious decision.
Wirtala continued the garage appearance and Location
standards was a topic of discussion at the work session and
Mr. Anders did some research and found the standards that
were applicable to another municipality which they changed
to apply to Trumbull creek Crossing. Wirtala added these
standards might also be something the city would consider
adopting in future updates of the design standards for
Kalispell. Wirtala reviewed the standards proposed.
Clark thought getting the proposed amendments from the
developer instead of staff was unusual and he added these
amendments have apparently not been reviewed by staff
yet. Schutt said that can be addressed after the public
hearing.
Hull asked about the road to Rose Crossing and whether it
would be paved and Wirtala said it is the developer's
preference that we provide an all-weather unpaved surface
however, the staff report indicates Public works would not
approve an unpaved surface so they have the option to
chose either proposal A which is to provide access through
Granite View Subdivision or proposal B which would be
constructing a all --weather paved access to Rose Crossing.
PUBLIC HEARING
No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
MOTION -- INITIAL ZONING
Hinchey moved and Clark seconded a motion to adopt staff
report KA-09-04 and recommend to the Kalispell city
Council that initial zoning of the 1 C o . 5 + acre site be I -1
(Light Industrial) & R--3 (Urban. single --Family Residential).
BOARD DISCUSSION
Graham asked for the status of the annexation of this
property and Jentz said the board is setting the stage for
the zoning but it doesn't become effective until it gets
through city council who considers annexation along with
the recommended zoning.
ROLL CALL -- INITIAL
The motion to approve the initial zoning of R-3 and I-1
ZONING
passed unanimously on a roll call vote
MOTION -- PLANNED UNIT
Mendius moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt
DEVELOPMENT
staff report KPUD-09--03 as findings of fact and recommend
to the Kalispell City Council that the R--3 / PUD for Trumbull
Creek Crossing be approved subject to conditions 1 - 22
listed in the staff report.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 22 of 31
BOARD DISCUSSION
Graham mentioned the staff report states that the Public
Works Department is recommending that the alleys be
privately maintained. He asked if they would be maintained
by the HOA and Conrad said yes. Schutt asked if that is a
deviation from how alleys have been maintained in the past
and Conrad said no, Public works, in the recent
subdivisions, has arrays recommended that if there are
alleys incorporated in the subdivision or PUD design that
they be maintained by the HOA. Further discussion on
maintenance of the alleys was held.
Griffin suggested the board review the proposed
amendments to the PUD and preliminary plat, as submitted
by the developer, one by one and ask for staff input on each
item. Schutt agreed.
MOTION - AMENDMENT 1.A.
Griffin moved and Graham seconded a motion to approve
the amendment to condition 1.A. as proposed..
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad noted staff did have a chance to review all of the
amendments and does not have an issue with amendment
# 1.A. Schutt asked if the model homes would be identified
on the preliminary plat and Conrad said no because they do
not know at this time which lot it will be.
ROLL CALL -- 1.A.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -- AMENDMENT I.B.
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
the amendment to condition 1.B. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said the city is already supporting a 4300 square
foot lot and if they want to go up to a 4500 square feet lot
staff has no issues with that amendment.
ROLL CALL --- 1.B. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -- AMENDMENT Griffin moved and Schutt seconded a motion to approve the
1.C. amendment to condition 1. C. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said here again staff can support the change from
43 feet to 45 feet.
ROLL CALL -- I.C. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -- AMENDMENT -- 2. Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
the amendment to condition 2. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff does not have an issue with this
amendment since a sales office has been approved for the
subdivision.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 23 of 31
DOLL CALL - 2.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call. vote.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said blocks 6 & 10 are the lots that are proposed at
43 foot widths and the developer mentioned they would be
expanding those to 51 feet. The concern was when the lot
width was below 50 feet the board wanted to see alley
designs based on past recommendations. Conrad
recommended the following amendment to condition. 5:
"Blocks 11 & 16 and any blocks where lots are less than
50 feet in width shall incorporate alleys meeting city
standards into the block design."
MOTION - AMENDMENT - S.
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
the amendment to condition 5. as proposed by staff to read
as follows: "Blocks 11 & 16 and any blocks where lots
are less than 50 feet in width shall incorporate alleys
meeting city standards into the block design."
ROLL CALL - 5.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION - AMENDMENT - S.
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
the amendment to condition 8. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said city staff has no objections to the amendment.
Clark said he believes you shouldn't back up residential lots
to an industrial area without a buffer and he doesn't feel a
buffer should be a "Landscape buffer". Schutt clarified that
Clark doesn't think a landscape buffer is adequate and
wants it pulled out of the list of potential tools and Clark
said yes. Clark added you buffer by changing the use not
landscaping and the change of use would be a street,
drainage, or some physical barrier. Jentz said the condition
was meant to allow the applicant a series of options to best
fit their subdivision development without having to design
the subdivision for them..
Hinchey said he feels open space is a landscape buffer.
Clark. disagreed. Jentz said staff indicated the design that
was offered was not appropriate so parameters were
provided to address that.
Schutt asked if staff is providing any parameters for the
width of the buffer and staff said no.
Clark asked if _Jentz was comfortable with the wording of
"landscape buffer" and he said as a combination of tools he
is but as the sole tool they would need to provide some
specifications for review and approval.
Schutt said this board is again being asked to approve a
plat layout that has several conditions that will dramatically
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 24 of 31
change the layout and what mechanism would staff use to
be certain that the proposed changes meets the spirit and
intent of the conditions. Jentz said before they come in
with sub --phase 2A of the preliminary plat they will have to
redesign their PUD and preliminary plat to comply with the
conditions. If after review staff does not feel it is in the spirit
of the PUD or the conditions imposed, the city would not
accept the plan. Then the developer has an option to go to
council for review and final decision or redesign the plan.
Graham asked what does moving Stillwater Drive to the
crest property line do to the stormwater retention
calculation. Andy Hyde of Carver Engineering responded by
moving Stillwater Drive over to the crest you would lengthen
Brandon Avenue and Kristin Avenue so in affect you are
increasing the amount of impervious area that would
generate storm. crater. Graham asked if it would be a
significant increase and Hyde said it could be and it could
result in losing some lots.
Schutt asked if it is a minor increase in impervious surface
by stretching those two intermediate streets and Hyde said
yes and they would also have to split up the location of the
storm crater pond into at least 2 of the block areas or they
may end up with 3 different storm water areas on blocks 4,
6, & 10. Further discussion was held regarding storm water
in this area.
ROLL CALL - S.
The motion passed, as proposed, on a roll call vote of 6 in
favor and 1 opposed.
MOTION - AMENDMENT -
Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the
12.B.
amendment to condition 12.B. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said the open space buffer and 20 --foot wide
bike/pedestrian trail would extend the connection of the
bike/pedestrian trail to Ashleigh Avenue and staff is
comfortable with that amendment.
ROLL CALL -- 12.B.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION - AMENDMENT -
Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the
13. & 17.
amendment to conditions 13. 8, 17. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said staff has no problems with those amendments.
Conrad added it will be irrigated and landscaped like in
phase 1.
ROLL CALL - 13. & 17.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION - AMENDMENT --
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
19.
the amendment to condition 10. as proposed.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 25 of 31
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad explained the location of sub -phase 2A and sub -
phase 2B for the board. Schutt asked the developer what
effect postponing the traffic impact study would have on the
development. Mike Anders of Northwest Dev Group said the
thought process was based upon the comments received
from Public works and the fact that work has already been
completed at the intersection of East Reserve and Highway
2 East. The traffic impact on that intersection will not be
dramatic in the next couple years and with one additional
sub --phase of about 39 lots and it would probably be in their
opinion, worth the time and energy of updating the TIS at
the end of the second sub --phase, 2B when additional
growth and development has occurred in the area besides
this subdivision.
Clark thought it was onerous to put the cost and time into a
TIS for 39 more lots and therefore he supports the
amendment as proposed by the developer.
ROLL CALL - 19.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -- ADD SINGLE
Hull moved and Schutt seconded a motion to include the
STORY EL]E"iiATIONS AND
single story elevations and the Garage Appearance &
GARAGE STANDARDS TO
Location Standards submitted by the developer to Condition
CONDITION 3
3 as 3. G.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Hull asked for clarification on the trellis in Item. D of the
Garage Appearance and Location standards and Wirtala
said responded.
Hull was excited about the garage standards since this has
been a major issue with this board and Schutt agreed.
ROLL CALL -- CONDITION 3
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL - PUD
The motion to approve the planned unit development of
Trumbull. Creek Crossing, Phase 2, as amended, passed
unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -• PRELIMINARY
Griffin moved and Hull seconded a motion to adopt staff
PLAT
report KPP-09--01 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the Trumbull Creek Crossing
Phase 2 subdivision be approved subject to conditions 23 -
45 listed in the staff report.
MOTION - AMENDMENT --
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
35.A.
the amendment to condition 35.A. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said staff recommended the 100-foot building
setback coincide with the rear lot boundary lines because in
the R-3 you could get detached sheds or storage buildings
within 5 feet of rear property lines. For the administrative
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 26 of 31
ease of insuring the 100 foot setback is met staff is
recommending the 100 foot setback and rear property lines
coincide. Conrad continued they recommended the same
condition for Willow Creek.
Conrad said this condition will affect lots in blocks S and 14
and added the other areas along the creeks have a greater
separation so it won't be an issue.
Clark said he doesn't see any variable circumstances to
change the setback from the requirements placed on Willow
Creek and in fact the setbacks were 200 feet in Willow
Creek. Clark said he doesn't see any reason to change the
condition.
ROLL CALL - 3 a.A.
The motion to approve the amendment to condition 35.A.,
as proposed by the developer, failed on a roll call vote of 3
in favor and 4 opposed.
MOTION - AMENDMENT -
Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the
3E.A.
amendment to condition 36.A. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said staff has no problems with changing this
condition.
ROLL CALL - 35.A.
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION -- AMENDMENTS --
Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
40. & 41.
the amendments to conditions 40. & 41. as proposed.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Conrad said staff checked with the Public Works
Department on these amendments and staff does not see
any problem with the amendments as proposed by the
developer.
ROLL. CALL -- 40. & 41,
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Schutt said Ms. wirtala stated they had gone the extra mile
to meet the new and improved storm water management
plans and he asked if that is delineated correctly in
conditions 28 & 29 and Conrad said yes they complete a
storm crater report and engineered drainage plan that would
be reviewed and approved by the city. Schutt said even
though those specific standards have not yet been adopted
and Conrad said it would seem s o .
Schutt continued the sewer lines will be built to Evergreen
Water and sewer District standards and then that affluent
goes into the pressure mains piped through the City of
Kalispell through the interlocal agreement and Conrad said
yes. Schutt asked who was responsible for maintenance of
those lines and Conrad said he believes it would be the
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 27 of 31
Evergreen water and sewer District. Schutt asked if there is
a major discrepancy in design standards between the two
utilities and Conrad said in talking with the Public works
Department they are pretty much identical and they are in
agreement with how the conditions are written. Jentz said
to follow up on that the water system. is Evergreen Water
and designed to their standards and they will maintain
those lines and the hydrants are designed to handle the fire
flow services in the area.
Hull asked if the secondary access must be paved and
Conrad said yes. Hull asked if the future 60 foot R/W's are
in the conditions and Conrad said yes and he anticipates
the R/W's being dedicated in the last sub -phase 2F.
Graham said the Police Department has indicated this
development will put a strain on their department. Conrad
said when the Police Department talked to him they
indicated they are not opposed to the city annexing this
property but they wanted the planning board and city
council to know if the city is going to grog to this area they
will serve the subdivision but they need to realize that their
department is still understaffed and it would further strain
their operations.
Conrad said the Police Department also indicated if the
property is annexed they will probably be receiving
jurisdiction along Highway 2 East and because of the higher
speeds along Highway 2 crashes tend to be more deadly. If
they do get that jurisdiction it will take more manpower if
there is an accident. Graham asked if that is common for
all emergency services and Conrad said the Fire Department
didn't see an issue with servicing this subdivision. In newer
subdivisions they might get calls for ambulance but they
don't typically go out on fire calls because it is new
construction built to current standards. The Fire
Department added it is well within adequate response time
from the northern, fire station # 62 .
Schutt asked if there will be better coordination with the
enhanced 911 station and Jentz said that is the purpose of
that program. If it is in the city the Kalispell Police will
respond. In the case of a fire Jentz wasn't sure who would
get the first response call, the city or Evergreen but it will
probably be Kalispell Fire Department because it is within
the city's limits.
Clark said this conversation doesn't have any relation to the
PUD or preliminary plat because this board doesn't rule on
the annexation.
ROLL CALL -- PRELIIVM NARY The motion to approve the preliminary plat of Trumbull
PLAN' Creek Crossing, Phase 2, as amended, passed unanimously
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 28 of 31
on a roll call vote.
BOARD DISCUSSION Hinchey said this is a really well thought out development
and the developer and his staff should be commended for
the years they have worked on it. It is a good project and
will make a good neighborhood.
Hinchey continued however, he is having trouble as he
thinks other board members are with the location of this
project as it relates to the City of Kalispell - being 2 - 2-1/2
miles from the closest boundary. Hinchey feels the city is
setting itself up by annexing yet another island.
MOTION Hinchey moved and Clark seconded a motion stating the
Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
encourages the Kalispell City Council to proceed with
caution on the annexation of Trumbull Creek Crossing,
Phase 2.
BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt clarified this is not being brought up as anything to
do with the subdivision itself but the location. Hinchey
agreed and said the board has rightfully approved the PUD
and preliminary plat but he has a more basic issue which is
the location and the ability of the city to provide services to
that location.
Clark agreed with Hinchey. The board has performed their
function which they were asked to do. However it is
premature to annex the property.
Schutt said he had similar misgivings when they looked at
the Silverbrook project north of town but we knew at the
time there were several other projects in the pipe that would
fill in that gap which made him feel more comfortable
knowing that connection was corning. Schutt added it is
much easier, cheaper and more effective to provide services
to a contiguous land area than hop --scotching all over the
valley.
Hull said he was opposed to silverbrook and he sees some
big differences with this project. With silverbrook the
growth boundaries were, in his opinion, artificially pushed
out to that area whereas this property is already within the
growth policy boundaries. It is contiguous to other urban
areas and Evergreen will be a part of Kalispell at some
point. Hull was disappointed that the storm water
regulations have dragged on so long. He does have some
misgivings but the fact that it is connected to other
subdivisions and not sitting out in a Feld in the middle of
nowhere he would vote against this motion.
wirtala said the differences with other subdivisions that
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 29 of 31
have been hop --scotched out is that this property also has
an industrial component to it - 40 acres - which is the real
money maker for the city. It has often been said that
residential development doesn't always pay its way however,
this would be one of the first developments that comes in
that would be subject to $7700 for impact fees for each lot.
Wirtala said this is a planned growth where they are asking
for annexation of the entire property yet the infrastructure
is being added in small components. The Parks &
Recreation Department is also requiring, through the
conditions of the PUD, that a Parks Maintenance District be
established. Wirtala said then Trumbull Creek Crossing,
Phase 2 will become a tax district unto itself to maintain
and take care of the park system. The HOA is taking care of
the alleys, open spaces, stormwater retention areas, and
there will be private hauler garbage so it is not city garbage.
In addition the Fire Department doesn't feel this subdivision
will put a strain on their services.
Griffin said although he can agree with some of the things
that Clark and Hinchey have said if we are going to draw a
line in the sand with the council the board needs to have
standards to determine when is it too far out to bring about
more cohesive, more serviceable and less expensive services
to properties that are annexed in the future. He had
concerns about the ability of the Police and Fire
Departments servicing this subdivision and hopefully down
the road the city will have a better cooperative agreement
between all of the fire and police forces in the valley.
Griffin said he is voting against the motion because he
doesn't think the board is in a position to determine what
they want to recommend or not recommend regarding leap-
frogging or extending services. He added to single out this
particular project for this action is wrong.
Clark didn't think this area was part of the growth policy
and Jentz said it is.
Clary referenced the letter received from Evergreen Fire
District which he wanted entered into the record. A copy is
attached to the minutes.
Hinchey said he stands by his motion and he thinks it has
been misunderstood. He is not recommending denial of the
annexation but merely stating what most board members
have articulated already that they are concerned about
development this far from the current city limits and they
suggest the city council proceed with caution.
ROLL CALL I The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 in favor and 3
opposed.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 30 of 31
OLD BUSINESS:
None.
NEW BUSINESS:
Hull said he was concerned that the board will be pushed
out of the airport discussion and he thinks this board is the
ideal board to deal with it. He would like to see the board's
work schedule include the airport to see what they can do
to bring the public in and deal with all the issues.
The city was caught by surprise by the number of people
who have come out in opposition to the plan and it might
have been passed without realizing that.
Schutt asked what staff sees as the trajectory of the airport
redevelopment plan.. Jentz said the city council, rightfully
so, is creating a forum for community discussions on the
airport which has to be resolved before the board can get
back to review and discussion of the plan. Further
discussion was held.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 11: oo p.m.
WORK SESSION
A work session was held following the regular meeting to
discuss the following:
1. Zoning Ordinance Update
NEXT METING
The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning
Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday,
December S, 2009, at 7 : o o p.m. in the Kalispell City
Council Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in
Kalispell.
The next work session of the Kalispell City Planning Board
and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, January
26, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council
Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell.
/ s / Brvan H. Schutt
Bryan H. Schutt
President
.APPROVED as submitted: 12/08/09
Zs/ Michelle Anderson
Michelle Anderson
Recording Secretary
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009
Page 31 of 31
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CONDITIONS OF
FA'J
a _WQ
PUD CONDITIONS:
I.A. Permits the developer one community information center/sales office for the entire
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase II. Builders who purchase large portions of the
community may be allowed to construct one or more model home(s) to demonstrate their
product. The model homes are temporary in nature. The lot shall be identifiedon a
revisedl'UDplan. The use of the lot as a model home and sales office shall cease once
the lots have been sold.
B. Allows the minimum lot area to be reduced from 7,000 square feet to 4500 square
feet.
C. Allows the minimum lot area widths to be reduced from 60 to 45 feet.
2. Uses within the PUD are limited to detached single-family houses except for
model homes and the community sales office to be used temporarily.
5. Blocks 67 1-0, 11 and 16...
S "..the buffer may include the use of streets, stormwater retention area, open
space, landscape b uffer, or any combination thereof.
12. B. Block 2 shall be modified to continue the existing 20--foot wide bikelped trail
landscape buffer north, through Block 2, to connect with Ashleigh Avenue.
13. The storm water retention areas shall be irrigated and landscaped to create a
park -like setting witha plan to bereviewed and approved b theParks and
Recr ation Department and Planning Department. Theapproved_plan shall be
installedprior _to final nlatapprovaLof thephase- h.estorm water retention ar a-
.-____
serving.
17. A landscape plan for the lift station shall be provided to the Planning Department
and Parks and R.ecr ationD en a�-tm e� for the review and approval.
19. insert 2B in place of2A.
PR.LLIMMARY PLAT CONDITIONS
35 A. The 100-foot building setback shall coincide with the r ar Totboundaries -f
the adjacent_IQt back wall of the structure on the adjacent lots.
36. a. Water mains shall be designed to provide fire flows as determined by the fire
department.
installed atapproved locations.
40. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final
plat. Utiliiyascments for Cit ater and sewer shall beprovided toallow for
Utility easements for City water and sewer shall be provided to allow logical
extension of utilitiesfrom this subdivision to adjoining properties,
41, ...The sidewalk and boulevard will be to od ified only to the extent required by
the LUSPS It will still allow the sidewalk and boulevard to function normally.
Garage Appearance and Location Standards
For
Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase II
i. The following standards apply, except when a garage is located behind the
primary structure or the garage is side or rear loading.
a. The garage shall
i. Not be located closer to the street than the dwelling, unless the exterior
wall of at least one room of habitable space shall be located closer to
the street than the garage door.
ii. Not occupy more than do% of the width of the facade of the
structure for a two car garage.
iii. Minimize the appearance of the garage by complying with at least
two of the following standards:
A. Set the garage an additional two feet further from the front
property line than the facade of the dwelling
B. Provide individual garage doors, not to exceed 80 square feet
each, for each parking stall.
C. Any individual garage door may not exceed So% of the width
of the structure facade. Any garage opening width beyond 50% of the
primary structure width must be set back at least 2 feet further from the
front property line than the facade of the other garage volume;
D. Provide a decorative trellis or other feature that will provide a
shadow line giving the perception that the garage opening is recessed.
The feature shall be provided across the top and along the width of the
garage door(s) and shall be at least 12 inches deep and 6 feet tali.
.......... ......
Rip
r
F�-27
IA M
ra. x v.,
MA
-6 Fir..
6.
F,
terra
F'
fp- -
P r
v
V
'TL
Z;.-
j.ke
yf
L 14 n
- ;- -
Z� ing t'
E
7,- -
- 7-1
7'
F.m.
- t
Tv
F A i
6
a 6.
F
T
r--CA;49
fk t
lip
AU
.. ---MBRD
13143 X 1214
M HATH
F
BAIM...
4 .. . . .. . .. . ....... ... . ..... ..... .... .. ..
PATIO
E MNI R M
01:s X 9.10
.FLOOR PLAN
1192 SQUARE FEET
VAULTED
GREATRM
19/6 �x .11/6
GARAGE
19/4 X 1-9/4
N 2:
BE
.. ...... ...
Ine.Kennewick-
flan .number 1.21099
0 This ch- a g home has .much to
offer despite its modest size.
& Adjacewthe foyer, double doors
introduce the- flexible dentbe-droom.
Animpressive -V-a--ulte-d great room
.With a wann fireplace offers plenty_
of space foractive family living and
entertaining,
The centr ally located island kitchen
opens tot edinincy morn and great
room,
Th- e vaulted master bedroom features
a waik-mom closet and private bath
complete with oversize-dShower
.
A laundry closet is conveniently
located off the fall baths which is
shared bythetwobedrooms.
is home I.s designed with 2 x 4
exterior wall construction.
. .. .. ... . ........ ..
L1 M E - 0 E 5 1 GN I N C.
Tel: (503) 624-0555 Fax; (503) 624-0155 7165 SW Fir Loop, Suite 104 Tigard, Oregon 97223
w w w . s u n t e I h o m e d e s i g n , r o rn
3
EVERGREEN FIRE RESCUE
i6i66. . .... ...... .... ...... . ....... . .... ... ....... ... ............. .... .......... : ..... ... .. ..... ... ...
" ............ ..... .. .. .............. . . .....
2236 Highway 2 East (P.O. box 5008) Kalispell, MT 59903 (406)752-4636 Fax (406)752-1540
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Bryan Schutt, President
Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59901
RE; Trumble Creek Crossing
I am writing to express concerns related to emergency services to the area in
question. This area is far outside the boundaries of the City of Kalispell - in the
middle of the southern portion of the Evergreen Fire District (EFD).
The existing Trumble Creek subdivision (57 lots) is under the protection of EFD for
EMS (two minute response) and fire [three minute response] calls. when the City
enforces the waivers to protest annexation and the election to withdraw from a
fire district received on the existing subdivision, the responses times would
significantly increase. If the City built another fire station near the development,
it would most likely be located within 2-3 miles of Evergreens Station 81 or 82.
Stations 51 & 62 are three miles apart and they are each about 3.5 to 4.0 miles
from EFD Station 81. EFD station 82 is 4.5 miles north, at Birch Grove and Hwy 2
East. Additionally, existing Trumble Creek properties are assessed their
proportionate share of the bonded indebtedness for Evergreen's new station 81
until the year 2029. Likewise, phase II and future developments will incur some
indebtedness (MCA 7-33-2129).
In the future, CAD based dispatch would send nearest available EMS and fire
units. Though EMS is covered by user fees, fire protection costs are taxpayer
supported. EFD could be providing fire protection to existing municipal locations,
i.e., Village Greens, Village Loop, Edgerton School and other surrounding
developments, as well as future municipal areas without compensation, or
consideration. Currently the City and EFD travel through each others protection
areas to respond to respective calls, whether EMS or fire. This is prevalent along
the section of whitefish Stage Road, south of west Reserve Drive, which begs the
question, Is this a responsible arrangement for providing EMS and fire services?
Page I of 2
Ten to fifteen years ago, the relationship between EFD, Kalispell and the Kalispell
Fire Department (KFD) was uncooperative, maybe even hostile. The Kalispell and
KFD relationship with the other rural fire districts would be described with the
same words and to some extent continue to this day. During the last five years
the working relationship between EFD and KFD has improved tremendously,
primarily because they have needed to rely on each other for EMS backup and
support. The fire side of the picture has benefited also, but the interaction on
the fire side is less frequent. EFD is staffed 24 hours providing 24/7 ALS and fire
services with 21 paid full-time and part-time personnel. The responders have
worked together to develop the same/similar protocols, supplies, equipment and
practices to make expectation somewhat seamless because of the number of
times they are supporting each other on responses.
This period of cooperative spirit has occurred during a time when EFD has not felt
its jurisdiction and revenue sources to be threatened. At the least, Trumble
Creek Phase II and any future developments may threaten revenue sources for
EFD operations. A dependence/reliance of backup and support has developed
between EFD and KFD - a relationship that can be fragile and requires careful
understanding for the safety of the communities to ---which we have each become
responsible. Brutal transparent discussions and honesty need to occur in areas
of overlapping jurisdiction -- what's more important - revenue, jurisdiction,,
safety, response times, and/or who's the customer? EFD has developed a strong
training program for EMS/fire services. KFD has benefited from individuals that
got their start in the EFD.
Immediate annexation or annexation without consideration to EFD will
undermine the efforts of the last few years.
Thank you for your time considering these issues.
Craig Williams, Fire chief
Evergreen Fire District
Xc: Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning commissions members
Kalispell Mayor and city Council members
Kalispell city Manager
Representative Jon Sonju - HD 7
Page 2 of 2
Jeff walla, Civil Engineer of STELLING ENGINEERS, INC. of the Kalispell office called
Mr. Jenson the Poison Airport Manager, who was going to speak at Quiet skies
Public Meeting this Thursday the 14th. At the Outlaw Inn. And told him I don't
want you to speak at that meeting I don't want you to contradict ghat Stelling
Engineers has told the city of Kalispell.
I called Mr. Walla and asked him why he called Mr. Jenson and advised him not to
speak at the Public Meeting. He said Mr. Jensen is a client of theirs and he didn't
tell him not to speak at the meeting. He said he inform Mr. Jenson that he wasn't
speaking to the City Council and suggested that Mr. Eckels lied to Mr. Jensen. i
said Mr. Jensen knew he wasn't speaking to the City Counsel for over a week and
it was even in the news paper, and what business is that of yours anyway? Again
he said Mr. Jenson and the Poison Airportis there client. I then told Mr. Walla
that Mr. Eckels talked to Mr. Jenson at great lengths about Quiet Skies and what
the meeting was about. And Mr. Jensen was excited about coming up to speak.
And today he told Mr. Eckels that you said Stelling didn't want him to talk and
contradict what Stelling Engineers has told the city. Mr. Walla then hung up on
me.
Question:
1. What does (Walla) Stelling Engineers don't want the City to know?
2. What's Mr. Walla or (Stelling Engineers) motive to silence Mr. Jensen from
telling the public/City about airport management and how they determined to
locate there airport?
3. why would Stelling eng10
ineers (Walla) not want to re -locate the City Airport?
Because of this action, the city Council should not allow Stelling Engineers to have
anything more to do with the Engineering Issues or drafting of any future E.A.'s of
the City Airport issue.
Contact Information
Vince Jennison 406-883-2482 - Polson Airport Manager
David Cole - 406-841-2770 - Community Development; State of MT
Gary rates -- 406-449-5271 x 32 - Airports division FAA
Brief introduction
Originally came to the council regarding regulation of training flights by
Red Eagle Aviation- lad ke v#i°� CoNG'�' v0� ���l'44;64 6Lien
Was asked by three city officials to step up my participation.
1. Council man - concerned about quality of life on the south side
2. City plannner - concerned about housing grants that may be in j epardy if
airport is expanded.
3. Policeman - concerned about public saftey, drug smuggling, homeland
security.
Sol, here I am here as a face representing the "silent majority".
I have made errors: last summer in an effort to create good will I left a note
for the owner of Red Eagle saying, "Great job". What I should have said
was, thank you for moving our operations to GPI for two days a week, by
doing so you have made a 28% improvement. He has used the note against
me ever since.
Would like to invite council members to a special meeting, Thursday 7:00-
9:00 at the Winchester room at the Outlaw Inn.
Special guests incude Vince Jennison -the manager of Polson Airport
and Dave Heine a real estate broker. Jeff Walla of Stelling Engineers called
Vince and told him that, "we don't want you saying anything the contradicts
what we have been telling the city." As an excuse for not coming, they
concocted the story that Vince thought is was a city council meeting. This is
a lie.
Items of discussion and Possible Ratificati6n
---Clarify questions such as
how many legal Kalispell residents keep their airplanes at city airport
is a historic district compatible with an airport affected zone?
and many, many more unanswered questions
--- Legal voting residents should be given primary consideration in city
policy. If so, speakers must give their legal residential address?
--- The advantages of having the airport operated by the city vs. a separate
entity such as red eagle. How to manage its' airport: Vince Jennison
---The next EA - should be "an original work" (David Cole: Head of
Community development at Dept of Commerce 406-841-2770)
should include - (Gary Gates, consulting)
--- firm must be independent - not able to bid on job
--- cost of moving Red Eagle to GPI?
--- cost of moving all tennants to new location
--- time needed to clear court challenges and then build
4 years from time of land acquisition
--- At what point to we determine expansion is a "dead
horse"/not going to happen?
--- What else could the land be used for?
--- Survey of legal residents
--- Appraisal of the Land
Ask for evidence from aviators regarding GPI safety. Has anyone seen
written evidence that GPI is unsafe or inconvenient for general aviation?
Red Eagle Aviation; appears "ungovernable". They pay the
"manager's salary". Development should be the job of the planning dept.
and the manager should run the operations.