Loading...
Planning Board Minutes - May 8, 2007doesn't have alley loaded garages. Conrad said for the most part the alley loaded lots are much smaller than the ones with the garages in the front. Clark asked hover wide those lots are and staff noted they are between 60 and 72 feet which it typical for R-3. Hull said it appears to him that the lots sizes are now closer to the standard city lot size. Jentz said basically they are the size of standard city lots. MOTION - PLANNED UNIT Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff DEVELOPMENT report KPUD-07-02 as findings of fact and recommend that the PUD for Valley Ranch be approved subject to the conditions as amended. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL - PLANNED The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. UNIT DEVELOPMENT OLD BUSINESS A request from Wayne Turner for annexation and initial CONTINUED: zoning classification of R-3, Urban single Family Residential, WILLOW CREEK - with a PUD overlay over the entire 140± acre project site. ANNEXATION & INITIAL The developers have also requested approval of Willow creek, ZONING, PLANNER UNIT a preliminary plat to create 288 single family lots, 82 DEVELOPMENT & townhouse lots and 9 lots which would accommodate multi- PRELIMINAR"Y PLAT family buildings. A total of 24 multi --family buildings are proposed over the 9 multi -family lots and would allow up to 340 condominium units. The property is in the county zoning jurisdiction and is zoned R-1, Suburban Residential, and I-2, Heavy Industrial. The property is located on the north side of Foys Lake Road at the intersection of Foys Lake Road and Valley View Drive. STAFF OVERVIEW - Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department WILLOW CREED presented an overview of the Willow creek project for the board.. Conrad noted that the planning board, at their April. 10, 2007 meeting, elected to make a recommendation of approval on the Growth Policy Amendment from Industrial to Suburban Residential for the Willow Creek. Then a motion was made to continue discussion on the remainder of the project which included initial zoning, planned unit development and the preliminary plat for 'A illow Creek Subdivision. Conrad oriented the board on the location of this project. The major issues on this project that were brought up in the staff report and comments received at the public hearing were the traftic impacts associated with this overall project, noise � impacts from the future highway bypass, setbacks from f Ashley Creek and how storm water was or to be Kalispell City Planning Board M�r�� ies t the r!�ee �n;T- of Mav 8, 2007 Wage 2_0 of 216 addressed. Conrad noted staff and the planning board, received a letter from Ms. Bain's Attorney and a petition regarding the initial zoning of the property, signed by property owners in the immediate area. Conrad added the petition will not affect the planning board's decision and will affect the city council's vote on this project. The petition will be brought before the city council during their review. Conrad said the board received a slightly revised project plan from the developer showing the 150 foot buffer along Ashley Creek and how the developer could meet the 150 foot setback from the creek which would reduce the overall number of units by 20. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-07-3 and recommend that initial zoning of the 140.5 acre site be R-3 as shown on the zoning district reap for the property. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-07- 1 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD for willow Creek be approved subject to the 49 conditions listed in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-07-2 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Willow Creek subdivision, phase 1-6, be approved subject to the 49 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad reviewed the letter from Ms. Bain.'s Attorney and said regarding the issue of water rights for the subdivision, to his knowledge the grater rights are tied with the property. There is a recommended condition of approval that the developer turn over the water rights that are associated with this project site, to the city. Whether the developer owns 20, 50 or 0% of the property rights will be brought out prior to final plat. Conrad assured the board that this letter will be forwarded to city attorney for his input. Norton said the way he understands the discussion at the last meeting is even though the developer may only own 50% of the water rights he is required to give an equal percentage to the city either from this property or elsewhere. Conrad said the condition reads the developer will transfer the grater rights that are associated with this property to the city. MOTION - ANNEXATION & Norton moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt staff UHTIAL 4ONA7-- iNO F-eport 7K-0o and recommend that inival zoning upon annexation of the 140.5 acre site be RW-3 Urban Single Family Residential. Kalispell City Planning Board Mlnutes of dhe rmeetinf-� of Mav ?00? Page 21 of '6 BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked for clarification on the revised preliminary plat and the minimum lot size in R-3 zoning. Conrad said the minimum lot size for an R-3 zone is 7,000 square feet. ROLL CALL -- ANNEXATION The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and 1 & INITIAL ZONING opposed. MOTION - WILLOW CREEK Schutt moved and Balcorn seconded a motion to adopt staff PLANNED UNIT report KPUD-07-1 as findings of fact and recommend to the DEVELOPMENT Kalispell City Council the PUD for Willow Creek be approved subject to the 49 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcomn thinks the project is too dense and she doesn't feel the developer has adequately addressed the concerns about the type of fill that has been placed on the property; water rights; affects on the community and other issues. She believes the developer has a right to develop this property but she is not sure this proposal is the answer for this site. Hinchey said he is not willing to say that the entire project should be ash canned and if the conditions as outlined were met the project might be acceptable to him. He added if the conditions are met this development Won't look anything like what they have before there today. He does have a problem with the setback from Ashley Creek and if Dish, Wildlife & Parks are requesting 200 feet that should not be negotiable. Hinchey also feels that the noise study should be required. Schutt said that he objects to the current layout of this project for several reasons. It is very dense and incompatible with surrounding development. He likes the spirit and direction that the staff recommendations are going but the city would be allowing a lot of deviations on road length, block length, cul-de-sacs, setbacks, etc. According to this plan there are 24 multi --family condominium buildings which is a direct deviation of the R-3 zone. In his opinion they could spend a fair amount of time discussing the conditions but he is not prepared to move forward with the plan that is even close to this. Hull said the thing that he keeps coming back to is this is not out in the middle of the county life valley Ranch, this is next to downtown. Hull thinks the project is dense and a peculiar site to put that kind of density on. He said for years this property has been hanging out there and other than the city's proposal to put a golf course in this location this is the first real proposal for the property. Hull said he would vote in favor of the project. Hun doted Dish} Wildlife & Parks Came up with the 2`00 foot setback from. Ashley Creek and he objects that FWP's would be able to write subdivision regLilations. He said the Kalispell City Planning Beard NA inutes of the rmeetin u of h4 air 8. 1007 Page of 226 Missoultan stated Missoula is in the middle of a big discussion of their setbacks from the Clark Fork River which would be Zoo feet but for a creek like Ashley Creek it would be 75 feet. The board needs to discuss setbacks for future developments so the developer is aware of the setbacks when they submit a project. The city should set the rules not agencies who receive notices of the proposals. Clark said that he agrees with Hinchey that the Zoo foot setback from Ashley Creek should be required. However he is also concerned that the developer might change the layout of the residential lots to make up for the loss of multi --family lots near the creek. Clark feels that this is a transitional area from city across the bypass and Ashley Creek and he thinks it has to transition into the county developments that are larger lots. The project is too dense and should be scaled back. He has no objection to hove the roads and green space were laid out but he can't vote for the proposal. Conrad understands what Mr. Clary is saying about the Zoo foot setback and if the board does impose the Zoo foot setback they could add that the residential lots remain residential lots so additional multi --family lots can't be added in other areas of the proposal. Conrad noted if the Zoo foot setback is imposed it would remove approximately 80-90 units from the proposal. Norton said the project is too dense and is a transitional area. He said he saw photographs of the site since the hearing and all the sawdust and fill piles are not north of this development. He is concerned with the stability of the ground and you can't build on something that doesn't have a good foundation. Norton questioned whether the developer provided enough evidence that the soils were studied. The project has too many areas that are not suitable for construction of residential properties and with this density there is no opportunity to skirt those areas. Clark agreed with Norton that there are unstable areas all over this site. Jentz stated the developer did submit the soil survey with their application for the board's review. Jentz added it is stated in the application and the developer assured us that there may be fill on this side of the bypass but MDT will be purchasing those areas as part of their bypass R/W acquisition. Norton said he was unable to find this information in the application and suggested the information may be misleading. ROLL CALL — 'V''ILLOW ' The silo uon Hailed on a roll call vote W i iti favor and 5- CREEK PLANNED UNIT opposed. DEVELOPMENT Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of Mav S. ,007 Page y3 of 226 BOARD DISCUSSION Norton suggested since the PUD failed the board does not need to discuss the preliminary plat. Jentz said if everyone is comfortable with the findings that were stated above no further action is required. Further discussion was held restating the discussion above that led to the vote for denial. In further consultation with staff Conrad recommended that the board act on the subdivision part of this application. The same findings can be used for the subdivision. aspect. Norton argued that the subdivision that was presented to them has densities that are greater than an R--3 zone would allover therefore it cannot be considered because it doesn't meet the zoning. Jen.tz said a subdivision was submitted and a public hearing was held and it is a disservice to the council to forward a subdivision that the board hasn't reviewed or made a recommendation on. MOTION - CONTINUE THE Hinchey moved and Balcom seconded a motion to indefinitely W LLOW CREED table the willow Creep preliminary plat, since it does not PRELIMINARY PLAT comply with the recommended zoning and for the reasons of denial articulated with the PULE, until such time as the zoning and PUD has been properly determined for the site. RILL CALL - WILLOW The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CREED PRELIMINARY PLAT OTHER OLIO BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Setbacks from Divers Sys Streams Norton thought the item brought up by Mr. Hull regarding setting recommendations for setbacks from rivers and streams was a good idea. Hull restated his previous comments on this subject noted above and added that storm water issues and the Parks Master Plan also need to be reviewed by the board. Clark disagreed with the idea of the city setting recommendations for setbacks because terrain along the rivers and creeks changes to a point that the setbacks wouldn't be necessary in all locations. Conrad said in talking with Fish, wildlife & Parks they would like to provide a standard set of setback conditions to the city and county for each of the major rivers in the area. So then when a developer comes in we can notify them of what those setbacks would be because they would be part of the subdivision regulations. Kalispell City Planning Bared A inntes of the meeti n � of M av 8. 2 007 Page .2.4 of 206 KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING CO MISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING NOVEM 3ER 13, 2007 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Bryan Schutt, Robyn Balcom, Rick Hull, John Hinchey, Jinn Williamson and C.M. (Butch) Clark. Kari Gabriel was absent. Sean Conrad. and Tom Jen.tz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 28 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF 1VII WTES dark moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the minutes of October 9, 2007. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. DEAR THE PUBLIC No one wished to spear. WILLOW CREED INITIAL A request from Wayne Turner for annexation and initial ZONING, PLANNED UNIT zoning classification of R-3, Urban Single Family Residential, DEVELOPMENT & on an approximately 24.5 acre portion of a 164.5 acre project PRELIMINARY PLAT site. The Planning Board has already made a recommendation of R-3 for the remaining 140 acre portion of the 164.5 acre project site at its May 8th 2007 meeting. In addition, the developer is requesting a Planned. Knit Development (PUD) overlay zoning district on a 140± acre portion of the 164.5 acre project site. The developers have also requested approval of Willow Creek, a preliminary plat to create 361 single family lots, 13 townhouse lots and 15 multi -family buildings allowing up to 152 condominium units for a total of 531 residential units. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction. and is zoned R--1, suburban Residential, and 1-2, Heavy Industrial. The property is located on the north side of Foys Labe Road at the intersection of Foys babe Road and Valley View Drive. Board member Williamson recused himself from participating in the discussions of the willow Creep project due to conflict of interest. Williamson stepped down. STAFF REPORTS EA-07-- I3, Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Office -07-01 & KPP-07-02 presented staff reports KA-07-13, KPUD- 07-01 8, KPP--07--02 to the Board. Conrad said this is a request for Willow Creek, a planned unit development (PUD) and preliminary plat on 140 acres With an initial zoning request of R-3 for an additional 24 acres to the east of the current project site. Conrad reviewed the history of the Willow Creek project for Kalispell City Planning Board 'm inures 4the Ineeing of November I ', 007 page t of 1 ? the board. The planning board held a public hearing at both the April and May board meetings to consider the original proposal. At that time there were 710 dwelling units proposed. The planning board recommended denying the PUD in large part due to the density and the setbacks along Ashley Creek. In July the developer revised the project reducing the amount of units to 580 and another public hearing was held with the board recommending denial of the PUD based on density of the project. The developer has since then revised the project and before the board tonight is a project that Includes 531 dweilin.g units with a mixture of single family homes, townhouses, and condominium units. Conrad noted when the board reviewed this project previously the board also considered a potential growth policy amendment that included property on this site that was designated as industrial which the planning board recommended approval of the growth policy amendment. However city council denied the growth policy request and then instructed staff to come back and initiate a growth policy amendment on. those 2 areas. Back in September the planning board held a public hearing for the growth policy land use designation change and recommended a change from the industrial land use designation to a combination of suburban residential, high density and mixed use on portions of this site. The city council approved those changes to the land use designation at their November 5th meeting. Conrad continued tonight as the board reviews the initial zoning request on the 24 acre portion it is now designated suburban residential and the R-3 zoning that is requested is consistent with that designation. The revised application previous submittals included a 6 phased project and now the proposal is for 7 phases. Conrad said phase 1 will include a road connection from Foys Lake Road to U.S. Highway 2 west and he reviewed the location and proposed uses in each phase. As part of the revised project, the developer increased the lot sizes along the western edge, adjacent to the Stoneridge Subdivision; as well as lot sizes along Foys Lake Road. There was also an increase in open space and parkland from 40.7 acres to 45.5 acres. Conrad stated that a petition was received in opposition of the R--3 zoning which will not have any affect on the planning board's decision tonight but will affect the council's action. +vtLt..Ir.f iV i er%--viJs.nmt-x-ndi E.g tJ ie Ki lisspell City Planning B C.IarCIL and Zoning Commission adopt staff reports KA-07-13, KPUD-07- 01.7 & KPH'-07--02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that initial zoni _of the 24 acre site be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the vneeting cif'November 13, 2007 Page ?of12 R-3, and the PUD and the preliminary plat for willow Creek Phases 1-7 be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Clark asked if the annexation of the 24 acres was approved how it could be developed. Conrad responded if the hoard recommends R-3 (single family residential) for that area there are constraints on that property including the future bypass, Ashley Creek and the floodplain that would limit development capacity. There is some land adjacent to the Burlington Northern R/ R that may have some potential development but it would also be limited. Conrad added any development of the 24 acres would have to come back through the planning board and city council for approval. Conrad added the only thing they could potentially do without approval from the board is construct a single family home. Clark asked where the closest water and sewer is located and Conrad said it is probably at the end of 4th Avenue west or Foys Lake Road.. Hinchey said if the development potential on the 24 acres is limited as Conrad said, and it doesn't have anything to do with the 140 acre project the board is reviewing, why is it before the board. Conrad said the owner requested the annexation and initial zoning of the property and staff is carrying it forward at their request. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Hubert Turner, 1053 Stillwater Road said the reason the 24 STAFF acres is before the board for initial zoning and ultimate annexation is the legal descriptions overlap with other properties and they felt it was necessary to annex and zone the entire property so that there were not portions of one parcel that was in the city and the other portion outside of the city. Turner continued to answer Mr. Clack's question about development potential for the 24 acres, Turner does not believe the current alignment for the bypass showing on the maps is the actual location and it should be shifted about 300 feet to the east. He said when the bypass is shifted the development potential is virtually eliminated on that 24 acres. Wayne Freeman, CTA, 2 Main Street in Kalispell stated that their f= is representing the developer on this project. Freeman reviewed the location of the project and provided a brief history of the project to date. Freeman noted that based on the comments from the board, the neighbors and Fish, wildlife & Parks they have made never al modifiCl ttions tnnr, i cuing adding the ? %01 foot- wuffcr zone along Ashley Creek, created more open space, and reduced the density significantly. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meetine of November 13. 2007 Wage -1 of 12 Freeman said they have turned this project into a project that is mostly single family residential. There are condominium units on the east side of the site making the higher density closer to existing city neighborhoods with lower density to the west. However, they have sharply reduced the number of townhouse and condominium units. Freeman noted they met with a number of the surrounding property owners at a workshop and they analyzed their comments and have gone a long way in reshaping the project without turning it into a 1 -- 5 lot subdivision, which was not a viable option for the developer. The number and size of the multi --family buildings have been reduced. Freeman stated they have eliminated on -street parking in the condominium area and added additional parking space by eliminating condominium buildings. Freeman briefly reviewed the roadway sections, which all meet or exceed city of Kalispell. standards. Freeman reviewed the locations of the park/ open space areas for the board and indicated the amount of park/open space has increased since the last submittal. The design guidelines are extensive for this project. Freeman reviewed some of the guidelines that included architectural themes and types of housing. They have produced a series of buffer zones that would be constructed along the bypass, have identified the type of wall materials and fencing along Foys Lake Road, and Freeman added the minimum distance from the edge of the Foys Lake Road R/W is 60 feet but it can be as much as Zoo feet in the buffer zone. There will be an undulating pattern of housing, walls and decorative plant material along the road so the homes will not be a solid line. Freeman noted they have prepared a grading plan for the project and they intend to capture the off -site drainage. The city of Kalispell has very strict standards on off -site drainage and they can't discharge additional grater above and beyond what is already discharging there now, He added they are prepared to deal with all of these issues. Freeman noted that about 501% of the overall traffic volumes will travel up through the development to the Highway 2 West access that will be constructed as part of Phase I . They intend to remove the abandoned railroad track to the north which will help facilitate the connection. to Highway 2 West. The developer will also be required to fix the existing failing infrastructure along South Meridian Road. Kalispell City Planning Beard f€ i��utesyf the �nee�inof November 13, ?? ["age 4 of 12 up by the developer. Freeman said this project is considered a new urbanism concept with relatively high density in some areas but lower density in others; it creates walk able areas and is not unlike projects that are occurring elsewhere. Hull asked if the cond.onu*m'ums will be sold or rented out and Freeman said sold. PUBLIC HEARING j Scott Mason, 300 Learn Lane distributed copies of a letter to the board. (Copy attached) Mason noted this project has come a long way but there is still room for improvement therefore he does not support the project at this time. Mason said his main concerns are traffic and stormwater. Mason continued they have been told that this is a new project but there are parts of it that have not changed. The traffic study and the Preliminary Engineering Deport (PER) for example are the same as originally submitted and it does not keep water from running off the site at higher than existing amounts. The volume of crater coming off this site will be much larger than what they have now. Right now it is a field with grass and when water falls it soaks into the ground. There is going to be acres and acres of roads and roofs and there will be more runoff from those surfaces. If the developer feels that there won't be a higher quantity of runoff Mason suggests a stipulation or an agreement be put in place that states there will be no increase in volume. Mason referred to Map 1 of his handout that indicates the area where he lives in and said it is recognized as hydric soils. Mason referred to Map 2 from 1960 which indicates this same area has been recognized to have problems with flooding and drainage for a long time. All the stormwater from the southern part of this property is going to run off into their neighborhood/ valley that is already flooded. Mason said the maps that were provided in the application did not indicate where the water would go downstream so he provided Map 3 which shows Foys babe road to the north with a 24 inch culvert where all of the stormwater from Willow Creek comes through under the road and then flows through private property across a little swale into an unnamed tributary to Ashley creek. This tributary also flows through Lone Pine 'grails subdivision and is not big enough to convey all the crater that they get out there. He has lived there for 12 years and every single year the creek floods into a w e eland directly to the west of Learn mane. '11' this stream cannot convey the existing grater and with more water coming off willow Creek it will. make flooding there much gorse. Kalispell City Punning Board Minutes of the tneeting, of November I ?. 200-7 Page 5 of 12 Mason continued other problems are the natural topography, Learn Lane, and Lone Fine Trails which all work against them. He added this unnamed tributary is not in the low point of the valley which he indicated on Map 4. Historically, the water would build up behind and eventually flow over Learn Lane down through the swale to the middle of Lone Pine 'Trails Subdivision.. However, Lone Pine Trails Subdivision did not provide conveyance through. Also the city required the developer to raise Learn Lane by 18 inches because it is an emergency access so now it forms a dam across the valley because it is now 18 inches higher than it used to be so any grater that flows out of this tributary during flooding times has no way to get back. Mason suggested some solutions. He would request, if this development is approved, the city fix the problem with Learn Lane, by putting a culvert. It is about 1004 feet from. Learn Lane to the city stormwater system *n Lone Pine Trails and a connection should be put there. That way when the stream floods it has a way to get back to the stream. He said this is a regional problem because it is hard to fix this drainage problem with one landowner and with half of it in the city and the other half in the county. Mason also suggested that the development could permanently retain the stormwater on -site by putting in retention ponds. Also they could provide a parallel conveyance to Ashley Creek rather than running the water down and into the unnamed tributary. Finally, Mason said Learn Lane is a county road and is almost directly across from the main entrance to Willow Creek subdivision, and it is not even mentioned *n the traffic study. Their road accesses Foys Lake Road and they have concerns about the separation between their access and Willow Creek's access. Mason added like it or not, Willow Creek Drive is going to be a defacto bypass because there is no access to the new bypass from Foys Labe Road so people will drive through Willow Creek to Highway 2 West and then access the bypass north. Marilyn Bain read a letter for the board. (Copy attached) Bain added M' listening to Mr. Freeman's comments in regard to the buffer area on the front of Foys Lake Road one additional comment needs to be made in relation to the front berm and fencing. This will block the merest access easement so she will be totally denied any access to that pumping site. ISchutt asked for the locaLon of uhc pump site. which B�a.in provided for the board. ___.IClark asked Bain when the last time the pumping station Kalispell City Planning Board N4 inutes of the meeting of Novemb-er l I, ?007 Page 6 of 12 was used and Bain said not for at least the last 2 years, but the water rights are still there. John Rauk, 125 Stoneridge Drive read a letter from Steve 8s Jeannie Luckey, which he read for the board. (Copy attached) Rauk said he has personally made comments about the R--1 zoning around the area and that individuals in the area had all purchased there with the faith that it was a rural area. Looking at the 24 - 25 acres being asked to annexed he would ask that it not be approved based on the developer's statement that it can't be developed for anything. He thinks R-1. zoning would be more appropriate. Raub said they have seen significant improvements which is a good sign. However, it is not inappropriate to ask developers to maintain existing neighborhoods, and improve and develop models for future neighborhoods. Julie Robinson, 955 F'oys Lake Road said she is in full agreement with the objections made by Mr. Mason. Robinson said she would also be in full support of Mr. Mason's remedies for these problems where the water is directly channeled either through the storm water system or through a direct pipe so that they don't have to deal with the problems of excess water coming in. Robinson also noted that she agrees with the letter from Mr. S& Mrs. Luckey and the comments made by Mr. Rauk regarding the concerns and impact of high density with regard to agriculture and existing traffic flow patterns. Robinson said those are points well made and they will hopefully be given serious consideration by the board. Alan West, 110 Eagle Ridge Lane said the developer has provided the Meridian bypass in the traffic study hasn't shown the board the additional percentage of traffic volume that will be generated from non --residents of this proposal who will use this road. Living in Eagle Ridge Estates, he said, Fern Road is currently the Meridian bypass for those who need to get south of town. west said this will help him out because Fern Road will be Mess busy but it will create a lot of congestion in other areas. West noted the other issue concerns the schools. If you 531 units, which will hopefully be affordable for starter homes with young kids you can safely assume there would be 500 kids in that neighborhood which would require another Peterson school. west questioned if there was room in this development for another school to accommodate all of those kids. Geraldine Young, no address given noted she owns 13 acres directly south of the proposed subdivision. Young said she is in com.p1.1.e agreement with Mr. Mason C—Und ever-yone clsc: who has spoken. she Yves on a hill above her horse pasture and she can see the traffic and the bottlenecks and she added she tapes Dern Road to avoid Meridian Road. Youn Kalispell City Planning Beard Minutes of the meeting of November 13, '2007 Page 7 of 1 said already they are seeing so much dust across the valley to the north and with a project like this they will have the dust right on top of them and won't be able to see anything on the west side of Kalispell. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt asked for clarification on what the board is reviewing and Conrad said initial zoning of R-3 on the 24 acres, the board had previously recommended approval on initial zoning for the 140 acres, a planned unit development and the preliminary plat, with 7 phases. MOTION -- INITIAL BONING Balcom moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff report KA-07-13 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell. City Council that the initial zoning for the 24 acres be approved for R-3 (Urban Single Family Residential) . BOARD DISCUSSION dark asked why they are asking for R-3 because as he understands it is relatively unusable. Conrad said anytime an annexation request comes before the city they have to request a zoning district. The previous land use designation for the 24 acres was industrial but has since been changed to a suburban residential designation. The R-3 zoning district is consistent with the suburban residential land use designation on the Kalispell Growth Policy map so that is why the R--3 is before the board. Clark asked 'why it is not proposed at R-1. Conrad said the board could adopt a finding that R-1 is consistent with the suburban residential but it would be surrounded by R-3 and as the developer noted the zoning is benign because of the bypass coming through that area. Hull asked if the R-3 zoning would change the negotiations for the price of R/ W for the bypass and Conrad said no, to his knowledge, the zoning doesn't have a bearing on the assessment. ROLL CALL - INITIAL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ZONING -- WILLOW CREED MOTION -- PLANNED UNIT Hull moved and dark seconded a motion to adopt staff DEVELOPhWNT - WILLOW report KPUD-07--01 as findings of fact and recommend to the CREED Kalispell City Council that the planned unit development for Willow Creek be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Clark noted that he has a problem with the setbacks on the larger lots. Historically they have always been. 15 feet on the front setback and this is proposing 10 feet. Teri feet is fine for those lots that are 6,000 square feet or under but not for over o, 000 feet which he thinks should be 15 feet. Schutt clarified that the 10 foot front setbacks only be Kalispell City Planning Board of inute4 of the meeting of November 1 % 2007 }'a!,e t� of I. allowed on a lot of less than 6, 000 square feet, and the 6,000 square feet and greater front setback be increased to 15 feet. Hinchey said he would prefer that lots over 6,000, perhaps 7,000 square feet should maintain a 20 foot front setback. Hinchey feels that would be more in beeping with the R-3 zoning and downtown Kalispell. Conrad noted the locations of lots with side corner setbacks as requested by the board. Hinchey thought the side corner lots should also have a 20 foot setback for lots 7,000 square and above. MDTIDN TO AMEND Clark moved and Balcom seconded a motion to amend CONDITION # 11) condition # 1 D to read,. "Allows the front, side corner and rear setbacks reduced to 10 feet for lots less than 7,000 square feet. On lots 7,000 square feet or more the front and side corner setbacks would be 20 feet and the rear setback would be allowed at 10 feet. The multi -family buildings and garages shall meet the 20-foot setback provided for in the R- 3 zoning district." ROLL CALL - AMEND The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CONDITION # 1 D BOARD DISCUSSION Hull directed the board and staff to the Note on condition #34 which indicates that "the downstream analysis should look at the 2, 10, and 100 year flogs", but does not specifically address limits on the amount of flow. Conrad said the city's stormwater engineer asked that the notes be placed on the condition to make the developer and consultants aware that they need to complete a downstream analysis under Foys Lake Road and how it connects to that tributary and eventually gets to Ashley creek. The condition puts them, on notice that the volume release would be required to be at the same level as is currently being released. Therefore the people downstream will be assured that the flows will not negatively impact their properties. MOTION - AMEND Hull moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to amend CONDITION #34 Condition #34 by adding the following sentence to the end of the Note paragraph: "volumes and peak flows will not exceed the 2, 10 and 100 year flows." BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked about the comment made that the stormwater should be retained on -site instead of detained and Conrad said the city's Public Works Department already looks at that issue when a development comes in. They determine the historic flows of the undevel0 ed property and as it gets Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 13, 2407 Page 9 of 12 ROLL CALL -- AMEND C€3NDITION #34 BOARD DISCUSSION improved, how the developer retains or detains the flow, and the historic levels that it was and should be released. Schutt said to respond to some of the comments, there hasn't been a detailed stormwater design done on this project yet and Conrad said no. Schutt said whether the water goes north into Ashley Greek, south into the drainage swales or into retention ponds, detention facilities, those decisions have not yet been made. Conrad said the developer brings in a detailed stormwater analysis to the city and they discuss those issues and the city will mare modifications if necessary. Clark noted that Mr. Mason was very interested in the flooding situation which was counter to what he heard Wayne Freeman state. Freeman reviewed their plans for stormwater for the board. They will have to complete a full detailed engineering plan and a hydrology plan. The most cumbersome part is the hydrology studies and he added you don't get away with anything because city staff is very diligent. Clark asked if CTA will be completing the study and Freeman said he didn't know but the requirements would be the same no matter who completed the studies. Clark continued they brought up the culvert on. Learn Lane and he asked if that would be outside the scope of this subdivision. Freeman said there are some existing problems out there and he doesn't know what this particular problem is but if it needs to be addressed the city will require them to tape care of it. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Schutt asked the difference between. condition #34 and #35 and Conrad explained. Hinchey asked why 48" fencing was requested when the 42" fence is typical. Conrad said that 42" is the typical allowance for the front setback but they were trying to achieve a certain look within their subdivision with a strict 4 foot high fence. Staff didn't have an issue with the 6" difference. Hinchey said then 48" would be consistent all along the streets in the subdivision. and Conrad said yes, if the property owner chooses to put a fence in their front setback. Conrad noted this would be different along the rear setback, especially along Foys Lake Road. Hinchey noted in Condition #9 it calls for a 5 foot tall vinyl fence along Foys Labe Road and he recalls an exarn.ple showing a. white vinyl fence. He did some research on other fence color samples and noted a color called Cambia i.s wood. -- like and would be more eye -pleasing than the white vinyl. Kalispell City Planning Board NI -routes ofthe ,Meeting of November 13, 1_007 Page 10 of 12 MOTION - AMEND Hinchey moved and. Clark seconded a motion to amend the CONDITION #9 first sentence of Condition #9 to read, "A five (5) foot tall earth tone vinyl fence, such as Mild Fence Company's (cambia), shall be installed by the developer abutting the rear property boundary of lots 334-335 of phase 4, lots 1 -16 of phase 5 and lots 317-333 of phase b." ROLL CALL -AMEND I The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CONDITION #9 BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked that a requirement be put in place that the Highway 2 connection be built with phase 1 to help alleviate some of the construction traffic and Conrad noted that requirement is discussed in the PUD and. Preliminary Plat Sections of the staff report and is also memorialized in Condition # 2 5 . Schutt asked if there is both ingress and egress onto the bypass at this location and Conrad said the initial construction does not include ingress and egress but the intent is to have that access an the future. Clark said this project has been kicked around for months and the developer and CTA have come a long way in getting the project to this point. Clary thanked them for their responsiveness to the board and the public. Hull said that he has been in favor of this project from the be . g and he added that the density is a little over 4 units per acre and downtown Kalispell is about 5 units per acre, which he doesn't consider to be high density. Hull said the density is concentrated within the development, and the development itself is consistent with the rest of the city. This location is adjacent to the oldest part of Kalispell and is only about 1/2 mile from Flathead High School. Hull remains in favor of this proposal. Clark said in the staff report District 5's input was requested as far as the schools and the report said District 5 was unresponsive. Conrad added CTA also sought the district's input early on and a letter was received that said if this subdivision did go through it is going to increase the students, noting Peterson School is already burdened and doesn't have a lot of room for expansion. However, they did not offer any suggestions and didn't request that a school site be dedicated on this property. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The original motion, as amended, passed unanimously on a MOTION AS AMENDED I roll call vote. MOTION - PR -L'IbU `ARY ` Hinchey moved and Hull seconded a motion to adopt staff PLAT - WILLOW CREEK report KPP-07 -02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Willow Kalispell City Naming Board Mins es of't e : eetin2 of ] ;�a��e��et- l �. -����7 Page II of IL Creek, Phases 1-7 be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL - WILLOW CREEK PRELIMINARY The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 M' favor and 1 opposed. PLAT, PHASES 1-7 Board Member Williamson was seated again at approximately 8:45 p.m. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Toms. Jentz reported there will be a joint work session with. the Kalispell City Council on Monday, November 26th to review the Public Draft of the Transportation Plan Update. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and will be held at the city council chambers. Jentz also reported that there will be a Special Meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission on Tuesday November 27th. The only item for public hearing will be the Glacier Town Center. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately S : 50 p.m. A joint work session with the Kalispell City Planning Board and Kalispell City Council is scheduled on November 26, 2007 at 7:00 p.m., Kalispell City Council Chambers, 312 First Avenue East. A special meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled on November 27, 2007 at 7 : 0 0 p.m. NOTE.* The location o this meetirz will be the upstairs conference room o the Earl .Bennett aBui ldin 1035 FYrst .Avenue East. The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on December 11, 2007 at 7:00 p.m., Kalispell City Council Chambers, 312 First Avenue East. Bryan H. Schutt Michelle Anderson President Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: / /07 Kalispeii City Punning Board MIP.utes rat #fie meeting of NNovember f?. 2007 Page 12 of 12 Kalispell Planning Board Submitted at November 13, 2007 Board Meeting RE: Proposed willow Creek Subdivision Greetings, My name is Scott Mason and I reside at 300 Learn Lane, Kalispell, approximately 1/4 mile south of the proposed willow Creek subdivision. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to this important planning process. I would like to make the following requests and comments regarding the proposed. willow Creek Subdivision. General Comments 1) Please require plans and commitments from the developer nov�r, prior to preliminary plat approval, rather than during final plat. 2) Please require a connection to HM 2 now, no construction should be allowed until this connection is complete and fully approved by City of Kalispell and MDT. 3) Please require.,specific and detailed commitments regarding elements that the Lapplicant has ro osed in a conce foal. fashion.. For instance, the applicant has proposed buffering berms and vegetation along Foys Lake road as shown on 3.11. From the Figure, the berm appears to be about 3 feet in height and the trees are approximately 30 feet tall. However, nowhere in the proposal is the size of this berm or the trees specified. A specific commitment to berm size is needed. Please note that for Lone Pine Trails, the Kalispell city council required a visual berm on the north side of the development but did not specify size. The berm provided at Lone Pine Trails is approximately 12 inches tall, unvegetated, and as such it only functions as a visual berm to someone crawling. If the Planning Board and/or City council do not require details now, the City engineering and construction staff will have no basis upon which to oversee construction and require any needed modifications later. 4) A revised traffic.study and desigLi that considers the use of the. -Proposed willow Creek Drive as a Fo s Lake Road Hi era 2 —_Highwav 93 Bypass connector is needed. It is likely that there will not be a access to the Highway 2 Bypass via Foys Lame Road. In this case, the shortest, most direct access to the Bypass from Foys Lake road will be to travel north on proposed willow Creek Drive to Highway 2 where access to the Bypass is available. In this case, willow Creek will become heavily traveled as a through road for non -willow Creek residents. No consideration of this is apparent in the current willow Creek plans. 5) A revised traffic sqLdy and desigLi that considers effects to Learn Lane is needed. The traffic study submitted with this PLED is outdated and inaccurate and is based on the applicant's previous submittal (note that the acreage and number of housing units in the traffic study does not match the PHD proposal). It does not reflect the current proposal. It does not consider effects to Learn Lane, a county road and the emergency access for Lone Pine Trails subdivision. Learn Lane is immediately adjacent to the proposed project but is not shown on any maps, mentioned in text, or otherwise considered in the application. The study needs to address whether there is adequate separation between Foys Lake Rd -Learn Lane and Foys Lake Rd -Willow Creek intersections. Turning south on Learn. Lane while traveling west on Foys Lake Road is a dangerous proposition with the current traffic. Near misses are frequent as cars attempt to pass on the left as one is trying to turn left. Last year the mail carrier was hit while making this turn. 6} The v ro sed ark and o ens ace could be a eat addition to the ci and is to be commended. Please consider the following suggestions: a. Provisions should be made for connection of trails with adjoining properties, especially along Ashley Creek. The applicant states that willow Creek is to be "pedestrian friendly"and it appears that it will be so, internally. However, there is no way for pedestrians of bicyclists to travel from willow Creek to the rest of the City without traveling on high speed highways with little or no berm (i.e., Highway 2 or Foy's Lake Road). Connection of willow Creek trails to Rails to Trails should be a requirement, not an option. Extension of the trail to the northeast under the Highway 2 Bypass bridge should be encouraged. Connection of the trail with a bikepathltrail along Foys Lake Road to the east is encouraged. b. As the park spaces are to be part of the City, there should be provisions for non -willow Creek residents to use the parks and this requires public parking. Please consider off-street parking adjacent to parks and trail heads, especially near the northern end of willow Creek Drive. 7) The proposed stormwaterplan- is inade uate would increase water flows to existing areas of robl. _. -em. flooding,and does not consider the made uac of downstream water conve ances. a. The proposed stormwater plan does not give any consideration to downstream effects of runoff from the southern portion of the property (sub-basm* D in the PER) and is therefore inadequate. i. All of the maps end at Foys Lake Road and do not show areas south of Willow Creek. ii. PER has no discussion of effects to downstream areas. iii. PER does not even purport to know and describe where water goes, but instead says that satellite im ager v, suggests drainage aoes to Ashley Creek. b. The area to which sub --basin D would drain has known historic and current drainage and flooding problems that would be severely exacerbated by Willow Creek. i. As recognized in the Kalispell Growth Policy and the MRCS Soil Survey (see attached daps 1 and 2), the area to the south of willow Creek is poorly drained and often flooded. H. In my personal observation, surface ponding and flooding of water has happened every year since 1995 (see attached Photo 1 from February 2007). iii. Unnamed tributary creek to which willow Creek stormwater would discharge (see Map 3) overflows routinely in late winter/spring. iv. Return of flood waters to the creek is blocked by natural topography, county road (Learn Lane) and Lone Pine Trails subdivision. The actual low point in the valley is not the unnamed tributary to Ashley Creek but a swale that runs through Lone Pine Trails subdivision (see Map 4). Flow in the swale is blocked by Learn Lane (no culvert) and Lone Pine Trails subdivision.. Last year City and Lone Pine developer raised Learn Lane approximately 18 inches because it crosses a floodplain and is the emergency access to the subdivision. Learn Lane/Lone Pine Trails form a dam across the drainage and floodwater cannot flow back to Ashley Creek tributary. v. Any increase in water flowing through culvert on Foys Labe Road will result in increased and prolonged flooding of our neighborhood. c. The proposed stormwater plan does not comply with the growth policy: i. The growth policy states (page 47, Policy 2): "The quantity d rate [emphasis added] of runoff from a developed piece of property should not exceed that which would occur had the property remained undeveloped." ii. The proposed plan will result in an increase in the quantity (volume) of runoff from the property in direct violation of the above growth policy. iii. Urban and suburban development is well known to increase the amount of stormwater flows. The reason for this is simple, fields of permeable soil and grass are replaced with impermeable roofs and roadways. So, willow Creek with the proposed stormwater drainage design will increase stormwater flows above current conditions on the site; will cause an increase in the amount (volume) of water flowing to the unnamed tributary and associated hydric soils; will cause the duration of peak flows from storm events to be extended (i.e., pear flows will last longer); and will cause an increase in the extent of flooding in the area. 8) Ston water Solutions, a. Please correct the problems exacerbated Lane Pine Trails subdivision by requiring a culvert in Learn Lane that connects to the City stormwater system m Lone Pine Trails subdivision. This would allow flood water to return to the stream, dissipating additional flooding that would be caused by additional stormwater flags from willow Creek subdivision. b. If development of the southern portion of the Willow Creek proposal is to go forward, I believe that one or more of the following must be required: i. A regional drainage plan that includes city and county areas along Foys Lake Road and that remedies the current flooding and mitigates impacts from future development/growth. ii. A requirement that all development -related stormwater is retained on - site (i.e., no detention and release as currently planned by willow Creek). iii. Parallel conveyance of stormwater to Ashley Creek (i.e., pipe or ditch stormwater from. Willow Creek directly to Ashley Creek rather than through the unnamed tributary). c. These solutions are consistent with the Growth Policy (2007 Resource and Analysis Update Chapter 7 Environmental Considerations, page 8) where it states "Persons developing property have the responsibility to convey storm water from that property to an appropriate point of disposal. The quantity and rate of runoff from a developed property should not exceed that which would occur had the property remained undeveloped. In instances where developing property cannot be drained to an appropriate point of disposal, storm water must be detained and handled on site." Than you for your considerations of these issues. I would be happy to discuss these issues further with the Planning Board, Planning Department staff, or the developer. I can be reached at 257-404 or earthsys(&centurvte1.net Sincerely, Scott Masan 300 Learn. Lane Kalispell, MT 59901 4 Figure 2. WETLAND AND HYDRIC SOILS Kalispell Growt3 tcyr$ Karl Growth Poffcy Are r�r PotUtility Area N Soils clamtfied r - as HWtic Scak9d to ftt shoat Sods ciassffied as erg uric lrxt lt,sicns ._,rstcr i WeMuids i � i � all calag r f� of ) Ztt� a r r atrwr,.�r s ..r. o c .wyrs -1s. � i* c vrw,r r sw►vrr. f . .. _.. .. ,....::: r<'' 4. r. `.:-t.'• +T�: i.. F? � S!? L I`["" =� . �:' ".. ..., �:. y",� ..� ;.-,r `-xsrsc+- •.:�r-Y.rra+ n.�a.rti ..r�lc'�Lr Map 1. From Kalispell Growth Policy Resource and Analysis Section, February 2003. The area at issue, south of Foys Lake Road is clearly shown as having hydric soils. The Growth Policy Resource document (pg ?7A) states " Hydric soils, one of the primary indicators of wetlands, are those that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth of hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., plants adapted to saturated soils, such as cattails). The areas of hydric, soils tend to also be rnapped as floodplairt and core riparian habitat ... '. g Y Iffl t: '�. ,.:►i J Ci i� ::a ter. \ `� \. ` •�r [ [ � t t Salin'."3� 9 6- e-alkali land (Sa) — USDA, 1960 Y 1 1 k 'S- - r hl x Strongly saline soils in poorly Y �F drained swales and depressed T areas. Pg. 49 r • They are flooded and seepy in # ' wet seasons. Pg. 49 K92' �. ' • The more nearly level areas need _ ��5 . `, �1 drelinage to remove standing water that might drown out the - n grass. Pg. 17 • Drainage also helps remove salts 'f At en from the sods. Pg. 17 . . . . . . .... M ryry � rr FrJ '.� Fia py�LAi .A'.i. . %A , 1 » w WL + r. A. Ku ; 14 �v > HT y Fo s Lake Road r1 Ile Ali P :E u Fh f 1 1,.-t Learn T,ane Map 2. Base map/photo from Upper Flathead Valley Area Montana Soil Survey Sheet 21. USDA, September 1960. ............. ........... ...... .... ...... J �z- L -)uwivision - Map 3. 2006 Air Photo from Mapguide/Flathead County GIS "JIL I" ,{�... -. Photo 1. Unnamed tributary at Learn Lane (2/23/07 approx. 4 pm). Note flooding south of tributary. , Ir I �uI I" . Map 4. Same 2006 air photo as Map 3 but with black line added to show swale that is low point In the valley. A culvert at Learn Lane and connection to City stormwater system in Lone Pine Trails would provide for return of flood waters to the unnamed tributary to Ashley Creek. 10 November 13, 2007 City of Kalispell Planning Dept. 17 2"dStreet East Kalispell, MT 59901. Dear Kalispell City Planning Board, I am responding this evening to the three requests by the Applicant, Wayne Turner for the public hearing tonight. My letters of April 10, 2007 and July 10, 2007 stated numerous serious errors of omission in the previous requests for changes to this property as presented by Mr. Turner. I've listed several of the topics from my letters: 1). Existing site hazards in regards to filled areas. 2). Inadequate access with very serious safety concerns. 3). Lack of proper evidence for the variance requests for smaller lots. 4). A devaluation of the adjacent property values because this subdivision, as proposed for the hearing tonight, does not conform to the neighborhood. 5). Insufficient factual answers for his requested variances. 6). A deficient submittal for the Preliminary Plat. 7). My comments in regards to the cut and fill grading of 10' to 35', which will result in "330,040 cubic yards of export." At 10 yards of dirt and rock for a standard dump truck load this would equate to approximately 33,040 truck loads of export material. This material will be moved north of Ashley Creek to the former Forest Products Co. industrial site to be used as replacement fill on that area. That sounds great until one stops to ask this very important question. Where is Mr. Turner taking the fill and industrial waste from the Forest Products Co. site? Approximately 33,000 truck loads will be moved from this site or the Forest Products Co. property site to some other location in the county. 8). The cut and fill estimate may range from 10' to 35'. Will this depth be increased during this process? This is not standard grading preparation for a subdivision. This will be an open pit mining operation that will directly affect Stonen'dge to the West, the residential homes to the South, businesses to the North and the entire West side of Kalispell for many years. The negative effect of dust from this site can not be comprehended. 9). According to the City of Kalispell Zoning map, dated May 15, 2007, this property does not adjoin the city of Kalispell. This would be construed as spot zoning. 10). Problems with the section of plat requirements titled "The Effects on Agriculture and Agricultural Water User Facilities." My other detailed comments in addition to the above listed comments, presented at the earlier public hearings for requests affecting this property still apply to the hearing this evening. I am very disappointed with the Planning Staffs total lack of providing any protection in regards to my pumping station, improvements and POD on Ashley Creek. I can understand earlier decisions for staff report comments based on a lack of correct information, but it is totally irresponsible when legally recorded easements, shown in documented information has been presented and is totally ignored in the staff report for the hearing this evening. Nothing is mentioned as being a requirement for protection of my 60 horse pump, improvements and POD at this site. I currently have recorded easements depicting access to this site. As I have stated before, these easements are fully spelled out in a document titled `Settlement Agreement' dated July 17, 1987. This document was duly recorded under recording #2000291/14250 in Flathead County. The easement on the west boundary line of Stoneridge and Willow Creek is the only easement being required by the planning staff for Mr. Turner to acknowledge in regards to this pumping site. The Planning Staff does not have a Legal right to ignore easements of record and state on Page 38 of the staff report "By placing the portion of the easement in common space, the parties who have a water right and interest in the pump station will be able to access the site." The wording for this easement in the recorded document states it is for utilities, main Iine and ingress and egress to the pump site. It further states that written approval must be granted from all property owners on both sides of the boundary line before a road can be placed on this easement. The precise wording of the easement to the west makes this a very restricted easement. This could have the probable effect of my being permanently blocked from access. Other questions that need to be addressed will be the effect of the cuts and fills upon the ground under this west easement. Will there be a steep bank? Will the ground be level.? Will there be a gradual transition and how will. this be handled? How will the cut and fill process affect Stoneridge to the west of this property? The legal easement that crosses the proposed Willow Creek subdivision from Meridian road to the pumping site is the easement of historical use for access for all parties needing to reach the pump ing site by vehicle for equipment repair, checking on the site, changing and reading electric meters, repairing electric lines and transformers caused by power failures or any other necessary reason. By ignoring the existence of the current historical use of this easement I will be further denied access to the pump site. Easements of record can not be removed, altered or purposely ignored by either Mr. Turner or the Planning Staff and any attempt to do so is a serious infringement of my Legal rights. If the Willow Creek Subdivision is approved, as to the, staff report presented tonight and Mr. Turner starts his process of the cuts and fills for site preparation, I will be totally denied access to my POD and pump site because it will be physically impossible to cross the property to reach the pumping site. This will be an illegal and damaging action. Mr. Turner must show how this pumping site and my improvements will continue to exist in his proposed subdivision and be protected from vandalism etc. in a manner that will be acceptable to me. Also, he will need to show how my easements of record will not be summarily removed without my agreement. This should have been included in the staff report, but any reference to the issue of protection was specifically left out and not addressed in any manner. If, it is determined thata condition stating that protection of my pump, improvements and legal easements must be shown prior to Final Plat Approval, it will be too late because the damage will have already been done. A condition that will show protection of my pump, improvements and legal easements must to be spelled out in detail, as a requirement for Preliminary Plat Approval. I hope you will consider my comments and very serious concerns made tonight and at the past public hearings in regards to the requests by Mr. Turner for Willow Creek and deny the requests this evening. Thank you for allowing me to present my comments and concerns this evening. Sincerely., Marilyn Bain 13 November 2007 Statement of Steve and Jeannie Luckey, 341 Stoneridge Drive, Kalispell, Montana 59901, to the City of Kalispell Planning Board, regarding the proposed Willow Creek Subdivision: To state that the proposed Willow Creek Subdivision has created considerable controversy would be an understatement. Whenever a situation like this occurs, there are usually several valid reasons. The following summary provides examples reflected by this controversial proposal. A planning board member at a recent meeting stated that there are other high -density developments reflecting this type of population concentration in the Kalispell area, but a comparative examination indicates this to be incorrect. None of the local high -density developments reflect this type of ultra high -density housing. Any planning board decision regarding an ultra -high density subdivision is precedent setting and the relative factors must be carefully considered because of the unique nature of the proposal. In addition, there appears to be significant liability issues potentially affecting the city. If this proposal is approved following the advisement of the potential adverse results, both the planning board and the City of Kalispell could be held responsible. Considering this unique situation, it would be appropriate to have an environmental impact study focusing on the factors represented by the Willow creek Subdivision proposal. A specific professional study would address the urban geographical, behavioral science, potential criminal activity, emergency vehicle access, domestic pet, and other appropriate social and safety factors. An alternate proposal could include an excellent location for a golf course surrounded by high -end residences. This concept would provide -substantial developer revenues and significant municipal tax revenues while maintaining the quality deserving of this unique property. Another alternate consideration could include high -end units similar to the Meadows Condominiums'. The recent dramatic increase in energy costs demands that affordable housing be located within walking distance of commercial services. The Willow Creek Subdivision proposal severely taxes available schools and existing traffic problems. Currently, it can take over 15 minutes to drive from Highway 2 to the Stonefidge development entrance during certain times of the day. Several hundred more vehicles will severely compound the existing traffic problem. The considerations affecting the approval of this development should be driven equally by the welfare and desires of the affected residents as well as the financial objectives of the developer along with the desired increase in municipal tax revenues. All of these important factors could be addressed by alternative plans that better suit the unique features of this desirable location. Urban geographical factors indicate a tendency for `affordable housing' units to be frequently occupied by multiple families and extended family members. This factor significantly magnifies the high density challenges contained in any high -density development. Pets are a real problem as well as providing appropriate accommodations for the dramatic increase in the number of children of the younger `starter -home' age group., Reportedly, there are close to 3000 available approved lots and residential options in the Flathead Valley. A V1Slt to a S1ri111ai' high density development constructed near the airport in Missoula will graphically illustrate many of the factors described in this summary. It will also reveal the actual esthetics proposed by the attractive artists depictions compared with the stark reality of the final product. It's not an attractive alternative. In summary, this proposal is the wrong development, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. The proposed Willow Creek Subdivision adversely impacts the aesthetics and ergonomics of the location. Sin rely, Stephen A. Luckey r � I r 7 ■ Jeannie M. Luckq