03-28-783'-28-78 .
Minutes approved:
3-14-78'.
Kookoosint Village
#2 & Master Plan.
LaSal.le.Industrial
Center.
Hawthorn West-
Publ ic. Hearing
The regular meeting::of: the Kal ispel,l City -County Planning Board
was held Tuesday, :March 28,, 19.78 at 7:30 p.m. in the Flathead
County Courthouse East, 723 5th. Avenue East, Kalispell, Montana.
Members Present: Others Present:
Ray Lybeck 2 APO Staff Representatives
Gasmen Meadows Steve Petrini
Dale W. Haarr.'. Jim Mohn
Dorothy Garvin
James J. Thompson
Walter A. Griffin
Harvey Knebel
Fran 011endike
W. J. Lupton
The meeting was called to order by President Dale Haarr at
7:34 p.m.
Minutes of the March 14, 1978 Meeting: Dorothy Garven moved that
the m.inutes be approved as mailed; Seconded by Jim Thompson:
motion carried.
Jim Mohn read the list of conditions in the letter of recommendation
referencing Kookoosint Village-#2 and Master Plan, which was sent
to the Board of County Commissioners on March 20, 1978, and also
the recommendation on LaSalle Industrial Center. (attached)
Jim Mohn presented the summary of the project and outlined the
Staff's recommendations.
Developer of the project, Jim Scharen,.asked that Jim Thompson
present the planning background with respects to the current
proposal. This was done.
Jim Bartlett, a 'resident of Adams Addition, questioned the park
.dedicationwith respects to the current proposal. Jim Scharen
gave a brief history of previous actions with respects to
Po.rta Vi.11a No#2 and Porta Villa #2 and the action taken on behalf
of the city for park purposes. Gasmen Meadows further clarified
the park situation stating that both land dedication and cash -in -
lieu of payment had been made on both Porta Villa #2 & #3•
Walt Griffin asked for the number of off-street parking spaces
to be provided in the development. Jim Thompson indicated that
there were several off-street- guest parking facilities
accommodated in the plan and that the final number is yet to be
determined. Walt Griffin also brought up the question as to how
the. park requirement would. be satisfied on this particular project.
Jim Thompson indicated that the plan would be asked for under the
PUD classification with the recreational requirements to be
satisfied within the boundaries -of the subdivision. Following
.additional discussion Fran 011endike moved to recommend
preliminary approval of this project with the conditions as
indicated below:
1_ That water and sewer systems be approved by the State
Dept. of Health:and Environmental Sciences,
.2. that a review by the City Attorney be made to clarify any
question with regards to any park requirement, and
I3. that completion.of the Covenants be made prior to action by
the City Council.
Hartt Hill Estates -
Pub] i c Hearing.
The motion was seconded by Walt Griffin; motion carried with
Garmen Meadows and Jim Thompson abstaining.
Jim Mohn presented the Staff evaluation and recommendation
With regards to the project.
Dean Jellison, spokesman for.the group, indicated that a
presentation would be made and asked for Bruce Lutz,, the
designer to give his explanation of the planning background for
the project.
Mr. Lutz then explained the history and resource evaluation of
the site,.which went into the design being presented.
Mr. Jellison then gave a presentation dealing with the tax
effects of the project,. evaluation of the agricultural and
timber. potential of the area, :indicated that the site had been
used for approximately 40.year.s.as a dairy farm and for
approximately the last 20 years as low grade pasture land,
indicated that the developmen.t.wou`ld relieve- pressure .on..some
other areas. ofmore _product.1ve timberland and. indicated a
significant.bas.is of need for the development in light of the
.shortage. for quality..residential subdivision in the .area that
would qualify for local financing.
Bernard Lund,, a ne.ighbor.of.the area for 4-5 .years Located south-
west of this site, indicated that he had seen the area being 0irrigated and apparently the site supported 75-80 head of
cattle as part of the C l ay.poo.L Dairy Farm.
John Heberling, attorney at law,'representing Mrs. Alice
Sowerwine and.a citizens.group being formed to oppose the
development, introducedhimself and indicated that he had several
questions that he:w.ou`.ld like to ask, but in light of the number
of people in.attendance relinquished the floor unti.11ater date.
Vic Loh.n, an'adjacent landowner north of the development,
:indicated that he had looked at the. plans and discussed the plans
with the developer and had no objections and felt that the
development.was a very desirable project.
Mrs W. C. Peterson, an adjacent landowner to the site, indicated
that this was good agricultural land and should not be developed.
She.indicated that .in the.no.t.too distant past water wells. in
the area had gone dry.and was-:int.e.rested in what effect this
development would have on her water system. She also questioned
the number..:of..septic.systems to be placed in the proposed
subdivision and what effect these would have on Ashley Creek.
She also f:e.Lt that land -values on her property would depreciate
due to development of the site.'
President Haarr then asked for an explanation on the water
system. Dean Jellison stated .that there are state laws
relative`t.o water rights. That the water system would have 0
to be designed in accordance with the State Dept. of Health
water system .requirements and that, the evaluation on the
deep acquifer..would have to -be made by the State Dept. of Health.
2.
Gary Rose stated that water righ.ts.must be filed for before a
first in time, first in right is established.
Richard Lennish, located southwest of the site, questioned the
stability of the soils and that the number of homesites proposed
could have adverse affects on Ashley Creek from surface runoff
and subsurface sewage disposal. He indicated that the limitations
on the soils must be clarified and stated that the view from his
home would directly at this site.
Bernard Lund,.who puts up hay on his property, indicated that the
area immediately below the hill from his septic tank drainfield
produces a better hay crop because of the sewage seep and asked
what the possibilities were with Hartt Hill Estates tying into the
city sewer system. Dean Jellison indicated that the -d_,stance
to the city services was approximately Z mile and indicated that
hooking into the city system would be a very expensive project
and at the present time they questioned the city's ability to
.handle the additional affluent.
Mrs. Lennish questioned the method and location of designating
park Duane Bitney and Jim Thompson explained that a Master Plan
is being developed by the County Park Board to determine the
most suitable areas for park use on Ashley Creek and that
eventually park requirements will be met in later phases of the
development.
Fred Lehmann,.an adjacent landowner, was concerned about the
park and what effect it would have on his land to the west.
Mr. Bozars indicated that the number of people proposed for this
development would ruin the park before it had a chance to be
planned and indicated that the effect of septic tanks on Ashley
Creek would ruin the creek and also indicated that there were
deer in the area, pheasants, ducks and blue herron.
Duane Bitney, Walt Griffin and Dean Jellison spent the next few
minutes discussing the park board plans and the involvement of
the park board ownership on the Burlington Northern right-of-way
which made.up. the south boundary of the proposed subdivision.
Dale Haarr brought out that the question of park action could
be clarified in conditions for approval with regards to the
Board's action.
Rod Bozath, who has lived w.ithin a z mile west of the site since
19,46 stated that in ,1946 he could see two homes from his house
and now see 17. He also indicated that the area is good farm
land and has been for 40 years and at one time supported over
100 cows. He indicated that the area did support a dai.ry for
many years and still could.
Mrs.'Lund questioned the ability of one well to serve 70 homes.
.Another lady stated that depth to water was between 400'- 12001.
Mr. Rose indicated that one well could be developed to serve
the entire subdivision.
Bernard Lund indicated that each home would require approximately
3•
t
250 gal. per day and what would happen to the ground water when
additional -,water was required to water lawns and landscaping, etc.
Garman'Meadows and Jim Thompson at this point mentioned
that before proceedings went any further they should notify
the pub] ic that they would be abstaining, due to conflicts
of interest.
Walt Giffin questioned the access points onto the highway and
indicated that previous statements have been received from the
Smith Valley Volunteer Fire Dept. requiring certain amenities
to be hooked into the water system for fire fighting purposes.
Brought up for question was the relationship to the effects on
the natural environment indicating the soil limitations of the
soils involved in the site which indicated the possibility
of potential California slide situation happening on this
development.
Ray Lybeck spoke on the productivity of the land indicating
that he had been an acquaintance of the developer for many
years and that the land had indeed supported a large dairy
herd at time.
Jim Thompson and Bruce Lutz discussed the soils limitations
as outlined in the Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey
and indicated that those limiations had been considered
when the design,was.drawn up. Other alternatives had been
discussed but it was the feeling of the designers that other
types of developmentwerenot the best for the site. 0
John Heberling, Attorney with McGarvey Law Firm, addressed
the Board and sited overall apparent violations of State
Statute, County Subdivision Regulations, Water Quality
Regulations. The i terns mentioned by Mr. Hebert ing are 1 isted
as follows but,not necessarily in this order:
1. Om.issions to prominent features on a preliminary plat
2. Omissions in the Environmental Assessment in Sections
3. Inadequate soils information
4. Community Impact Report
5• Lack of park area within the preliminary plat
some of which are also required in the Subdivision Regulations
6. Lack of adequate evaluation of the alternatives which should
be addressed as part of the environmental assessment
7. Information from State Dept. of Health and Environmental
Sciences Regulations
8. Indicated that there was no information on the part of
developer or in the Staff Report with regards to
seismic activity in the area and inconsistencies with
the developer's design and health requirements with
4.
regards to soils limitations.
2nd Addition to
Lapp Addition to
Evergreen.
(Continuation)
J.E.Mohn
ee/4-10-78
Mr. Heberling's inquiries lasted from 9:35 p.m. until 11:40 p.m.,
at which time Walt Griffin moved that the Board recommend
preliminary approval of Hartt Hill Estates as per the
conditions noted in the attached letter, motion seconded by
Dorothy Garvin: Motion carried with four in favor, two against
and two abstaining. (See Mr. Heberling's letter attached herewith)
Jim Mohn presented the amended plan as recommended by the Planning
Board, which provide for 8 single family lots with a through street
which would connect Forest Drive with East Evergreen Drive.
Following limited discussion with area landowners and members of
the Board which dealt with the need for park and possible
objections width the through road, Jim Thompson moved that the
Board recommend preliminary approval of the amended plat of
Lapp Addition with the following conditions:
1. That all the water and sewer systems be approved by the State
Dept. of Health and Environmental Sciences and County Sanitarian,
2. that the roads be built to County standards, and
3. that cash -in -lieu of park land be accepted.
Motion was seconded by Garmen Meadows: motion carried unanimously.
Being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:35 a.m.
Dale Haarr, President
Garmen Meadows, Secr.
5.