Loading...
07. Ordinance 1548 - Planned Unit Development - Westwood Park Subdivision - 1st ReadingCity of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2 d Street Fast, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.com REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor amid City Council FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT Westwood Park Planned Unit Development - RA-1 / PUD at the Northern Terminus of Corporate Drive MEETING BATE: August 1, 2005 BACKGROUND: This is a request for a Planned Unit Development zoning overlay on property zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. The PUD will be known as Westwood Park and proposes 32 dwelling units on approximately 8.97 acres. The development consists of a mix of two family and three family dwellings that would be developed as townhouses for individual ownership. The proposed plan departs from zoning in that there is open space within the subdivision and smaller lot sizes within a building area. Setbacks have been reduced in some cases to allow a different configuration of some of the buildings with an attempt at providing a side access so that garages do not face the street. The lots located in the center of the development will back up to a central open space that has been provided. Secondary emergency access is being provided via a 20 foot wide paved driveway to the cast that would be upgraded and extended to Cooper Lane, a City street. A bike and pedestrian path would be developed to the north that exits onto Two Mile Drive. Spring Creek creates the eastern boundary of this property where there is significant . �r� c. .- 1 _. .- n... _I....._ . rna__'e-�T TT _11-____ i1__ ____ _it-._ _f. it__ i1__..--____I- 1UU year IlooClplcl1IT all(I NOT11C JWUUWiiy. 111C r-U1J WIUW� UIC UICUL1UI1 U1 L11C L111M U111L townhouses without having to go through the conditional use permit process which would be required in the RA-1 zoning district for multi -family dwellings. Additionally, the concept of open space areas between the lots with a reduction in actual lot size is feasible under the planned unit development The planning board held a public hearing at a meeting on June 21, 2005 and after hearing the staff report, testimony from the developers and concerns of the neighbors, they unanimously continued the project and identified several issues of concern they wanted the developer to attempt to address. Those were as follows: • Density • Floodplain • Stormwater and surface water • Primary and secondary access issues Westwood Park PUD July 22, 2005 Page 2 On Monday June 27, 2005 a meeting was held at the home of Pastor Dawn Shur whose property is along the west boundary of the subdivision. In attendance were approximately 12 or 13 property owners from Greenbriar Subdivision., the developers, their engineers and me. It was a very positive and productive meeting. The neighbors were concerned about the two three unit townhouses that were on the west side of the property. The developer amended their plans by creating one three unit townhouse and two two unit townhouses rather than two three unit townhouses and one single family dwelling. This resulted in a greater separation between the buildings. Additionally, one of the dwellings was eliminated along the east portion of the site as a result of the reconfiguration of the roadway and removing it from the 100 year floodplain. The neighbors were also concerned about stormwater management and groundwater levels and wanted assurances that their homes and property would not be compromised by stormwater from the project. The engineers and developers explained their plans for managing the stormwater and gave the neighbors the results of groundwater level testing that was done. That information is included with the amended staff report. The conclusions of the report were that some areas had clay soils on the surface that prevented the easy absorption of surface water into the ground. High groundwater was not prevalent in the area and the problems or nPrr-PivPrl nrnhlt-.rns with water in hn,-ornents or stanrliner water was a result of slirfne-P water, not groundwater. A detailed, engineered storm water management plan will be fully developed, but in essence, the stormwater would be collected in several areas within the site and piped to one or more retention areas within the development. In looking at access within the site, some of the neighbors initially had concerns about the location of the road along the east boundary of their property. However, a vote was taken and it was generally unanimous that a nice vinyl fence and landscaping would be the preferred alternative to hacking up the rear yards of the lots. The neighbors felt that by moving the buildings away from their property there would be less impact to them with regard to obstructing their views, noise and density. Secondary access to the site was relocated from the north to the east via an existing paved driveway. The relocation of the secondary emergency access alleviates the problems the neighbors to the north had about potential flooding of their property if the roadway were elevated as well as concerns about resizing and replacing the existing culvert. Additionally, the relocated access to the east appears to require less fill in the floodplain to improve the road to secondary access standards. The issue of providing an access or easement to the north was strongly opposed by both the neighbors and the developers. It was felt that there were inherent problems with the location related to sight distance, floodplain, neighborhood integrity and non- Westwood Park PUD July 22, 2005 Page 2 local traffic. That easement was not placed on the revised preliminary plat and PUD plans. At the conclusion of our approximately two hour meeting, the neighbors felt very satisfied that their concerns were fully addressed. The developers felt that their project design was improved as a result of conferencing with the neighbors and the staff felt that the planning board's concerns had been fully addressed. The Kalispell City Planning Board considered this matter again at their regular meeting of July 12, 2005. The developers and engineers explained their changes and the successful meeting with the neighbors. The planning board felt their concerns and the neighbors issues had been adequately addressed. A motion was made and passed unanimously to forward a recommendation that the planned unit development for the project be approved subject to conditions. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to approve the first reading of the ordinance for the planned unit development would be in order. FISCAL EFFECTS: ALTERNATIVES: Respectfully submitted, Narda A. Wilson Senior Planner Positive impacts once fully developed. As suggested by the City Council. Report compiled: July 22, 2005 c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk �Je'sH. Patrick City Manager ORDINANCE NO. 1548 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO.1460), BY ADDING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ON PROPERTY CURRENTLY ZONED CITY RA-1, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR'S TRACTS 2CK, 2CH AND 2CE LOCATED IN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL GROWTH POLICY 2020 AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Bill Rice and Craig and Connie Denman, the owners of the property described above, petitioned the City of Kalispell that the zoning classification attached to the above described tract of land, currently zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, be amended to include a Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 9 acres of land, and ,� WHEREAS, me property is located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between Two Nine Drive and Highway 2 West, and WHEREAS, the petition of Rice and. Denman was the subject of a report compiled by the Tri-City Planning Office, Staff Report #KPUD-05-4, in which the Tri-City Planning Office evaluated the petition and recommended that the zoning on the property as described above be amended to include a Planned Unit Development overlay, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board held Public Hearings on the matter on June 21, 2005 and July 12, 2005, and recommended that a Planned Unit Development overlay be added to the current RA-1 zoning, and WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the proposal to overlay a Planned Unit Development on the RA-1 zoning, the City Council finds such zoning to be consistent with. the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 and adopts, based upon the criterion set forth in Section 76-3-608, M.C.A., and State, Etc. v. Board of County Commissioners, Etc. 590 P2d 602, the findings of fact of TCPO as set forth .in Staff Report No. KPUD-05-4, as amended by the Kalispell City Planning Board. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L Section 27.02.010, of the Official Zoning Map of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 1460) is hereby amended by designating the property described above as RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment with a Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 9 acres. SECTION 11. The Planned Unit Development proposed by Rice and Denman upon the real property described above is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: That the r�eir 1-p e— of thv cite ohntt be in ernc�tnn+inl nnvvr r�linnno .i.i tl, +tiv n..r.7.nnl. oa i iiu4 41iY,, uV i vi v�AiiAvii4 vi 4EAV Ji4V .rtiUti 4iV ui as i+VJ4UA14AUi yiJilltJ ii UAI{.+L YYECLl iEiV CifJ�J1ECJCACIV�1 submitted, the site plan, materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the PUD as approved by the city council. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Appendix C — Final Plat) 2. That the plans and specifications for all public infrastructure be designed and in accordance with Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction Standards and a letter shall be obtained stating that they have been reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 3, Design Standards, Section 3.01). A letter shall be submitted with the final plat from an engineer licensed in the state of Montana certifying the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. As built drawings shall be submitted to the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to final plat submittal for the completed infrastructure. A letter from the public works department shall accompany the engineer's certification stating that this condition has been met or otherwise adequately addressed (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 3, Design Standards, Section 3.01) 4. An engineered stormwater management plan shall be developed which utilizes on site retention methods and insures that adjoining properties will not be impacted by stormwater runoff, snow melt or surface water. 5. Front yard setbacks for the townhouses that have garage access directly along the right of way shall right efway insure a minimum distance of 20 feet between the garage and the sidewalk and would apply to Lots 11, 12 and 13.. This would not apply to townhouses that have some other provision for handling access and on site parking. (Kalispell Planning Board) 6. A minimum 20 foot rear setback shall be maintained between the buildings and the exterior boundaries of the subdivision. 7. That covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the subdivision shall be provided that include a provision for the private conservation and maintenance of common areas as well as compliance with the approved planned unit development elevation drawings, treatments and other architectural elements. 8. A note on the face of the final plat shall be provided for the pro-rata share of ownership of the common area for taxation purposes. 9. Townhouse lots within the subdivision shall be identified by a lot number and letter such as Lot 1 A, 1 B or 1 C rather than being numbered sequentially as shown on the preliminary plat. 10. That permits be obtained from the Flathead Conservation District, Montana Department of Natural Resources and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for work done along the creek channel or a letter from those agencies stating that the scope of work does not require permitting. (FCCD / DNRC) 11. That a minimum l 0-foot buffer shall be established between the western internal roadway and Greenbriar Subdivision to provide screening and buffering between the road and these houses. This shall be in the form of berming, fencing or landscaping or a combination thereof. These improvements are to be coordinated with the Kalispell Public Works Department, the Parks and Recreation Department and the homeowners in Greenbriar Subdivision to the west. 12. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.20). a. Water mains designed to provide minimum fire flows shall be installed per City specifications 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. r+ Mira TlPnartrrtant arraec shalla nrnvir�ar� in �rr•nrr��nraxxrit}-TntQrnot;nnal �i;r. C`...ao !')llfl'21 Chapter 5. d. Secondary emergency vehicle access shall be provided in accordance with International Fire Code (2003) Chapter 5 and Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. e. It should be noted that hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-8. f. Street naming shall be approved by the fire department. 13. That a letter be obtained from the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the five foot landscape boulevard developed between the curb and the sidewalk. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.11). 14. That the areas designated on the plat as common shall meet the requirements for parkland dedication provided they are developed in accordance with a plan approved by the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director that provides recreational amenities including but not limited to pedestrian access, irrigation, landscaping and play equipment so as to provide a recreational component within the development and not simply left as passive open space. A letter shall be submitted with the final plat stating that the common areas have been developed in accordance with the approved park development plan. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.19). 15. That a. detailed flood study be completed determining the exact location of the floodway. No fill, development or other disturbance of soil or vegetation shall be allowed within the floodway. The location of the roadways and bike path / secondary emergency access shall be relocated so that no fill, development or disturbance of vegetation occurs in the 100 year floodplain unless otherwise absolutely required. Any work, development or fill in the 100 year floodplain shall be kept to a minimum and shall be directly related to providing secondary emergency access for the subdivision of the north approximately 400 feet of the bike /and pedestrian path / emergency access road. It is anticipated that this may result in the reconfiguration and / or loss of lots within the subdivision. 16. A floodplain development permit shall be obtained from the Kalispell Floodplain Administrator for any limited but necessary work to be performed within the 100 year floodplain. 17. That a note be placed on the face of the final plat that waives protest to the creation of a special improvement district for the upgrade of roads in the area to City standards which may be impacted by this development. 18. That a letter be obtained from the Kalispell Public Works Department stating that the proposed emergency accesses onto Cooper Lane has been reviewed and approved and any associated and necessary improvements have been satisfactorily completed. 19. 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 havebeen :�rxrp �nr1 0,.,.,nYra /Ttal;�..oll C.,l.4;. ;c;_ C7o. „i��;(..� Q--+;-- 2 MI uury ciwaa ie�rwrvtiu uiiu u ri�rr.0 �i�uaio�a.ii ta"uIVA.1i 11 a�v ,uxut�vai.a, �"IUJ.I _. .vl). 20. 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. 21. The developer shall provide a letter from the U.S. Postal Service approving the plan for mail service. (Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Section 3.22). 22. Street lighting shall be located within the subdivision and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations Section 3.09(L)). 23. All utilities shall be installed underground. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.17). 24. That a minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for this subdivision sball be completed prior to final plat submittal. 25. All areas disturbed during development of the subdivision shall be re -vegetated with a weed - free mix immediately after development. 26. That an easement a eement be obtained for the secondary emer enc access across the private property to the east that encompasses the nature and intent of the proposed roadway. 27. That a development agreement 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. 28. That preliminary plat approval for the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 2.04). SECTION III. The balance of Section 27.02.010, Official Zoning Map, City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance not amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION IV. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after 30 days of its passage by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA, THIS 15TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk City of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2"d Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.com July 22, 2005 James H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Westwood Park Planned Unit Development Dear Jinn: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on June 21, 2005 and held a public hearing to consider a request for a planned unit development overlay on property zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, on approximately nine acres. The property is r. --- ^ - lUC;ateCl cll� LIiC iIUCIItCIit E.CIIiIlI1US Ul LUr-p- UI'iILC LI-1VU UCCWUeIl tiwy G VdeSL c1nQ lwo iVJ,11.e Drive. A preliminary plat for 32 two and three unit townhouses has been filed concurrently with the planned unit development. Narda Wilson, with the Kalispell Planning Department, presented staff report KPUD- 05-4 evaluating the proposal. She noted that the development would probably be developed in a single phase and the applicants would build the homes. Elevation drawings and floor plans of the proposed units were included in the packet. During the public hearing the applicants spoke in favor of the proposal and stated they wanted to do something different that would be high quality. Marc Drew, representing several property owners in Greenbriar Subdivision to the west, spoke on behalf of several property owners when he presented a power point presentation to the board. He said they had concerns with the density, floodplain, standing water and impacts to their neighborhood. The board discussed the proposal and the testimony. After significant discussion of the issues raised by the public, the planning board unanimously continued the project and identified several issues of concern they wanted the developer to attempt to address. Those were density, floodplain, stormwater and surface water, primary and secondary access issues. Westwood Park PUD July 22, 2005 Page 2 On Monday June 27, 2005 a meeting was held at the home of Pastor Dawn Shur whose property is along the west boundary of the subdivision. At the conclusion of the approximately two hour meeting, the neighbors felt very satisfied that their concerns were fully addressed. The developers felt that their project design was improved as a result of conferencing with the neighbors and the staff felt that the planning board's concerns had been fully addressed. This project went back before the planning board at their regular- meeting of July 12, 2005. At the beginning of the meeting the developers and their engineers explained their progress and changes to the site layout that were made since the last meeting. The planning board commended the developers for working with the neighborhood and felt that their concerns had also been satisfied. A motion was made that passed unanimously to recommend that the planned unit development proposal for Westwood Park be approved subject to conditions. Please schedule this matter for the August 1, 2005 regular City Council meeting. You may contact this board or Narda Wilson at the Kalispell Planning Department if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely Kalispell City Planning Board George aylor President GT/NW/ma Attachments: Exhibit A - PUD Conditions of Approval Staff report KPUD-05-4 and application materials Minutes from the 6/21/05 planning board meeting Minutes from. the 7 / 12 / 05 planning board meeting c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk c w/o Att: Bill Rice, Westwood Partnership, 5733 Hwy 93 So., Whitefish. MT 59937 Craig & Connie Denman., 5733 Hwy 93 So., Whitefish, MT 59937 Jackola Engineering, P.O. Box 1134, Kalispell, MT 59903 TKP Partnership, 1509 Washington Ave., Golden, CO 80401 EXHIBIT A WESTWOOD PARK UNIT DEVELOPMENT KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD JULY 12, 2005 The Kalispell City Planning Board held a public hearing was held on this matter at the regular meeting of the planning board of June 21, 2005 with subsequent consideration at the July 12, 2005 regular meeting. The following conditions are recommended for the planned unit development and were included in the recommendation for approval of the preliminary plat. 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 PUD as approved by the city council. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Appendix C - Final Plat) 2. That the plans and specifications for all public infrastructure be designed and in accordance with Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction Standards and a letter shall be obtained stating that they have been reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 3, Design. Standards, Section 3.01). 3. A letter shall be submitted with the final plat from an engineer licensed in the state of Montana certifying the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. As built drawings shall be submitted to the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to final plat submittal for the completed. infrastructure. A letter from the public works department shall accompany the engineer's certification stating that this condition has been met or otherwise adequately addressed (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 3, Design Standards, Section 3.01) 4. An engineered stormwater management plan shall be developed which utilizes on site retention methods and insures that adjoining properties will not be impacted by stormwater runoff, snow melt or surface water. 5. Front yard setbacks for the townhouses that have garage access directly along the right of way shall paT-�ng is outside the publie right of w insure a minimum distance of 20 feet between the garage and the sidewalk and would apply to Lots 11, 12 and U. This would not apply to townhouses that have some other provision for handling access and on site parking. (Kalispell Planning Board) 6. A minimum 20 foot rear setback shall be maintained between the buildings and the exterior boundaries of the subdivision. 7. That covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the subdivision shall be provided that include a provision for the private conservation and maintenance of common areas as well as compliance with the approved planned unit development elevation drawings, treatments and other architectural elements. Westwood Park PUD July 22, 2005 Page 2 8. A note on the face of the final plat shall be provided for the pro-rata share of ownership of the common area for taxation purposes. 9. 'Townhouse lots within the subdivision shall be identified by a lot number and letter such as Lot 1A, 1B or 1C rather than being numbered sequentially as shown on the preliminary plat. 10. That permits be obtained from the Flathead Conservation District, Montana Department of Natural Resources and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for work done along the creek channel or a letter from those agencies stating that the scope of work does not require permitting. (FCCD J DNRC) 11. That a minimum 10-foot buffer shall be established between the western internal roadway and Greenbriar Subdivision to provide screening and buffering between the road and these houses. This shall be in the form of berming. fencing or landscaping or a combination thereof. These improvements are to be coordinated with the Kalispell Public Works Department, the Parks and Recreation Department and the homeowners in Greenbriar Subdivision to the west. 12. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.20). a. Water mains designed to provide minimum fire flows shall be installed per City specifications 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 S. d. Secondary emergency vehicle access shall be provided in accordance with International Fire Code (2003) Chapter S and Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. e. It should be rioted that hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-8. f. Street naming shall be approved by the fire department. 13. That a letter be obtained from the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the five foot landscape boulevard developed between the curb and the sidewalk. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.11). 14. That the areas designated on the plat as common shall meet the requirements for parkland dedication provided they are developed in accordance with a plan approved by the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director that provides recreational amenities including but not limited to pedestrian access, irrigation, landscaping and play equipment so as to provide a recreational component within the development and not simply left as passive open space. A letter shall be submitted with the final plat stating that the common areas have been developed in accordance with the an -Droved nark development elan. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.19).� 1 A 1 1 15. That a detailed flood study be completed determining the exact location of the floodway. No fill, development or other disturbance of soil or vegetation shall be allowed within the floodway. The location of the roadways and bike path / secondary emergency access shall be relocated so that no fill, development or disturbance of vegetation occurs in the 100 year floodplain unless otherwise absolutely required. Any work, development or fill in the 100 year floodplain shall be kept to a minimum and shall be directly related to providing secondary emergency access for the subdivision of the north approximately 400 feet of the bike /and pedestrian path / emergency access road. It is anticipated that this may result in the reconfiguration and / or loss of lots within the subdivision. 16. A floodplain development permit shall be obtained from the Kalispell Floodplain Administrator for any limited but necessary work to be performed within the 100 year floodplain. 17. That a note be placed on the face of the final plat that waives protest to the creation of a special improvement district for the upgrade of roads in the area to City standards which may be impacted by this development. 18. That a letter be obtained from the Kalispell Public Works Department stating that the proposed emergency accesses onto Cooper Lane has been reviewed and approved and any associated and necessary improvements have been 19. 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). 20. 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. 21. The developer shall provide a letter from the U.S. Postal Service approving the plan for mail service. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.22). 22. Street lighting shall be located within the subdivision and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations Section 3.09(L)). Westwood Park PUD July 22, 2005 Page 2 23. All utilities shall be installed underground. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.17) . 24. That a minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for this subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 25. All areas disturbed during development of the subdivision shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 26. That an easement agreement be obtained for the secondM emergency access across the private Property to the east that encompasses the nature and intent of the, prowsed roadtivay. 27. That a development agreement be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney between the Citv of Kalispell and the developer outlinine and formalizing the terms. conditions and provisions of approval.f The final plan as approved, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning for the site. 28. That preliminary plat approval for the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section. 2.04). WEST WOOD PARK PUD A request for a Planned Unit Development overlay on REQUEST property zoned RA-1 on approximately 8.97 acres to allow construction of a 33 lot residential subdivision. WEST WOOD PARK A request for preliminary plat approval of West Wood Park, a PRELIMINARY PLAT 33 lot residential subdivision located at the northern APPROVAL REQUEST terminus of Corporate Way between Two Mile Drive and Highway 2 West. STAFF REPORTS KPUD-05- Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a 4 AND KPP-05-11 presentation of Staff Report KPUD-05-4, a request for a Planned Unit Development overlay on property zoned RA-1 on approximately 8.97 acres, and KPP-05-11, a Preliminary Plat approval request for West Wood Park, a 33 lot residential subdivision. Wilson explained the project and showed the site map. She stated that Highway 2 is located to the south of the property, east is Gateway West Mall, Two Mile Drive is directly to the north, National Flood is at the north end of Corporate Drive, and the Kalispell Bypass corridor is to the west. She said the property is currently zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, with a minimum lot size of 6000 square feet for the first duplex, and 3000 square feet for each additional unit beyond a duplex; single family residences and duplexes are permitted uses, and multi -family uses require a conditional use permit in the RA-1 zone. Wilson stated there are approximately nine acres, and there are 33 dwelling units proposed instead of 34; there will be one, two- and three unit townhouse dwellings. She said by going with a PUD, it allows flexibility in the three unit townhouses, and a reduction in the setbacks in some locations in the development. She said the project consists of five three -unit townhouses, eight two -unit townhouses, and two single family dwellings on 9 acres and explained that the PUD allows multifamily uses without a CUP and a reduction in setbacks in some areas down to 5 feet; the RA-1 zone requires 20 feet in the front, 20 feet in the rear, and 10 feet on the sides, but the PUD would allow some lots to be closer. She said the developer is proposing some side loaded garages which don't front the street on some lots to have smaller setbacks, but they still must provide a 20 foot parking area for vehicles; Lots 1, 3, and 27 would be closer to the right of way, but they also would have side loaded garages. Wilson explained that there is a primary internal access road off of Corporate Drive, which is a loop road that exceeds the length of road that can exist without secondary emergency access. Because of that, there is a condition requiring a 20 foot wide secondary emergency access road at the north end Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special meeting of .Cunt 21, 2005 Page 13 of 20 of the property, which will also serve as a bike and pedestrian path. She said the property is bounded by Spring Creek to the east, which is a significant area of the 100 year flood plain, and there is also some flood way that has not yet been determined. She said that portions of the secondary emergency access road and the internal access road are in the 100 year flood plain, but that looks more like design than necessity; the staff is recommending that the roadway be reconfigured to the west to get it out of the flood plain, and relocate the emergency access to avoid the flood plain; that would leave a small portion of the emergency access road within the flood plain, which would have to be filled and graded. She said there would be a diminishing of the common area, but staff feels it is a design component, and preservation of the 100 year flood plain is the important thing; it could result in loss of sortie lots, but a roadway in the flood plain is unacceptable. She said staff also has concerns about the secondary emergency access, because the existing culvert would need to be rel)laced - the neighbors are worried about floodiniz. She said that Corporate Drive to the south empties onto Highway 2 West; this project will generate limited additional traffic, but not over what is anticipated for the road. There is City water and sewer close to Spring Creek, and the mains will be extended within the subdivision. Wilson stated that some of the parkland and common area is in the flood plain, and the common areas would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association; there is adequate common area, but staff would like to see some recreational amenities and a park area developed, and not just passive common area. Wilson finished by stating the density would be 3.7 dwellings per acre; this is in a high density residential zone, and so it is at the lower end of the density scale. She said this will be a single phase development, with storm water retention on site, and fire protection and police provided; there will be some additional children in the school district. There is a condition for a 10 foot landscape buffer along the western boundary, not in the right of way. She also said there is an access road along the west boundary, which creates roars frontage on two sides on some lots in Greenbrier, and this needs to be mitigated. Wilson said that staff recommends adoption of the staff report and recommend to the City Council that the PUD be granted subject to the listed conditions, minus Condition 17 because it is a duplicate, and adoption of the Preliminary Plat subject to the listed conditions, also minus Condition 17. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the speciat meeting of June 21, 2005 Page 14 of 20 QUESTIONS BY THE Schutt asked why a road can't be built in the flood plain. BOARD Wilson said the roadways have to be two feet above the base flood elevation for access, which would mean filling the flood plain, and this looks more like a design issue than a necessity. She said the roads can be shifted, but we need to preserve the flood plain, and it is not necessary to build in the flood plain. The emergency access road would have the same requirement. Hinchey asked why the secondary access is not up to full City standards. Wilson said that all of the lots are accessed internally, and the City does not need the full standards. Norton asked if two entrances to mitigate the effects of traffic could be developed. Wilson said the flood plain could be an issue, and a 60 feet road would be a huge expense to the developer. She said they are trying to create a village concept, and traffic from Two Mile Drive will cut through the subdivision if there is an entrance on both sides. A grid street system is a good goal, but the pros and cons weighed more on not putting it in. In response to a question from Hinchey, Wilson said there will be a barrier by the emergency access. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Craig Denman., 315 Fox Hollow, stated that his initial concept was for multi -family units, and at this point the townhouse market is very hot. He said he shifted to a neighborhood plan, and his concept is to get houses closer to the street and garages off the street, to encourage more social interaction. He said there will be a uniform landscaped and maintained community so residents can walk through it; the traffic is slower, the houses are closer, and there will be a sidewalk with a nice landscaped boulevard. He said the plan is to put a buffer in on the west with mounds and trees and to create social interaction with walkways and pathways and make it a community that enjoys each other. Hinchey asked how they would accommodate the road alignment. Denman said he does not see a significant problem in relocating the road, and they may be able to do it with a hammerhead. He said there are other ways to redesign the road. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special meeting of June 21, 2005 Page 15 of 20 Jim Burton, 1304 3rd Avenue East, stated that the purpose of the PUD is for flexibility. He said some of the parking extends to the right of way, and the sidewalks will be in a meandering fashion, so parking in the right of way won't be a problem; residents can also park on the City streets. He said the density is 3.7 units per acre, and they have looked at redesigning the loop road and the secondary access; they can work with it, but they will lose a minimum of 2-3 units. Thor Jackola, 1120 Sunnyside Drive, stated that they are going to engage Jay Billmayer to study the flood plain and they would like to reserve the right to fill it if need be. He said the site map shows the current indicated flood plain. PUBLIC COMMENT I Opponents: Michael Britton, 490 Two Mile Drive, stated he has lived there for 32 years, and he wanted to draw attention to the fact that there is a critical problem with the elevation of the road that crosses the creek to his property, and any changes will impact his road to his property. He said the culvert was choked up with limbs and ice when the pictures he submitted to the Board were taken, even though they tried to clear it; more structures will manipulate the flood plain, and the road elevation is critical for keeping his house out of danger. Mark Drew, 152 Greenbriar Drive, stated he is speaking for several neighbors, and gave a short PowerPoint presentation. He said they sent out a survey to all members of their homeowners association, and they wanted their interests and concerns known., which are summarized in his presentation. He said their three main concerns are the density of the project, the flood plain and water drainage in the area, and particularly the buffer between Greenbrier and this project. He also thanked the Board for all that they do. Joe Hickey, 147 Greenbriar, stated he lives by the 10 foot buffer and he wants an engineer to determine that their basements are not going to be flooded, and he is concerned about snowplowing and where the snow is going to be put. He said the road elevation will be higher than his back yard and the water will have nowhere to go but his yard. He said there are lots of basements with water issues as it is, and it is not designed well for snow removal and they will have snow drifts in the buffer. Lucy Rude, 141 Greenbrier, stated she went to the first meeting at the Hampton Inn, and that her concern is being able to look at the mountains; you can't stop development, but you should be able to tell you are in Montana. She said Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special meeting of June 21, 2005 Page 16 of 20 the developer told her that she would still be able to see the mountains when this is developed and that this is an awfully big development for nine acres; it will be crowded and traffic will be bad. Coral File's daughter wanted to know what they are going to do when this property floods and to develop it with that in mind. Deanna Schroeder, 486 Two Mile Drive, manages the five apartment buildings on Two Mile, and said that they have a lawn that stays wet in the spring, and they have plumbing problems in the spring. She asked what the setback on Spring Creek is, and said she had traffic concerns. She agreed that we need some elbow room and we should not be compromised by money and development. Pastor Dawn Shure stated her crawlspace bas already had water in it, and if she is getting water now, the water will run into her house if this gets developed and she finds that distressing. Kathy Britton, 490 Two Mile Drive, stated that all of Greenbriar is on a significant slope, and all the water will drain down the slope. She asked how well the retention ponds will work in the winter with snow cover when the snow melts and stated it looks like a problem to her. She said the developers have been great to work with to mitigate their concerns, and a road through to Two Mile, which has no sidewalks or shoulders, would be disastrous and would feed people out on a blind curve. Joe Hickey, 147 Greenbriar Drive, stated that he would like sidewalks and a shoulder for the emergency access road. Marilyn Gartner, 518 Corporate Drive, stated she is taking the 55 Alive Driving class and was asked to draw a picture of what her worst traffic area was, and she drew the intersection. of Corporate Drive and Highway 2. She said that something should be done about that intersection and it is a bad place. Markie Sable, 153 Greenbriar, stated she is concerned about stagnant water and what health problems it could bring on. Bill Rice, 155 Bast Nicholas, stated that the Master Plan would allow a higher density with this project, and they wanted to do something a little different; they want to get away from all of the garages facing the street, and want some community interaction. He said there will be 16 feet between the back of the curb and the property line, and the water will , be handled by engineers. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special ineeting of Rine 21, 2W5 Page 17 of 20 Janet Elliot, 145 Greenbriar, stated that she moved from one area because townhouses were being built there, and now they are building townhouses by this house. She said she would also lose her back yard because of the road. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Taylor moved and Schutt seconded to adopt Staff Report KPUD-05-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that a Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 8.97 acres zoned RA-1 be approved subject to the listed conditions. DISCUSSION Taylor stated that he is very concerned with the water problem and that we have not heard any answers as to how it can be abated. He said there is more work that has to be done with the water, and as for the density, he is not sure we are violating the Growth Policy. He said the design is inviting, it is different and could work, but looks rather squeezed when vnii lnnk r 1ncc-ly- it all ri(-ni-.nrls; nn thr- flnnrl nlnin is -,lit He said that the buffer zone ties into the water issue, and we will not have enough information until the water issue is resolved. Hull said he is not too concerned about the water issues because of the approvals the developers must go through, but he does have an issue with stopping 400 feet short of Two Mile Drive without a proper City road; at the minimum he wants to see a 60 foot public easement even if they don't build it, or at least 30 feet on the west side in case that is developed. He said the unfinished road is not good policy for the future. Taylor stated he is also bothered by that, and wants to see some attempt at a solution; there should be more than one point of ingress and egress. Schutt said a connecting road through this subdivision would be a terrible idea, and through traffic from Two Mile will be a detriment. He said he likes the design of the layout, and it is not a cookie cutter design. He asked Wilson if it will be hooked up to the City storm water system. Wilson said there is no system, and storm water will need to be handled on site. She said an engineer would submit a plan to Public Works and they would review it. She said the current plan would have to be modified to a certain extent anyway because of the flood plain, but storm water can be channeled underground or through piping; that would come later after further analysis of the site. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special meeting of tune 21, 2005 Page 18 of 20 Hinchey stated he feels a connector to Two Mile Drive is really important, and there may be ways to mitigate the through traffic. He said that Hull had the right idea to at least keep the option open for a future connection, and some comments tonight are beyond our scope to do anything about. He said he feels the layout is very dense even at the low end, and he would rather see a couple less units, but he commended the developers on their design. He said he is also concerned with the water retention. Taylor also commended the developer and said it is an ingenious design and will serve its purpose; it is not cookie cutter, but we are sitting here tonight with not enough information. He stated he would like more answers and feels uneasy about passing this along to the City Council. Albert stated that he also has a water issue because he lives close to the area, and it will be a big concern unless there are alternatives on how to handle the water situation. Norton also commended the develo-oer for the cluster development, and said he has no problem with the density; it does meet the guidelines in the Growth Policy, which is a living document and not every parcel is suited for that use. He said the developers are pushing the envelope with this design, and if they took it back and redesigned it then brought it back, it would be a good plan. He said he also shares the concerns with the storm water and road interconnectedness. He said the developers should look at the issues raised tonight and come up with a different design. MOTION I Norton moved and Taylor seconded to table the request. FURTHER DISCUSSION f Schutt asked which questions we are requesting answers on. Taylor answered the density issue, engineer the storm water drainage, viability of a 30 foot easement from the adjoining property with a 60 foot easement from there, and the possibility of eliminating the westerly road approach and the floodplalin. Schutt stated that a road going straight through this subdivision will be a detriment to this neighborhood, even though we do want a grid street system. Hull stated that there will be further development along Corporate Drive, and he wants to see a grid system with impediments other than speed bumps. Norton said the bypass would eliminate a lot of through traffic. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the special meeting of June 21, 2005 Page 19 of 20 Taylor said we are not disapproving the project if we vote to table, but we are sending the message that we like the project but there is work that needs to be done before it is forwarded on. ROLL CALL The motion to table passed 5-1 on a roll call vote with Gabriel absent. OLD BUSINESS Norton stated that annual officer elections are coming up. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:30 p.m, The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, July 12, 2005. George Taylor President Judi Funk Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: J /05 Kalispell City Planting Board Minutes of the special meeting of June 21, 2005 Page 20 of 20 AMENDED WEST WOOD PARK PUD KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #KPUD-05-4A JULY 6, 2005 An amended report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay on property zoned RA- 1. A public hearing held before the Kalispell City Planning Board for on June 21, 2005 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: This is a request for a PUD to allow the development of a residential subdivision in the city of Kalispell that would allow some flexibility in setbacks, lot coverage and lot size. A. Petitioner and Owners: Bill Rice West Wood Partnership 5733 Hwy 93 South Whitefish, MT 59937 (406) 863-9925 Craig and Connie Denman 5733 Hwy 93 South Whitefish, MT 59937 (406) 863-9925 Technical Assistance: TKP Partnership 1509 Washington Ave Golden., CO 80401 (303) 278-8840 B. Nature of the Request: This is a request for a Planned Unit Development zoning overlay on property zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. The PUD will be known as West Wood Park and proposes 33 32 dwelling units on approximately 8.97 acres. The development consists of a mix of one family, two family and three family dwellings that would be developed as townhouses for individual ownership. The proposed plan departs from zoning in that there is open space within the subdivision, and smaller lot sizes within, a building area. Setbacks have been reduced in some cases to allow a different configuration of some of the buildings with an attempt at providing a side access so that garages do not face the street. The lots located in the center of the development will back up to a central open space that has been provided. A loop roadway will serve the lots in the subdivision that is a northern extension of an. existing City street, Corporate Drive. Secondary emergency access is being provided via a 20 foot wide paved driveway to the east that would upgraded and extended to Coo er Lane a City street. A bike and pedestrian path would be developed to the north that exits onto Two Mile Drive. Spring Creek creates the eastern boundary of this property where there is significant 100 year floodplain and some floodway. The PUD allows the creation of the three unit townhouses without having to go through the conditional use permit which would be t required in the RA-1 zoning district for multi -family dwellings. Additionally, the concept of open space areas between the lots with a reduction in actual lot size is feasible under the planned unit development mechanism. C. Location and Legal. Description of Property: The property is located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between Two Male Drive and Hwy 2 West. A request for preliminary plat approval of Westwood Park Subdivision has been filed concurrently with the PUD request. The property can be described as Assessors Tracts 2CK, 2CH and 2CE located in Section 12, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. D. Existing Land Use and Zoning: The site is currently occupied by a single family dwelling which will be kept and conveyed separately and not a part of this development. Otherwise, the property is undeveloped. The zoning for the property is RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. This zoning district has a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet and allows single family homes and duplexes as permitted uses. Multi -family dwellings are listed as a conditionally permitted use in the district with an allowable density of one dwelling per 3,000 square feet. The setbacks in the RA-1 zoning district are 20 feet in the front, rear and side corner and 10 feet on the sides. With the PUD process, consideration can be given in reducing the setbacks in order to gain better design. E. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: North: Single family residential, County R-1 zoning South: Multi -family, offices and retail, City B-3 and RA-1 zoning East: Multi -family and floodplain, RA-1 zoning West: Single family residential, County R-1 and City R-4 zoning F. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of this area is a mix of high density residential to the northwest and southwest, cornmercial to the south and west and single family to the west. It lies in a transition area between the rural and urban areas of west Kalispell. G. Utilities and Public Services: Sewer: City of Kalispell Water: City of Kalispell Refuse: City of Kalispell Electricity: Flathead Electric Cooperative Telephone: CenturyTel Schools: School District #5 Fire: Kalispell Fire Department Police: City of Kalispell H. Relation to Zoning Requirements: The applicants are proposing a PUD which would 2 EVALUATION OF PROPOSED PUD OVERLAY The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M.C.A. and the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A and Section 27.30.020, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. 1. Does the requested zone coMly with the Master Plan? The Kalispell City Master Plan map designates this property as High Density Residential. The existing RA-1, Residential Apartment, complies with the land use designation of the growth policy. The density under this land use designation anticipates three to 12 dwelling units per acre. As proposed the development has a density of approximately 3-.47 3.56 dwellings per acre. 2, is the reguested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? The development is proposed to be served from the extension of an existing City street, Corporate Drive to the south_ This roadway will be extended into the subdivision that will form an internal loop road. Secondary access is proposed via a 20 foot wide paved emergency access to the nar-th that wiJ4 ev: ante q4ve n,r<�o Dfive east that will exit onto Coo er Lane a City street. Secondary access would be limited to emergency vehicles only while Corporate Drive would function as the primary access road. Corporate Drive connects with Highway 2 West to the south. Corporate Drive is a fairly new City street that has been developed within the last 10 years and is in good condition.. Hwy 2 West is a federal highway that is maintained by the state and is also in generally good condition. This subdivision will generate limited additional traffic onto Hwy 2 and onto Corporate Drive but additional traffic would not be in excess of levels that are anticipated or beyond the capacity of the roadways that will serve the subdivision. The subdivision will not create congestion in the streets or roads in the area. 3. Will the requested zone secure safety from firepanic, and other dangers? Adequate access and public facilities are available to the site in the case of an emergency. There are no features related to the property which would compromise the safety of the public provided that a detailed flood plain study is completed, all structures are located out of the floodplain areas and all appropriate permitting is adhered to. New construction will be required to be in compliance with the building safety codes of the City which relate to fine and building safety. All municipal services including police and fire protection (including hydrants), water and sewer service is available to the area and will be extended as part of the development of this property. 4. Will the requested zone romote the health and general welfare? The requested zoning classification will promote the health and general welfare by restricting land uses to those that would be compatible with the adjoining properties and providing a place for new housing in the community. 3 5. Will the requested zone rovide for ade uate light and air? Setback, height, and coverage standards for development occurring on this site are established in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to insure adequate light and air is provided. The planned unit development is not proposing a deviation from the zoning in a way that would comprise the development standards of the RA- l zoning district which is intended to address the appropriate size, location and intensity of development. 6. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land? This area is designated as being within the Kalispell Potential Utility Service Boundary in the Kalispell Growth Policy and is anticipated for high density residential development. With public water and sewer in close proximity to the site along with other similar development in the area, the development as proposed is generally appropriate for this site. All public services and facilities will be available to serve this subdivision.. Currently this property is in the City and is zoned RA-1, a district that anticipates a relatively high density in relation to other residential zoning districts_ The density of approximately 3.7 dwellings per acres should not result in the overcrowding of land or exceed the density anticipated in this area. 7. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people? The anticipated density for this property was established over a decade ago with the existing RA-1 zoning designation as well as the High Density Residential land use designation of the growth policy and previously adopted Kalispell City -County Master Plan. There are other similar developments in the immediate area along with a mix of commercial. This is generally an evolving urban environment where relatively high levels of development and use are anticipated. Because these are anticipated, this would no result in an undue concentration of people. S. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? All public services and facilities are currently available or can be provided to the property. Development should be encouraged in areas where these services are available. The adequate provision of all urban and public services are available to this side. 9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the articular suitability of the property for particular uses? The existing RA-1 zoning designation for this property is consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area and gives due consideration of the suitability of this property for the permitted uses in the district. 10, Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The general character of the area is a mix of multi -family, commercial, offices and single family residential. The urban sized lots for residential development on City 4 sewer is anticipated and has taken place in close proximity to this site. The same type and density of development can be anticipated to occur on this property that currently exists in the area and the proposed development will be consistent with the character of the neighborhood_ 11. Will the ro osed zone conserve the value of buildings? Values of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the RA-1 zoning and PUD will promote compatible uses on this property with other properties in the area. 12. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the municipality? Urban scale residential development should be encouraged in areas were services and facilities are available such as is being proposed on this parcel. The proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use designations for the area and surrounding zoning in the area. EVALUATION OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: Project Narrative: West Wood Park is a residential planned unit development proposed on property currently in the city of Kalispell with a zoning designation of RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. The property is located north of Highway 2 West at the northern terminus of Corporate Drive. The applicants are proposing a total of 33 32 dwelling units on approximately 9 acres that would be a mix of 3 unit townhouses and 2 unit townhouses and side family dwellings. Specifically, three would be -a 4 three unit townhouses (4-5 12 dwellings) and 8 10 two unit. townhouses (44 20 dwellings) and The overall density of the development is approximately 3.56 dwellings per acre. The units would range in size from approximately 11500 to 2100 square feet and each would have a two car garage. The developer intends to complete the construction of the homes rather that to sell the lots to independent contractors. The property is zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, which has a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet for the first duplex and an additional 3,000 square feet for each dwelling beyond a duplex. Multi -family dwellings are listed as a conditionally permitted use in the RA-1 district. The use of the PUD will not only allow the developer to create the three unit townhouses via a PUD rather than a conditional use permit; but will also provide some flexibility in the lot layout within the subdivision., setbacks and lot coverage. The setbacks for the RA-1 zone are 20 feet in the front, rear and side comer and 10 feet on the sides. The developers are proposing a reduction in setbacks to varying degrees throughout the subdivision; in some situations to compensate for the configuration of lot boundaries that are contiguous to open space area and in others to allow for more flexibility in locating garages and access to the dwellings. Details regarding the reduction in setbacks will be discussed more thoroughly later in this report. It is anticipated this development would occur in a single phase that would involve the extension of Corporate Drive to the south as well as the extension of water and sewer 9 within the site to serve the development. A secondary emergency access is proposed to the north between the loop road and Two Mile Drive. This secondary emergency access would be a 20 foot paved roadway that would also function as a bike and pedestrian path for the development. Access to this roadway would be blocked using bollards or some other means acceptable to the fire department. There is a significant amount of the property that is designated as being within, the 100 year floodplain with Ashley Creek forming the eastern boundary of this property. The base flood elevation has been established in this area as being 2963. Portions of the internal roadway as well as the secondary access road have been shown to be located in the 100 year floodplain and possibly the floodway. These are issues that will be further addressed later in this report. Common areas are indicated on the preliminary plat near the center of the development and at the southeast corner of the development. The open area near the center of the development is intended to be developed as an amenity to the lots that would back up to it and it is planned to have pedestrian access through this common area that connects to other parts of the development. The common area in the southeast corner of the site is largely located in the 100 year floodplain and could be developed as a small park area as well as being used as part of a stormwater management plan. There is additional common area that surrounds some of the lots as well as a common area that extends to the north to Two Mile Drive where the bike, pedestrian and emergency access road is proposed. All of the common areas would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Criteria for the Creation of a Planned Unit Develoument IPUDI District Trio fnilnsxrina information nnri r-Nrnh ntinn r,rifarin arr frnxn CPr-tine 97 r7l fi7Ci(r31 of tl� Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The intent of the planned unit development provisions are to provide a zoning district classification which allows some flexibility in the zoning regulations and the mixing of uses which is balanced with the goal of preserving and enhancing the integrity of the neighborhood and the environmental values of an area. The zoning ordinance has a provision for the creation of a PUD district upon annexation 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: 1. The extent to which the plan departs from zoning and subdivision regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to, density, bulk and use, and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest; The planned unit development does not deviate from the zoning with regard to use, but deviates from the zoning primarily with regard to setbacks. Single family, two family and multi -family dwellings are anticipated in the RA-1 zoning district. Multi -family dwellings are listed as a conditionally permitted use which would typically require the granting of a conditional use permit for the three unit townhouses. The PUD would eliminate the need for acquiring a conditional use permit since all of the relevant information related to location, building height and size area addressed under the PUD. Setbacks in the RA- 6 I zoning are 20 feet in the front, rear and side corner and 10 feet on the sides. As proposed, the setbacks have been reduced in some instances, but to a certain extent this is a result of the manner in which the lots of been configured within the subdivision. If the setbacks are taken from the external boundaries of the property rather the from the internal lot boundaries, there is no apparent deviation from the 20 foot rear yard setback. There is a deviation from the front vard setbacks from 20 feet on some of the lots. The 20 foot front yard setback is intended to provide a parking area in front of a garage without the vehicle extending into the right of way. As is being proposed with this development, in most instances the deviation from. the 20 foot front yard setback is not problematic because the garages and associated parking area are accommodated elsewhere on the property and a vehicle can be parked in front of a garage without extending into the right of way. However, in a few instances the issue of providing an adequate parking space in front of the garage is present. As indicated on the site plan, the location of some of the townhouses and associated garages will need to be modified in order to accommodate a 20 foot setback in front of the garage. Specifically the lots that would need to be moved further from the edge of right of way are: Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 29. Minor modifications to the siting of the units will fully address this issue. Side yard setbacks are 10 feet in the RA-1 zoning district which ultimately results in a minimum of 20 feet between the buildings. As proposed there is a deviation from the 10 foot side yard setbacks with some of the proposed buildings_ In some instances the deviation from the 10 foot setback requirement are a result of the manner in which the lots have been configured which still results in a 20 foot separation between buildings. But in a couple of the deviation from the side yard setbacks is real with a separation between the buildings of less than 20 feet. Specifically the reduction in setbacks occurs between proposed Lots 23 and 24 and Lots 16 and 17. There is also a deviation from the 20 foot side corner setback that are again more a matter of the manner in which the lots have been configured with open space between the lot and edge of right of way with the exception of Lot 33 which is proposed to be within five feet of the right of way. All of the lots within the subdivision comply with the rninimum lot size standards for the creation of sublot. There is not deviation from the 35 foot height limit with the buildings proposed to be a mix of one an two story dwellings. There are no deviations from the subdivision regulations. 2. The nature and extent of the common open space in the planned development project, the reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of the common open space and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan; Open space is defined in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance as "Any part of a lot unobstructed from the ground upward. Any area used for parking or maneuvering of automotive vehicles or storage of equipment or refuse shall not be deemed open space." However, on a practical basis open space is much more than simply the undeveloped land around a building that could mean the setback areas. Common area is indicated on the park in several Locations within the subdivision. There is a common area at the entrance of the subdivision that will generally function as an entrance to the subdivision. 7 and for a subdivision sign. Another common area is located near the southeast corner of the site that is located in the 100 year floodplain that has the potential for development as a pseudo park and storm water management area. A common area is also located to the north where the bike, pedestrian and emergency access road is located and around the buildings. The largest common area is located between the internal block of lots that has been proposed with a meandering sidewalk and those lots will back up against this common area. Common areas are also located within the subdivision around some of the lots. All of the common areas would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. The developer will be responsible for developing amenities within the common area that is also being proposed to meet the parkland dedication requirements of the subdivision regulations. Amenities that should be developed within the primarily common area would include the proposed sidewalk, picnic area and other appropriate amenities so that the common areas actually provide a recreational amenity to the subdivision.. The homeowners association would be responsible for the maintenance of the common area and open space once the subdivision is developed. Covenants, conditions and restrictions will be required to be submitted with the final plat that addresses the conservation and maintenance of the park and open space areas. If properly developed and maintained it appears that the proposed park and open space areas will provide adequate useable park and open space area for the subdivision with easy access by the residents. 3. The manner in which said plan does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic and further the amenities of light or air, recreation and visual enjoyment; The extension of public road, water and sewer to the site will be required to serve the subdivision. Most of the public utilities will come from existing utilities in the immediate area. Corporate Drive will be extended to provide a loop road within the subdivision and secondary access to the north. The developer will be required. to develop the utilities in accordance with the Kalispell. Standards for Design and Construction. Additionally, the new roadways to be constructed within the subdivision indicated on the overall development plan will be constructed to City standards. Access to the subdivision is generally good with Corporate Drive being a fairly new City street which is adequate to accommodate additional traffic generated from this subdivision. The proposed secondary emergency access to the north -A411 @Jso double as a bike a, pedestrian tfail that �A4H b Mile —Priv—appredmatA fec� leag to the east will extend along the southeast boundary of the property to an exiting paved drivewav and connect with Cooper Lane a Citv street. Some improvements will need to be made to the secondga access road to bring it up to an acceptable standards.. In conjunction with the secondary emergency access , there will need to be a crossing over the creek and 100 year floodplain in order to build this road. In order to develop a crossing over the creek the developer will be required to obtain a floodplain development permit from the City of Kalispell and a 310 permit from the Flathead Conservation. District. Additionally, there are sections of the internal roadways that are located in the 100 year floodplain and perhaps the floodway. This is could be problematic because it will require filling the 100 year floodplain in order raise it two feet above base flood elevation.. The necessity to fall the floodplain for these roadways appears to be a matter of design rather than necessity and the staff would recommend the shifting of the roads and bike path to the west to avoid the need to fill the floodplain. This may result in the reconfiguration of W the lots and perhaps the lots of one or more lots in the subdivision. The design of housing types and lot sizes are a townhouses in a two and three unit configuration . Speck elements of the architecture have been submitted with the PUD application in the form of drawings and elevations. The narrative also describes the elements as the exterior style being a slightly rustic theme utilizing artificial stone, subtle timber details and vertical wood siding. Colors would be natural, weathered earth tones with colored accents and metal roofs. The housing would be a mix of single and two story dwellings and would generally be between 1500 and 2100 square feet. The setbacks from the external property boundaries, public rights of way and between the buildings generally meet the intent of the zoning and would provide adequate light and air within the development. Storm water management will be required to be handled and retained on site and a portion of the 100 year floodplain could assist in accommodating stormwater management issues_ No detailed plan for handling drainage has been submitted with the application and would not be required at this time, but as the project develops an engineered drainage plan will need to be designed in accordance with City standards and will be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department. Parkland dedication is proposed to be addressed through the development of the common areas within the subdivision that are primarily located near the center of the site and in the southeast corner of the site as well as extending to the north with the development of the bike, and pedestrian plan /.secondary emergency access. These common areas will need to be developed with recreational amenities and landscaping in order to create a park like environment and to be considered to comply with the parkland dedication requirements of the subdivision regulations. Passive open space doesn't meet parkland dedication requirements but will need to be adequately maintained by the homeowners association in a weed free state. It is the intent of the developers to provide maintenance of the common areas and the areas around the dwellings in order to provide a consistent, high -quality level of maintenance for the entire project. 4. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established; This neighborhood is a mix of uses with multi. -family dwellings located to the south and northeast of this site. There is a single-family subdivision to the west and commercial development to the east and to the south. The overall design of the PUD and future development for this subdivision has created a mix of housing types and an integrated park and open space component. As proposed it appears to be a well -integrated design with the exception of the location of some of the roadways and bike path / emergency access in the 100 year floodplain. The area to the south and this area in general have been slow to develop over the last several years while other areas of the city have experienced more rapid urban growth and expansion. There are several urban scale developments in the immediate neighborhood, some of which have been in place for many years. Specifically, there is an apartment complex to the northeast on the east side of Ashley Creek, Greenbriar Subdivision to the west and the senior apartments to the south. The urban densities such as those being proposed are more in keeping with the type of development anticipated in the area because of the close proximity of the area to services. The density being proposed is in keeping with the neighborhood in 9 which it is located, the uses anticipated for the site and the densities allowed under the RA-1 zoning and the growth policy for the area. The staff is recommending some screening and to buffer the residences to the west from the development being proposed since a roadway will adjoin the back yards of the homes in the eastern portion of Greenbriar Subdivision. S. In the case of a plan which proposes development over a period of years, the sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect and maintain the integrity of the plan which finding shall be made only after consultation with the city attorney; The developers are anticipating that the project would be completed in a single phase with the building taking place in to or more years depending on the market conditions. Part of the requirements of 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. 6. Conformity with all applicable provisions of this chapter. No other speck deviations from the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance can be identified based upon the informnafiion submitted with the application other than those addressed in the beginning of this report. The staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-05-4A as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 PUD as approved by the city council. (Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Appendix C — Final Plat) 2. That the plans and specifications for all public infrastructure be designed and in accordance with Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction Standards and a letter shall be obtained stating that they have been reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 3, Design Standards, Section 3.01). 3. A letter shall be submitted with the final plat from an engineer licensed in the state of Montana certifying the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. As built drawings shall be submitted to the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to final plat submittal for the completed infrastructure. A letter from the public works department shall accompany the engineer's certification stating that this condition has been met or otherwise adequately addressed (Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Chapter 3, Design Standards, Section 3.01) wo 4. An engineered stormwater management plan shall be developed_ which utilizes on site retention methods and insures that adjoining ro erties will not be impacted b stormwater runoff, snow melt or surface water. 5. Front yard setbacks for the townhouses that have garage access directly along the right of way shall be setback a minimum of 2.0 feet to insure that all vehicle parking is outside the public right of way. This would not apply to townhouses that have some other provision for handling access and on site parking. (Site Development Review Committee) 6. A minimum 20 foot rear setback shaE be maintained between the buildings and the exterior boundaries of the subdivision. 7. That covenants, conditions, acid restrictions for the subdivision shall be provided that include a provision for the private conservation and maintenance of common areas as well as compliance with the approved planned unit development elevation drawings, treatments and other architectural elements. S. A note on the face of the final plat shall be provided for the pro-rata share of ownership of the common area for taxation purposes. 9. Townhouse lots within the subdivision shall be identified by a lot number and letter such as Lot 1A, 1B or 1C rather than being numbered sequentially as shown on the preliminary plat. 10. That permits be obtained from the Flathead Conservation District, Montana Department of Natural Resources and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for work done along the creek channel or a letter from those agencies stating that the scope of work does not require permitting. (FCCD / DNRC) 11. That a minimum 10-foot buffer shall be established between the western internal roadway and Green.briar Subdivision to provide screening and buffering between the road and these houses. This shall be in the form of berming, fencing or landscaping or a combination thereof. These improvements are to be coordinated with the Kalispell Public Works Department, the Parks and Recreation Department and the homeowners in Greenbriar Subdivision to the west. 12. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.20). a. Water mains designed to provide minimum fire flows shall be installed per City spec if 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 shalll be provided in accordance with International Fire Code (2003) Chapter 5. d. Secondary emergency vehicle access shall be provided in accordance with International Fire Code (2003) Chapter 5 and Kalispell Subdivision Regulations. e. It should be noted that hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-5. 11 f. Street naming shallbe approved by the fire department. 13. That a letter be obtained from the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the five foot landscape boulevard developed between the curb and the sidewalk. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section. 3.11). 14. That the areas designated on the plat as common shall meet the requirements for parkland dedication: provided they are developed in accordance with a plan approved by the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Director that provides recreational amenities including but not limited to pedestrian access, irrigation, landscaping and play equipment so as to provide a recreational component within the development and not simply left as passive open space. A letter shall be submitted with the final plat stating that the common areas have been developed in accordance with the approved park development plan. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.19). 15. That a detailed flood study be completed determining the exact location of the floodway. No fill, development or other disturbance of soil or vegetation shall be allowed within the floodway. The location of the roadways and bike path / secondary emergency access shall be relocated so that no fill, development or disturbance of vegetation occurs in the 100 year floodplain unless otherwise absolutely required. Any work, development or fill in the 100 year floodplain shall be kept to a minimum and shall be directly related to providing secondary emergency access for the subdivision of the north approximately 400 feet of the bike /and pedestrian path / emergency access road. It is anticipated that this may result in the reconfiguration and / or loss of lots within the subdivision. 16. A floodplain development permit shall be obtained from the Kalispell Floodplain Administrator for any limited but necessary work to be performed within the 100 year floodplain. 17. 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. (Kalispell Subdivision. Regulations, Section 3.09). 18. That a note be placed on the face of the final plat that waives protest to the creation of a special improvement district for the upgrade of roads in the area to City standards which may be impacted by this development. 19. That a letter be obtained from Flathead County Road Department stating that the proposed accesses onto Two Mile Drive has been reviewed and approved and any associated and necessary improvements have been satisfactorily completed. 20. 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)- 12 21. 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. 22. The developer shall provide a letter from the U.S. Postal Service approving the plan for mail service. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.22). 23. Street lighting shall be located within the subdivision and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations Section 3.09(L)). 24. All utilities shall be installed underground. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.17). 25. That a minimum of two-thirds of the necessary infrastructure for this subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal. 26. All areas disturbed during development of the subdivision shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 27. That a development agreement be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney betixreen 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 unposed, shall constitute the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning for the site. 28. That preliminary plat approval for the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 2.04). NW 13 0; fi r n t- TZ "I-,* c-e �r-� I'll 1 %. Ly Vi iNa-11opt,11 Planning Department 17 Second Street East, Suite 2 11 Kalispell. Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 75I-1850 Fax.: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.coin MEMORANDUM TO: Kalispell City Planning Board and zoning Commission FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner DATE. July 6, 2005 RE: Westwood Park PUD / Preliminary Plat BACKGROUND: At their special meeting of June 21, 2005 the Kalispell City Planning Board held a public hearing and considered substantial testimony regarding the planned unit development and preliminary plat for Westwood Park Subdivision. The property is located at the northern terminus of Corporate Drive, south of Two Mile ]give and immediately east of Greenbriar Subdivision. It contains approximately nine acres and is bordered on the east by Spring Creek. The request is for preliminary plat approval of a residential subdivision with a Planned Unit Development zoning overlay on property zoned RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. This subdivision included 33 dwelling units on approximately 8.97 acres that would be comprised of a mix of one family, two family and three family dwellings that would be developed as townhouses for individual ownership. A loop roadway will serve the lots in the subdivision that is a northern extension of an existing City street, Corporate Drive. The planning board unanimously continued the project and identified several issues of concern they wanted the developer to attempt to address. Those were as follows: • Density • Floodplain • Stormwater and surface water • Primary and secondary access issues On Monday June 27, 2005 a meeting was held at the home of Pastor Dawn Shur whose property is along the west boundary of the subdivision. In attendance were approximately 12 or 13 property owners from Greenbriax Subdivision, the developers, their engineers and me. It was a very positive and productive meeting. The neighbors were concerned about the two three unit townhouses that were on the west side of the property. The developer amended their plans by creating one three unit townhouse and two two unit townhouses rather than two three unit townhouses Westwood Park Subdivision Memo July 6, 2005 Page 2 and one single family dwelling. This resulted in a greater separation between the buildings. Additionally, one of the dwellings was eliminated along the east portion of the site as a result of the reconfiguration of the roadway and removing it from the 100 year floodplain. The neighbors were also concerned about stormwater management and groundwater levels and wanted assurances that their homes and property would not be compromised by stormwater from the project. The engineers and developers explained their plans for managing the stormwater and gave the neighbors the results of groundwater level testing that was done. That information is included with the amended staff report. The conclusions of the report were that some areas had clay soils on the surface that prevented the easy absorption of surface water into the trrnrti r� T7'i erg <rrntnr�tu�+ar mac nni- -nrar�1A�t in i-l�a �rrao nre r7 +ho ,�,-n'F-.l or,-c �, �i v µ1su. s il�aa � v..aaau rr ue.41 rr uv uv.. ;./i 4 r .. • ...ai.. ua t1i4 a.{,a, 44 �i.l.\.A 4i1. YfA V ,J11.1114J VJr perceived problems with water in basements or standing water was a result of surface water, not groundwater. A detailed, engineered storm, water management plan will be fully developed, but in essence, the stormwater would be collected in several areas within the site and piped to one or more retention areas within the development. In looking at access within the site, some of the neighbors initially had concerns about the location of the road along the east boundary of their property. However, a vote was taken and it was generally unanimous that a nice vinyl fence and landscaping would be the preferred alternative to backing up the rear yards of the lots. The neighbors felt that by moving the buildings away from their property there -would be less impact to their with regard to obstructing their views, noise and density. Secondary access to the site was relocated from the north to the east via an existing paved driveway. The relocation of the secondary emergency access alleviates the problems the neighbors to the north had about potential flooding of their property if the roadway were elevated as well as concerns about resizing and replacing the existing culvert. Additionally, the relocated access to the east appears to require less fill in the floodplain to improve the road to secondary access standards. The issue of providing an access or easement to the north was strongly opposed by both the neighbors and the developers. It was felt that there were inherent problems with the location related to sight distance, floodplain, neighborhood integrity and non - local traffic. That easement was not placed on the revised preliminary plat and PUD plans. At the conclusion of our approximately two hour meeting, the neighbors felt very satisfied that their concerns were fully addressed. The developers felt that their project design was improved as a result of conferencing with the neighbors and the staff felt that the planning board's concerns had been fully addressed. Westwood Parr Subdivision Memo July 7, 2005 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Two motions would be in order: • A motion to adopt staff report KPUD-05-04A as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the planned snit development for Westwood Park be approved subject to conditions would be in order. A motion to adopt staff report KPP-05-11A as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Westwood Park Subdivision be approved subject to conditions would be in order. REPORTSIKPPI2005AVESTWOODMEMO.DOC July 12, 2005 The definition of a PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) as stated in the City of Kalispell Subdivision Regulations is as follows: "A tract of land developed as an integrated unit. The development is unique and is based on a plan which allows for "flexibility of use," design, setting and density not otherwise possible under the prevailing regulations. This is our response to Conditions of Approval to Staff Report #KPUD-05-4A and #KPP-05-11A Conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4 as stated. Condition 5. We would like to read as follows: "Front yard setbacks from the townhouses that have garage access directly along the ricrht of wav shall insure a minimum distance of 20 feet between the garage and the sidewalk and would apply to Lots 11, 12 and 13. This would not apply to townhouses that have some other provision for handling access and on site parking." Conditions 6, 7, and 8 as stated. Condition 9. The City of Kalispell Subdivision Regulations states in Appendix A, Section 1, D. "That all lots and blocks designated by numbers," Although the Townhouses house two or three units they are considered individual lots and encompass more than just the area of the building. We feel that it would be less confusing by designating each lot by number rather than by building and then unit. We would like to see condition 9 as follows: "Lots within the subdivision shall be identified by sequential numbers as shown on the Preliminary Plat." Conditions 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 as stated. IP14oa_755.3208 (F)406.755.321 3 PO Elox i 1 34 -3 d30 3"A AVE E SUITE 302, KALISPELL, MT. 599 a 1 Condition 15. We would like this condition to read as follows: "That a detailed flood study be completed to determine if a floodway exists. The Location of the roadways and secondary emergency access shall be .located so that minimal fill, development or disturbance of vegetation (by Permit) occurs in the 100 year floodplain unless absolutely required. That a gravel pedestrian/nature walkway be allowed along the west bank of Spring Creek as shown on the Preliminary Plat and within the 100 year floodplain." Conditions 16, and 18 as stated. Condition 17 is a repeat of Condition. 20 and should be removed. Condition 19 should be eliminated as the emergency access does not directly access onto Two Mile Drive. Conditions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28 as stated. EP14O&,7s5.32C19 (F)406.755.321 8 pa sox 1 34 -1 820 3" AVE £ SuiTt 302, KALISPELL,MT.59901 BILLMAYER ENGINEERING July 1, 2005 Thor Jackola Jackola Engineering & Architecture, PC 1830 Third Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: i7EraclExvnnl Pnrlr CiOiAjv� cinn Praliminartf Pl1 t TiON? 1 WIA,; pdit' ..� . _ ... ....u. .,, ..... .� , ..� ,.....Ron Dear Mr. Jackola, As requested, we have reviewed the preliminary plat of Westwood Park Subdivision with respect to potential impacts on the floodplain as a result of minor fill associated with Lots 5, 6 and 14. The 100-year flood boundary of West Spring Creek between US Highway 2 West and 2 Mile Drive is a backwater caused by the culvert geometry under US Highway 2. During a 100-year flood event backwater creates the upstream flooded zone as the result of headwater stacking at the US 2 culvert. The upstream driveways and culverts are inundated because of the hydraulic capacity of the Highway 2 crossing. Minor fills within the flood pool that defines the floodplain boundary will have no effect on the flood elevations upstream of the fill placement. The proposed fill on these Iots is very minor in nature (less than 200 cubic yards), and will not change the flood elevations. Based upon this initial assessment, it is my opinion that a FEMA Letter of Map Revision (LMOR) is very feasible and would be typically released by FEMA upon submittal of the appropriate forms and application fees. We remain available to assist with any questions or concerns that may come up during the subdivision review and development process. Sincerely, BILLMAYER ENGINEERING J. Jay Billmayer, P.E. CC: Job File T26.2 2191 Third Avenue East • P.O. Box 1139 - Kalispell, Montana 59903-1139 • (406) 257-8707 - FAX (406) 257-8710 PROJECT TITLE PROJECT NUMBER DATE,°_— �0 REGARDING r PO Box 1134, Kalispell, MT 59903 twnrl 7rr 4*2nO . V-- lAnSi 0 --w delft -Dy: Hf- LaserJet 07003 1400701t3t300)— Jun-27-05 4:32PM; flage Y LOG OF EXCAVATION TH-1 Page 1 of 1 " + M /\ PROJECT: Westwood Park LOCATION: As staked Kalispell, pall, Montana JOB NO,: SURFACE ELEVATION: 2959.0 BACKHOE Jahn Deere 120 Tracked Excavator GROUNDWATER DEPTH:Z None C7bserved USED: Z OPERATOR: D(.nman Construction DATE STARTED: 6/22/05 LOGGED BY: G Klein DATE COMPLETED: 6/22105 LABORATORY TEST DATA W a ��- MATERIAL CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION L, Organic Matter Silty CLAY, hrm to stiff, moist, low lasticit. with some: lean clay zones, darker organic m wtHor+l tia}�t hrnu�n (ri_AaL) qu>3.0 tsf (pocket penetrometer) 4. SK Lean CUkY stiff, moist, moderate plasticity, light brown (C;L) qua4.5 tsf (pocket penetrometer) Clayey Gravel with Sand, Cobblas, and Boulders, GLaciel Till, dense, moist, rsunded gavels. light grown f End of Test Bole @ TS` abandoned dice to utility conflict n a A P 4= a o Z$ c"I � =-.i.. �5 : t H<w� 'SAMPLE TYPE KEY: (Xl Sr .SAMPLE CC'NE FIELD DENSITY - _ REMARKS Installed PVC Observation Well I] NDFD-NUCLEAR DENSOMETER FIELD DENSITY ill ST -$HELnY rL]SE JQLK -LARGE SACK SAMPLE r% SK SACK SAMPLE Sent By, HP LaserJet 3100; 14067616655; Jun-27-05 4:33PM; Page 2 — fl QF EXCAVATION TM-2 t �� page 1 of 1 i%N J\ r wry a PROJECT: Westwood Park Kalispell, Montana LOCATION; As Staked pelf, c' Jb8 NU.: SURFACE ELEVATION: 2965.0 BACKHOE John Deere 120 Tracked Excavator GROUNDWATER DEPTH.V 9.5 6f22?05 USED, OPERATOR. Denman Construction DATE STARTED' 6122f05 LODGED BY; G. Klein DATE COMPLETM 6122105 I LABORATORY TEST DATA � z MATERIAL CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION �o TOPSOIL., Organic Matter I S I SILT, firm,, slightly moist, some plasticity, I light brown (ML) I Lean CLI%Y, very stiff, moist, laminated into ',;� 2" beds typical, blocky structure, light brown (CL) SK f Sic silty SA! D, loose to vary loose, very me to saturated, fine sand,. light brown (SM) 10 sides of test hole caving SK Clayey GRAVEL with Sand, Cobbles, and boulders, very dense, saturated. rounded / ravels, light brown (GC) ............. —�l End of Tost Hole as 12,5' i i I I f € I I i � E SAMPLE TYPE KEY; M SGFD-SAND CONE FIELD DENSITY REMARKS inStalted PVC Ob$ervatiOn Well LC NOFD- NUCLEAF DENS( MJt TFR'FIELD DENSITY Ill 5T • SHELBY TUBE IAI LSK -LARGE SACK SAMPLE 14 SK -SACK SAMPLE aenT -ay: HP La5e4"Jet 3100; 14OC17010000; July-27-05 4;norm; raise a/5 LOG OF EXCAVATION TH-3 (�^ page 1 of 1 sn F PROJECT, Westwood Park Kalispell, Montana LOCATION: As staked � J J08 NU.: SURFACE ELEVATION: 2967.0 anQ ar€vC �..AiFki L"acv� iLv 1 1c-:rueu r�XGaVBLQr GRDIJNOWATER pEPTH_Y 't3.3 6122/05 USED_ OPERATOR- Denman Corls&uction DATE STARTED: 6122/05 LOGGED BY' G. Klein DATE COMPLETED' 6/22/05 _ z m W �8 Q 1 10 15 LABORATORY TEST DATA MATERIAL � CLASSIFICATJON AND DESCRIPTION w ` 3 TOPSOIL., Omanic Maher' Lean CL#Y, hard, slightly moist, blocky, ruottled light brown (CL) < becoming more plastic with depth with occasional. -silt seams ell,/ 5J4 i E 'ltrf�e canri caam hdM+nminr� �rart� rr�r�ict qu=�.5_ tsf (pocket penetrometer) aecoming softer with depth no resistance to pocket penetrometer Q. � / SK considerable seepage __.. End of Test 'Hole @ 130 SAMPLE TYPE KEY: M SCFD-SANDCC7VE FIELD 4ENSITY REMARKS Installed PUG Observation Well ® NDr-D-NUCLF-AF DENSOMETER-rIELDDENSITY JI ST - 5HELBY TUSE Cl LSK -LARGE SiiCK SAMPLE © SK • SACK SAI,IPLE �enl my; mr t_aseruel uiuv; CILIZiZI 1jW1 - 4r_uu 1* - UW-M rage 41U L04 OF EXCAVATION TH-4 �A page I of 1 & PROJECT: Westwood Park LOCA71ON; As staked Kalispell, Montana JOB NO., SURFACE ELEVATION- 2966,0 BACKHOE John Deere 120 Tracked Excavator (' 1ROUNOWATER I)FPTH:V 12.3 6/23/06 USED; T OPERATC)FR! Dinrnan Constr'uctian DATE STARTED; 6123105 LOGGED BY; G Klein DATE COMPLETED: 6123/05 LABORATORY TEST DATA MATERIAL � CLASkIlIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION > 10 SK T, ii �J Sand, very stiff, slightly moist, fine sand, light brown (ML) I 8!(ty CLAY, very stiff, slightly moist, mottled with oxidized zones, light brown/pink (CL-ML) Lean CLAY, very stiff, slightly moist to moist, light brown (CL) - becoming soft, saturated, no resistance to, pocket penetrometer S114 SAND, loose to very loose, satun fine sand, light brown (SM) seepage with caving sidewails, End of Test Hole @ 15.91 SAMPLE TYPE KEY; I SCFD- SAND CONE FIELD DENSITY REMARKS installed PVC Observation Well LAd NDFD- NUCLEAF I)ENSOMETER FIELD DENSITY IFST -SHELBYTUBE WLSK -LARGE SACK SAMPLE LASK -SACK SAMPLE 3et)t BY; Hr Laserjet alooi 1400T01 0000 JUII-27-05 4;;34rMj rage 0/0 /A\ LOG OF EXcAvA-nON TH.5 page I of I A .... .. ..... PROJECT: JOB NO.; Viestwood Park Kalispell, Montana LOCATION: As staked SURFACE FLEVATI[ON, 2975.0 SACKHOE J jhn Deere 120 Tracked Excavator GROUNDWATER DEPTH,7 None Observed USED; OPERATOR- Eenmen Construction DATE STARTED: 6/23106 LOGGED BY: G. Klein DATE COMPLETED; 6/23105 16 MATERIAL CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL, Organic Matter g ,mmly-SIT, firm to stiff, sb­­ moist, htly occasiaral slit beds/nodules, fine sand, trace cobbles, light brown (ML) SK Loan CLAY, Soft, satuMted, light brown SK Clayey GRAVEL with and, Cobbles, and Boulder:, Glacial Till, dense, saturated, soft claggey binder, rounded: revels, light brown G G -ffi-7d —of Test Hole @ 14.9' LAE30RATORY TEST DATA m Z U r_z 22 z 'SAMFIX TYPE KEY; X SGFD- SAND CC NE FIELD DENSITY REMARKS Instafled PVC Observation Well U11 NDFD- NUGLEMI DENSOMETER. FIELD DENSITY IIUST -SHEL13Y--UBE JQLSK - LARGE SACK SAMPLE USK -SACK SAMPLE KAM City of Kalispell Planning Department 17 Second Street Fast, Suite 2 11 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website; kalispellplanning.com July 6, 2005 Dear Property Owners: You are being sent the attached agenda because you are a property owner within 150 feet of the proposed project noted below and will be most directly affected by its development. You have an opportunity to present your comments and concerns at the meeting noted below. This is not another public hearing. Comments willbe accepted at the beginning of the meeting under Hear the Public. You may contact this office for additional information. The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, July 12, 2005 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall, 312 First Avenue East, Kalispell. 1. A request for a PUD on property zoned RA-1 to allow a 32 lot residential subdivision located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between Two Mile Drive and Hwy 2 West concurrent with Westwood Park Subdivision. 2. A request for a preliminary plat approval of Westwood Park Subdivision. The subdivision consists of 32 dwelling units in a two and three unit townhouse configuration on approximately 8.97 acres located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between Two Mile Drive and Hwy 2 West. Documents pertaining to these agenda items are on file for public inspection at the Kalispell Planning Department, 17 Second Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, MT 59901., and are available for public review during regular office hours. Interested persons are encouraged to attend the hearing and make their views and concerns known to the Board. Written comments may be submitted to the Kalispell Planning Department at the above address, prior to the date of the hearing, or you may contact Narda Wilson, Senior Planner at (406) 751-1850 or e-mail at nwilson i() alispell.com for additional information. Sincerely, At� Narda A. Wilson Senior Planner AGENDA KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION July 12, 2005 A regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, July 12 2005 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hail, 312 First Avenue East, Kalispell, Montana. The Agenda for the meeting will be: A. Call to order and roll call. B. Election of Officers a. Nomination of President b. Nomination of Vice -President C. Approval of the Minutes — June 14, 2005 and dune 21, 2005 D. Hear the Public E. Public Hearings: The Kalispell City Manning Board and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on the following agenda items. Following the hearing and board discussion, the board may make its recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action: 1. A request for an initial zoning designation of R-4 upon annexation to the city of Kalispell on 0.51 of an acre located on the northwest corner of 7th Ave West and 0...........y: A - Tl, 4 ram 2. A request for an amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to, allow rental storage units in basements of existing buildings in the B-5 zoning district. E. Old Business 1. A request for a PUD on property zoned RA-1 to allow a 32 lot residential subdivision located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between. Two Mild Drive and Hwy 2 West concurrent with Westwood Park Subdivision. 2. A request for a preliminary plat approval of Westwood Park Subdivision. The subdivision consists of 32 dwelling units in a two and three unit townhouse configuration on approximately 8.97 acres located at the northern terminus of Corporate Way between Two Mile Drive and Hwy 2 West. 3. See attachment for summary of prior planning board items F. New Business 1. Amendment to the Kalispell City Planning Board By -Lazes G. Adjournment. Work session to fallow the regular meeting Next regular meeting: August 9, 2005 - Tuesday, 7:00 PM Tri-City Planning Office 17 Second St East, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 751-18M Fam (406) 751-1858 CITY OF KALISPELL APPLICATION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PROJECT NAME I. 3. NAME OF APPLICANT: k)v'Tw oot� ��{{1 n MAIL ADDRESS: ���' Z L'"� "13 ��� CITY/ STATE / ZIP: PHONE: S(qV i 2Z S7 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER IF DIFFERENT THAN APPLICANT: 4. NAME: iJt'1�wri4N 5. MAIL ADDRESS:Sot Q 7. CITY/ STATE / ZIP: TECHNICAL ASS] 8. MAIL ADDRESS: PHONE: 61a If there are others who should be notified during the review process, please list those. ?�iL L- C�11.idl OW t!)Co3 -9j 2, S- Check One: Initial PUD proposal Amendment to an e. tdsting PUD A, Property Address: 8 7- Tt,-j () 1 B. Total Area of Property: C. Legal description including section, township & range: Z.2.. D, The present zoning of the above property is: R 4— ,-. ,-., ....•_i .•. .r_t� '_. �._t.. .. .. ,.�-�- - �--�---.. ,. c......- �-----,. ......_rat_ _....-�-- L,' . Please provide trle 1U11UWing 1n1'Qiuiut1'Ull 11J d i1cLCldC1VC lUiiilclC W1U1 6UPPU Udig drawings or other format as needed: a. An overall description of the goals and objectives for the development of the project. b. in cases where the development will be executed in increments, a schedule showing the time within phase will be completed. C. The extent to which the plan departs from zoning and subdivision regulations including but not limited to density, setbacks and use, and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest; d. The nature and extent of the common open space in the project and the provisions for maintenance and conservation of the common open space; and the adequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan; e. The manner in which services will be provided such as water, sewer, storm crater management, schools, roads, traffic management, pedestrian access, recreational facilities and other applicable services and utilities. f. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established g. How the plan provides reasonable consideration to the character of the neighborhood and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed use. h. Where there are more intensive uses or incompatible uses planned within the project or on the project boundaries, how with the impacts of those uses be mitigated. i. How the development plan will further the goals, policies and objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy. j. include site plans, drawings and schematics with supporting narratives where needed that includes the following information: (1). Total acreage and present zoning classifications; (2). Zoning classification of all adjoining properties; (3). Density in dwelling units per gross acre; (4). Location, size height and number of stories for buildings and uses proposed for buildings; (5). Layout and dimensions of streets, parking areas, pedestrian walkways and surfacing; 2 (6). Vehicle, emergency and pedestrian access, traffic circulation and control; (7). Location, size, height, color and materials of signs; (8). Location and height of fencing and/or screening; (9). Location and type of landscaping; (10). Location and type of open space and common areas; (11). Proposed maintenance of common areas and open space; (12). Property boundary locations and setback lines (13). Special design standards, materials and / or colors; (14). Proposed schedule of completions and phasing of the development, if applicable; (15). Covenants, conditions and restrictions; (16). Any other information that may be deemed relevant and appropriate to allow for adequate review. If the PUD involves the division of land for the purpose of conveyance, a preliminary plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the subdivision regulations. Please note that the approved final plan, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the zoning for the district. No building permit shall be issued for any structure within the district unless such structure conforms to the provisions of the approved plan. The signing of this application signifies that the aforementioned information is true and correct and grants approval for Tri-City Planning staff to be present on the property 1V1 iiJL1LSlFV 3111iFF1LV21116 Ci.Llu Llla�lp4l L1V12 %A"AJal leYl[ YY p1V41J7. 1 (Applzcant Signature) Jam.- — 2 — el (Date) 3 APPLICATION PROCESS APPLICABLE TO ALL ZONING APPLICATIONS: A. Pre -Application Meeting: A discussion with the planning director or designated member of staff must precede filing of this application. Among topics to be discussed are: Master Plan or Growth Policy compatibility with the application, compatibility of proposed zone change with surrounding zoning classifications, and the application procedure. B. Completed application form. C. Application fee per schedule, made payable to the Tri-City Planning Office. PUD Zoning Review Fee Residential $700.00 + $25/acre Commercial $800.00 + $25/acre Mixed Use $850.00 + $25/acre * Deduct $200 from PUD fee if application is concurrently submitted with a preliminary plat. D. A bona fide legal description of the subject property and a map showing the location and boundaries of the property. E. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all property owners within I50 feet of the subject property as shown on the Assessor's roll. Public streets and right of ways are not included in the 150 feet. See example below and attached notice from County Plat Room. Assessor No Sec-Twn.-Rng Lot/Tract No Property Owner & Mailing Address Please consult the with staff of the Tri-City Planning Office for submittal dates and dates for the planning board meeting at which it will be heard in order that requirements of state statutes and the zoning regulations may be fulfilled. The application must be accepted as complete forty-five (45) days prior to the scheduled planning board meeting. Effective 3 / 15 / 04 4 Westwood Park will be made up of duplex townhouses, triplex townhouses, and single family homes built by the developer and for sale with a lot. The goal is to have an interesting and appropriate building architecture and community site layout and still be affordable to the general public. There will be a total of 34 units with a mix of ranch and two-story plans. The units will be approximately 1500 to 2100 s.£ finished with two -car garages. The homes may have unfinished space inside that can be finished as the occupant's family and income grows. The exterior style will be a slightly rustic theme utilizing artificial stone, subtle timber details, and vertical wood siding. Colors would be natural, weathered earth tones, with possible subtle color accents on window frames and metal roofs. The plan does not depart in use, but departs from the existing zoning and subdivision regulations in other areas. The primary purpose for this cluster development is to create grouped housing and nicely landscaped and attractive larger open space areas. As shown, this results in some slightly smaller lot sizes and potentially higher lot coverage than current minimums for RA-1 zoning, but is well within current allowable density limitations. With the town home lots, some of the lot widths are less than the minimum 60 feet listed in the zoning regulations. Many of the lots created maintained a 20 foot front yard setback where the garages enter from the front. In some cases, the garages enter from the side and the front yard setbacks have been modified to 15 feet, and even 10 feet in some areas. There is one location on the curve where the building front yard setback on the corner will be 5, just off the entry from Corporate Drive. With the town home lots, some of the side yard setbacks have been reduced to 0 at the parry walls. If no party walls, a minimum side yard setback of 5 feet has been maintained. A minimum rear yard setback of 10 feet has been maintained. The structures will consist of Single family, duplex, and triplex units. Reference the preliminary plat for locations. The building height limit of 35 feet will be maintained. There will be a sign for the development as shown on the site plan. This will be constructed of artificial stone and wood and will be attractively landscaped and maintained. In addition there may be smaller signs or bollards at the entry froze Corporate Drive on the south. These would be constructed from similar materials to the main sign. All signage would be indirectly lit with landscape lights. WestWood Park will be built on 8.974 acres (390,907 sq ft) under single ownership. There will be approximately 3.8 dwelling units per acre. The development as a whole more than meets the parkland to lots ratio. In the RA-1 zone parkland requirement is equal to 11% of the land divided into lots, in this case based on 6000 sq ft lots for singles and duplexes, and 3000 s.ff lots for the triplex center unit for a total of 105,000 s.f. of lots, the parkland requirement would equal 11,550 sq ft. There is approximately 2.839 acres of common area in Westwood Park, or close to 32% of the lot area. It is expected that some of the lots will ultimately be larger than the 6000 or 3000 s.f., but there is plenty of room to spare in the parkland requirement. It is expected that site work will commence in July of 2005 with construction of homes following as soon as possible thereafter. All site work will be completed prior to sales of the homes. Sale of homes could start by October of 2005. The build out, depending on sales, may take a couple of years. Currently the site's zoning is RA-1 which allows for duplex construction. This project is being submitted as a PUD to allow for triplex and single buildings and allow for varying setbacks based on side entry garages. Our goal is to make the subdivision as open and parr -like as possible so along the interior the sidewalk will meander away from the curb and through the road right-of- way. As described above, there will be more open space then required. The lot sizes comply with RA-1 as does the density. In an attempt to side load as many garages as possible, to improve the aesthetics of the architectures, we propose the 20' requirement from the front of the garage to extend to the meandering sidewalk. This allows us the flexibility to eliminate a large number of street facing garage doors. Open space will be left along the stream on the east boundary with a walking path and natural landscaping. A park/playground area is located in the southwest corner. On the west side of the loop a densely landscaped buffer will separate WestWood Park from the rear of the neighboring homes. In the center of the subdivision is a generous open space with a meandering path, which will allow for a park -like rear yard for many of the units which cannot take advantage of the creek. The creek has been opened up to the street on the East side for easier access and visual enjoyment by all residents, to allow for views out the front of some units, and to create a visual break (along with the landscape buffer on the West) from having houses and drives on both sides of the street. The units are designed to allow for side or front entry garages on the end units. This allows for a reduction in the appearance of garage doors in the neighborhood, more variety in drive layouts, better off-street parking for many units, and narrower curb cuts and drives reducing the overall impact of pavement. This will be used as a bike/pedestrian path as well as providing emergency access. It is hoped that this path can connect through the mall, across the highway, through the new apartment complex (permission has been granted) and connect with the County Bike Path to the south. This will take cooperation from the other property owners. A homeowners association will be organized to oversee and enforce the CC and R's as well as to maintain the open space area and perform other duties required. CC and R's will be created to include covenants, conditions, and restrictions as well as design standards for the development. Fencing covenants in WestWood Park will minimize or eliminate fencing to maximize the appearance of, and access to, open space areas. Property lines will purposely disappear for the benefit of openness and ease of landscaping. Homeowners will have their property cared for by the association and all will be groomed simultaneously, fighting will be designed to be non - obtrusive while providing adequate light for safety. Services will be provided by the city of Kalispell, which will include sewer, water, refuse collection, police, ambulance, and fire protection. The site is in School District 5. There will be pedestrian access from Two Mile Drive, The Gateway West Mall parking lot, and from Corporate Drive on the south. The lots will be provided with public roads, sewer, water, and storm drainage that will meet the standards set forth by the City of Kalispell Public Works department. Boulevard streets are planned with nicely appointed pedestrian areas. A loop road has been designed making emergency access to the majority of the development simple, and a secondary 20 foot emergency access to Two Mile Drive has been provided for. A hammer -head turn around has been provided on the east end of the development to service the small cluster of homes on that end. A walk path has been added through the center common area and tied to the emergency access road to allow easy pedestrian and bicycle access throughout the development. Power, gas, telephone, and cable have been provided as well. Please refer to the preliminary plat drawings for further reference.