2. Riata Ridge Annexation and Zoning RequestCity of Kalispell
Planning Department
17 - 2nd Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana S 9901
Telephone: (406) 751-1850
Fax: (406) 751-1858
Website: kalispellplanning.com
REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council
FROM 16 Sean Conrad, Senior Planner
James H . Patrick, City Manager
SUBJECT: Annexation and initial zoning request of R-- on a 4.47 acre
property
MEETING DATE: December 11, 20O6
At the November 14th planning board meeting the board considered a request from
Cary Priest for annexation, initial zoning, and preliminary plat approval on a 4.47 acre
property. Mr. Priest is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with the R--2
(Single Family Residential) zoning district and is also requesting a preliminary plat to
create Riata Ridge Subdivision, a 16 lot subdivision with each lot at 9,600 square feet
in size. The property is located on the south side of Greenridge Drive at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Greenridge Drive and willow Glen Drive.
During the public hearing the surrounding property owners protested the initial
zoning of R-2 and the proposed preliminary plat for 16 lots. The neighboring property
owners felt that the density allowed under the R.-2 was too dense for the surrounding
area which is zoned County R- 1, a residential zoning district with a one --acre minimum
lot size. The planning board unanimously recommended the R-2 zoning for the
property based in part on the property's Suburban Residential land use designation
shown on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use map. The planning board
elected to table the subdivision for up to 90 days to allow the developer to address the
board's concerns for the development regarding density, lot size, and the need for a
traffic plan to provide interconnectivity, to future subdivisions to the south.
The owner has requested that the annexation and initial zoning request move forward
to a Council hearing. Due to the contentious nature of the zoning request the
planning department has scheduled the zone change request for your December 11 th
work session.
Respectfully s tted,
Sean Conrad ame a nc
Senior Planner City Manager
c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk
GARY PRIEST
INITUL ZONING UPON ANNEXATION R-2
KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT #KA-06-6
NOVEMBER 3, 200.6
A report to the Kalispell city Planning Board and the Kalispell city Council
regarding a request for an initial zoning designation of R-2 upon annexation to the
city of Kalispell on approximately 4.47 acres. A public hearing has been scheduled
before the planning board for November 14, 2006 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 report evaluates the appropriate assignment of a City zoning classification in
accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell zoning ordinance. The
petitioner would like to annex in order to receive City services.
A. Petitioner and Owners. Gary Priest
P.O. Box 164
Kalispell, MT 59903
(406) 755-3749
Technical Assistance: Schwarz Engineering
100 Financial Drive
Suite 120
Kalispell, MT 59901
(406) 755- 1333
B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for
annexation is located on the south side of Greenridge Drive at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Greenridge Drive and willow Glen Drive. There
is an existing house on the property addressed as 736 Greenridge Drive.
The property can be legally described as a portion of Tract 3 except tracts A,
AA, C, CA and D, Kalispell School Addition, Block 1, located in Section 16,
Township 23 North, Range 21 West.
C. Existing zoning: This property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is
zoned County R-1, Suburban Residential. This zoning designation has a
minimum lot size requirement of one acre and a minimum lot width of 150 feet.
The County zoning code states that the purpose of the R-1 district is to provide
estate --type development and that the R-1 zoning would normally be located in
rural areas away from concentrated urban development, typically not served by
water or sewer services, or in areas where it is desirable to permit only low -
density development.
D. Proposed Zoning: The proposal would designate the property as City R-2, a
residential zoning district that anticipates single-family homes as a primary
use. The mini um lot size requirement for the R--2 zoning district is 9,600
square feet.
E. Size: The property proposed for annexation and zoning contains approximately
4.47 acres.
�. Existing Land Use; Currently this property is being used for stabling horses.
G. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: The area can be described as being located
in an urbanizing area of the City as several subdivisions have been given
preliminary plat approval to the south of this site along Willow Glen Drive. The
area immediately surrounding the proposed site is made up of larger single--
family tracts of land. These tracts of land vary in size from 0.43 of an. acre and
2.4 acre tracts located to the south of the project site, a one -acre and 5 acre
tract located to the east, 1I2 acre up to 2.7 acre tracts located to the north and
tracts between. 1/2 acre to 1 1/2 acre located to the west.
North: Residential development, County R- I zoning
South: Residential development, County R-1 zoning
East: Residential development, County Rr-1 zoning
West: Residential development, County R-2 zoning
H. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of the area is rural
residential development in the County. There is a city subdivision, Leisure
Heights, with suburban density approximately 1,000 feet south of the proposed
project site.
I. Availability of Public Services: City grater and sewer services are located south
of the site in the Leisure Heights subdivision. The owner has also requested a
preliminary plat to create 10 residential lots in conjunction with the annexation
and initial zoning request. If the annexation., initial zoning and preliminary plat
are approved, the owner would be required to extend grater and sewer lines to
serve the subdivision.
EVALUA11ON BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA
The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning; is set forth by 76--2--303, M.C.A.
Findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria
described by 76-2-304, M. C.A.
1. Does the re nested zone comply with the Kalis ell Growth. Poli?
The Kalispell Growth Policy designates this area as suburban Residential which
anticipates a density of up to 4 dwelling units per gross acre. This property is
proposed for R-2 zoning, a residential zoning designation that anticipates single-
family homes as the primary use on lots not less than 9,600 square feet in size or
approximately 3.5 dwellings per gross acre. The proposed zoning designation is in
substantial compliance with the future land use designation of Suburban.
Residential and can be considered to be appropriate for the area.
2
2. Is the requested zone desigged to lessen can estion in the streets?
It can be anticipated that the proposed development of the property that will, be
associated with the zoning will increase traffic impacts in the area due to the
undeveloped nature of the property and rural nature of the area. However, the
proposed R--2 zoning district would limit the potential residential density on the
land thereby g congestion on the surrounding streets.
3. Will the requested zone secure safe from fire anic 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. New construction will be required to be in
compliance with the building safety codes of the City which relate to fire and
building safety. All municipal services including police and fire protection,
water and severer service is available to the area and will be extended as part of
the development of this property.
4. Will the requested zone promote the health and general welfare?
Because this annexation will enable the property owners to connect to public sewer
and develop the property with full public services, the public health and welfare of
the community will be served.
5. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air?
Any uses established on the site will be required to meet the development
standards for the district dealing with setbacks, height limits and lot coverage.
These standards are designed to provide for adequate light and air.
6. Will the requested zone revent the overcrowding of land?
The requested zoning designation is consistent with the type of development which
is anticipated by the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. The requested
zone will not contribute to the overcrowding of land. Adequate public
infrastructure including sewer, water, stormwater management and street
development would be required if the applicant develops the land to the R-2
density.
7. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people?
An increase in the number and concentration of people in the area will likely result
after this land has been converted from a rural residential zoning district to a more
intensive residential zoning district. There will be a more intensive use of the
property, however, with the intensity of the uses of the property in direct
relationship to the availability of public services, utilities and facilities as well as
compliance with established standards found in the R-2 zoning district, there will
not be an undue concentration of people.
3
8. Will the re uested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, aster
sewerage, schools arks and other ublic re uirements?
The owner requesting annexation and initial zoning of R-2 has also submitted a 16
lot subdivision proposal for the properties included in the annexation. If the
annexation, initial zoning and proposed subdivision are approved, public service,
facilities and infrastructure would be made available to the developer. The
developer would need to extend the needed city services that are not currently
extended to the property at the developers' expense and in accordance with the
City's policies and standards. Fire, police, ambulance and public access are
adequate to accommodate potential impacts associated with the development of
this site. There will be impacts to services that can be anticipated as a result of
this proposal which can be met by the city.
9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the
property for particular uses?
The proposed zoning district gives consideration to the suitability of this property
for the permitted use allowed in the R--2 zoning district. The 4.47 acre project site
is relatively flat and is outside the designated 100-year floodplains associated with
the Stillwater River, located east of the project site. The proposed city R-2 zoning
permits single-family residences and compatible uses including parks and dayeare
centers.
10. Does the requested zone 've reasonable consideration to the character of the
district?
The general character of the area is rural residential. The proposed zoning allows
suburban residential development to address needs within the community for
housing in reasonable proximity to the city core.
Surrounding land uses are residential in nature however lands immediately
adjacent to the project site are located within the county. surrounding zoning
districts in the county include County R 1, a one -acre minimum lot size, and
County R-2, a 20,000 square foot minimum lot size. As the city of Kalispell
continues to groan the higher density residential zones allowed in the city will
continue to encroach into established neighborhoods whose lots were approved by
the county decades before on the immediate outskirts of the city. Although the
City R-2 zoning district allows for smaller lots than the surrounding county zoning
districts, the city R-2 zoning district would still maintain the residential character
of the area. The proposed city Rr-2 zoning district also furthers the long range
development plans as reflected in the adopted Kalispell Growth Policy for this area.
11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildinas?
The surrounding area is comprised of single-family residences on larger tracts of
land. The development anticipated under the proposed zoning may be more
intensive in nature than that of other properties in the immediate area however
City standards will insure that there is high quality development which in turn will
insure the value of buildings and homes are protected, maintained and conserved.
M
rim
12. Will the requested zone encoura e the most a ro riate use of the Land through -out
the 'urisdiction?
The Kalispell Growth Policy future land use designation anticipates the areas on
the east side of Willow Glen Drive to be residential in nature. The Growth Policy
also provides a maximum density for this area of 4 dwellings per gross acre. The
proposed City R-2 zoning encourages the most appropriate land use for this
property given the different densities and permitted uses within the eight primary
residential zoning districts within the Kalispell zoning ordinance. The proposed
City R_2 zoning can also be found to comply with the Kalispell Growth Policy
future land use map which is the basis for reviewing land use changes within the
Kalispell planning jurisdiction.
REGOATION
It is recommended that the Kalispell City Planing Board adopt Staff Report #KA-06--6 as
findings of fact and forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council that the initial
zoning for this property should be R- 2 , Single Family Residential, on approximately 4.4 7
acres as proposed on the attached vicinity map upon annexation to the City.
SC
5
City of Kalispell
Planning Department
17 - 2 d Street East, Suite 211, Kali pelf, Montana 5*00PELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Telephone: (406) 751--1850
Fax: (406) 751-185 8
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING
NAME OF APPLICANT: GARY PRIEST
MAIL ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 164
CITY/STATE/ZIP: KALISPELL, MT 59903
INTEREST IN PROPERTY; OWNER AS OF 6/29/06
Other Parties of Interest to be Notified:
PHONE: 75 6-3 749
PARTIES OF INTEREST: JOHNA MORRIS ON, SCHW A RZ ENGINEERING,
MAIL ADDRESS: 100 FINANCIAL DRIVE, SUITE 120
CITY/STATE/ZIP: KALISPELL, MT 59901
PHONE: 755-1333
INTEREST IN PROPERTY: TECHNICAL REPRESENTATION
PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING:
Address of the property: 736 GREENRIDGE DRIVE,
KALISPELL
Legal Description:-07KSC, EX TR A, AA, C,CA, D
(Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #)
16-28-21
(Section, Township, Range) (Attach metes and bounds as Exhibit A)
Land in project (ac) 4.47 ACRES
The present zoning of the above property is: COUNTY R-1
The proposed zoning of the above property is:
CITY R-2
State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary:
WANT TO ANNEX TO THE CITY. R.-1 ZONE DOES NOT WARRANT COSTS OF WATER AND
SEWER EXTENSION.
The signing of this application signifies that the foregoing information is true and accurate based upon the
best information available and further grants approval for Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the
property for routine inspection during the annexation process.
1
7-3 alp
(Date)
(Applic
Return to:
Theresa White
Kalispell City Clerk
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903
PETITION TO ANNEX
AND
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FROM RURAL FIRE DISTRICT
The undersigned hereinafter referred to as Petitioner(s) respectfully petition the City Council of
the City of Kalispell for annexation of the real property described below into the City of
Kalispell.
The Petitioner(s) requesting City of Kalispell annexation of the property described herein and
further described in Exhibit A hereby mutually agree with the City of Kalispell that immediately
upon annexation of the land all City of Kalispell municipal services will be provided to the
property described herein on substantially the same basis and in the same manner as such services
are provided or made available to other properties within the rest of the municipality.
Petitioner(s) hereby state that there is no need to prepare a Municipal Annexation Service Plan for
this annexation pursuant to Section 7-2-4610, M.C.A. since the parties are in agreement as to the
provision of municipal services to the property requested to be annexed.
The Petitioner(s) further herein express an intent to have the property as herein described
withdrawn from the S i KALISPELL Rural Fire District under the provisions of Section 7-
33-2127, Montana Code Annotated; and that incorporated into this Petition to Annex is the
Notice requirement pursuant to said Section; and that upon proper adoption of an ordinance or
resolution of annexation by the City Council of the City of Kalispell, the property shall be
detracted from said district.
In the event the property is not immediately annexed, the Petitioner(s) further agree(s) that this
covenant shall run to, with, and be binding upon the title of the said real property, and shall be
binding upon our heirs, assigns, successors in interests purchasers, and any and all subsequent
holders or owners of the above described property.
This City hereby agrees to allow Petitioner(s) to connect and receive the utilities from the City of
Kalispell.
This City hereby agrees to allow Petitioner(s) to connect and receive all available utilities from
the City of Kalispell excluding solid waste services. MCA 7-2-4736 prohibits the city from
providing solid waste services to this property for a minimum of 5 years from date of annexation.
1
7-3,
. ........ ....
Petitioner/caner Date
Petitioner/Owner Date
NOTE: You must attach an Exhibit A that provides a bona fide legal description of
the property to be annexed.
2
STATE OF MONTANA.
: ss
County of Flathead County
On this day of before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for
the State of Montana, personally ppeared r - known
to me to be the person wh subs crib e d to th foregoing instrument and acknowledged
to me that he/she exec
IN WITNESS WH F, I have he upto et my hand and affixed my Notary Seal the day and
year in this certifZc e firtA
i ■ `'�
1Z �k
r � i
otary Public tate of Montana
0)"k'*..,,.�•'`` Residing at:,,-- �p �r� �.S��\\
� fr, OF My Commission expires:
��t11�111i!!1 tll�itt�#�tl���
STATE OF MONTANA }
ss
County of Flathead County
On this day of , , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for
the State of Montana, personally appeared known
to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged
to me that he/she executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notary Seal the day and
year in this certificate first above written.
Notary Public, State of Montana
Residing at
My Commission expires:
STATE OF MONTANA )
ss
County of Flathead
On this day of , , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for
The State of Montana, personally appeared and
the , and
respectively, of the
corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and the persons who executed said instrument
on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notary Seal the day and
year in this certificate first above written.
Notary Public, State of Montana
Residing at
My Commission expires
GARY PRIEST
INITIAL ZONING UPON ANNEXATION R-2
Legal Description
TRACT 1:
That portion of Lot 3 of Block 1 of Kalispell School addition, according to
the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and
Recorder of Flathead County, Montana, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; thence along the Northerly
boundary thereof
Easterly a distance of 315,00 feet to a point; thence at night angles
Southerly a distance of 382.1 feet to the Southerly boundary thereof; thence
along said Southerly boundary
Kest a distance of 315.00 feet -to the Southwest corner of said Lot 3; thence
along the Westerly boundary thereof
Northerly a distance of 382.1 feet to the Point of Beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following described tract:
That portion of Lot 3 of Block 1, Kalispell School Addltlon, according to the
recorded plat thereof, records of Flathead County, Montana, described as
follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 3, Block 1, Kalispell School
Addition; thence along the West line of said Lot 3
North a distance of 104.20 feet; thence
South 89058`20" East a distance of 191.96 feet; thence
South a distance of 104.20 feet to the South line of Lot 3; thence along the
South line
North 89058'20" West a distance of 191.96 feet to the Point of Beginning.
ALSO EXCEP I NG THEREFROM that portion deeded to the Montana department of
Transportation in Bargain and Sale Deeds recorded
May 15, 2000 as Instrument No. 2000-136-14360 and 2000-136-14370, records of
Flathead County, Montana.
TRACT z:
That portion of Lot 3 of Block 1 of Kalispell School Addition, according to the
map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and
Recorder of Flathead County, Montana, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Lot 3; thence along the Northerly
boundary thereof
Westerly a distance of 255.00 feet to a point; thence at right angles
Southerly a distance of 382.1 feet to a point on the Southerly line of
said Lot 3; thence along the Southerly line thereof
Easterly a distance of 255.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 3;
thence along the Easterly boundary thereof
Northerly a distance of 382.1 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Commonly known as: 736 Creenridge Drive Kalispell, MT 59901
L,
lots. Mulcahy said that they concur with the staff report as
presented and they feel the staff did a good job in their
report.
PUBLIC HEARING
No one wished to spear and the public hearing was closed.
MOTION
Schutt moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff
report KA-06-12 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property
upon annexation be R-3, Urban Single Family Residential.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Hull noted that when the subdivision comes in for review the
board will require additional parkland and interconnection
between neighboring subdivisions.
Norton said there was property set aside in Stillwater Estates
for road expansion and Conrad said when they see the future
phases of Westview Estates they will provide some
connectivity with Stillwater Estates.
Balcom asked about the gravel pit nearby and if it will be
closed. Conrad said that it will be there for the time being
and he didn't know how many more years it would be in
operation.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
PRIEST/ RIATA RIDGE --
A request fromr. Gary Priest for annexation, initial zoning, and
ANNEXATION &
preliminary plat approval on a 4.47 acre property. The
PRELIMINARY PLAT
owner is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with
the R-2 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The
owner is also requesting a preliminary plat to create Riata
Ridge Subdivision with 16 lots each lot 9,600 square feet in
size. The property is located at 736 Greenridge Drive at the
southeast corner of the intersection of Green -ridge Drive and
Willow Glen Drive.
STAFF REPORTS KA-06-06
Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning
Sa KPP-06-09
Department presented Staff Reports KA-06-06 & KPP-06-09
for the Board.
Conrad said the Kalispell Growth Policy designates this side
of willowy Glen as Suburban Residential which allows up to 4
dwelling units per acre. The R- 2 as proposed here would be 3
1/2 dwelling units per acre. Conrad reviewed the surrounding
zoning for the board. He noted there is a city subdivision 1/4
mile south of this proposal which has been designated as R-
2. Staff was adamant about keeping the rural character of
this neighborhood and the developer agreed to the R-2
zoning rather than R-3.
Conrad stated the subdivision is 16 lots and access would be
provided by Greenrid e Drive on the north, Howard Drive on
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2046
Page 2of13
the east and a cul-de-sac road providing access to a number
of the lots. The parkland is indicated along Willow Glen Drive
as well as some additional R / W where a bike path would be
located.
Conrad said if preliminary plat is approved the developer
would be required to upgrade Greenridge Drive and Howard
Drive from the center line over to the subdivision which
would increase the road width to 24 feet with curb, gutter,
boulevard, and sidewalks adjacent to this subdivision.
Conrad added that with the upgrade to Greenridge and
Howard Drive the roads would be more than adequate to
accommodate the current traffic, plus the additional traffic
generated by this subdivision.
Conrad continued the preliminary plat shows parkland of
approximately 15,000 square feet along Willow Glen Drive.
The Parks and Recreation Department is recommending that
the entire parkland be dedicated as land *instead of cash -in -
lieu., be increased to approximately 20,000 square feet, and
be located away from Willow Glen in the vicinity of lots 14 &
15. The Parks Department felt with land values increasing
cash -in -lieu would not be sufficient enough to purchase an
adequate amount of land in the future and the relocation of
the parkland would be beneficial when the property to the
south was developed and could serve both developments.
Conrad said that originally they had proposed a roadway
that would connect Howard Drive to Willow Glen. but MDT
would not allow an access onto Willow Glen Drive in that
location and therefore a cut -de -sac road is being proposed
where the traffic would be funneled out onto Howard Drive
then on to Greenridge Drive to the intersection of Willow
Glen. An approach permit will need to be obtained from MDT
and any necessary widening or improvements of Greenridge
and Howard Drive would have to be completed prior to final
plat approval.
Conrad noted that the developer's consultant brought in a
revised preliminary plat which is similar to the original
preliminary plat provided to the board and they have
incorporated some of the recommendations of the Parks
Department by moving the parkland to the southeast corner
of the property. However the size of the park is indicated as
being only 8,500 square feet and not the 20,000 square feet
requested by the Parks Department. Conrad said that their
intent would be for the remaining parkland to be cash -in -
lieu.
Conrad reviewed the concerns of some of the neighbors
which includes improving only half of Greenridge and
Howard Drive to city standards and who would be
responsible for maintaining the roads. Conrad said
maintenance of the roads will be determined at a later date
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 3of13
by the Public Works Director and the County Road
Superintendent. In addition concerns were expressed
regarding drainage and where stormwater runoff would go.
Conrad said the consulting engineer has proposed 2 plans
for drainage and stormwater runoff. one was to tape all the
stormwater from the roadways and go underneath Willow
Glen Drive near the intersection of Woodland and the other
proposal was to store it somewhere on site. A condition is
included that, if approved, they have to deal with stormwater
per city codes and the Public Works Department would
review the proposals and approve the plan.
Conrad concluded by saying that this subdivision is a higher
density than the surrounding properties. He said those lots
were platted years ago when the city was a mile or more
away. Nov that the city is growing and encroaching on these
rural areas what the hoard needs to consider is the
appropriate fit. The Growth Policy designates this area as
Suburban Residential, there is the city R-2 zoning district to
the south and the planning staff felt the R-2 district would be
appropriate in this area given the rural character of the
neighborhoods close by.
Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board
adopt staff report KA-06-06 and KPP-06-09 as findings of
fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-2,
Single Family Residential and further recommend that the
preliminary plat for Riata Ridge subdivision be approved
subject to the 21 conditions listed in the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt was confused on which version of the preliminary plat
they were to consider. Conrad said the preliminary plat
before the board is the one that they received in their
packets. The revised plat distributed tonight more closely fits
to the conditions in the staff report but the parkland
indicated is only 8,500 square feet instead of the Parks
Department's recommendation of 20,000 square feet.
Schutt asked for clarification on the location of the city limits
in this area. Conrad responded.
Gabriel noted the roads go around the 3 sides of this
property and in order to get the 20,000 square foot park even
if they included another lot they still wouldn't have enough
parkland. Conrad said that is correct.
Hull said Howard Drive dead ends and there is no potential
for hooking into Leisure Drive. Conrad said no provision was
made for a future connection to Leisure Drive. hull said that
there is an unofficial road there and Conrad said when that
lot develops the unofficial road will no longer be used. hull
noted that Leisure Heights is a city subdivision and not
providing interconnectivi was an oversig4t.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 4 of 13
Hinchey asked if 9,600 feet is the m i * m um lot size for R-2
and Conrad said yes the lots are proposed at the minimum
lot size.
APPLICANT/ AGENCIES Johna Morrison, Schwarz Engineering S. Architecture stated
she is representing the developer. She said there are 2
different layouts and she would life to spear to both. The
second plat was an alternate layout as a response to the
requirements of the Parks & Recreation Department Director.
Morrison said that prior to submitting this subdivision she
had a lengthy talk with Mike Barer and he was in agreement
with their layout as long as they provided enough
improvements to make up for the parkland dedication.
Morrison said they couldn't find a way to provide the
required parkland no matter how they designed the project.
Morrison said in response to the Parks Department's
recommendation she created the second layout but by the
time the roadways, R./ W, cul-de-sac and boulevards were
included they ended up with an 8,500 square foot park
located in the southeast corner of the property. Morrison
continued the reason she prefers the first layout was locating
the park on Willow Glen would make it easier for the public
to access. It would create a very nice vegetative buffer from
Willow Glen to the houses, is easier to maintain along with
the bike path, and would provide a larger park.
Morrison stated she agrees with the staff report. The R-2
zone is the lowest density that is afforded in the city of
Kalispell however she realizes that this is hard for the
neighbors to accept. She added the city is going to grow and
this property will be developed.
Morrison noted if the board decides that they prefer the first
plat Condition #9 would have to be amended. She added in
reference to Condition # 15 and the bike path it has not been
determined whether the path will be constructed on the east
or west side of Willow Glen Drive. She questioned if they
couldn't get an approach from MDT would it be safe to run a
bike path across the road. Also if the bike path is not
located on the east side ad j acent to this property they would
be able to dedicate additional parkland.
Morrison said there is a 40 foot easement to the south of the
property which would have provided a loop road and provide
better site distance but MDT would not allow an access at
that location.
BOARD DISCUSSION Norton noted for the record the board received letters from
neighbors and concerned parties, one with 24 signatures
from neighbors who asked the board members to take a look
at the property and the character of the neighborhood, and
an email with comments from an independent planner, Brian
Wood, who was hired by the neighborhood. There were also
additional letters forwarded in the board packets.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 5of13
PUBLIC HEARING Glen Graham - 739 G reenridge Drive, stated he lives across
the street from this proposed preliminary plat. Graham noted
that their planner, Brian wood was not able to attend the
hearing due to personal reasons and asked the board to table
this proposal until their planner could be present. Graham
said this subdivision is a square peg trying to be put into a
round hole and it doesn't fit.
Graham said their planner submitted a letter listing the
concerns of the neighborhood. In addition, he said, to add to
the confusion yet another version of the plat has been
submitted which the neighborhood and their planner haven't
had a chance to review.
Graham reviewed Wood's comments for the board which
included the improvements to half a road, maintenance of
the roads, street access and design, and stormwater runoff
and groundwater problems in the area.
Graham noted the biggest concern is design and
neighborhood compatibility. They realize that it has been a
horse stable for a very long time and they know that it is
going to be developed. He added that the lots in The willows
and Leisure Heights are larger than the lots proposed.
Graham urged the board to take a hard look at this proposal
before they ap p rove it.
Shelly Graham - 739 Greer dge Drive said she agrees with
everything her husband said. She compared the lot size with
the lots in The willows and Leisure Heights and added Riata
Ridge is proposing the smallest lots in the area. She said
they would look more favorably on this subdivision if the
design were reconfigured to have larger lot sizes that would
be more in character with the existing rural neighborhood.
As far as the parkland she said they would request the full
20,000 square feet of parkland. She added there is very little
parkland in that part of Kalispell.
Roger Anderson - 750 Greenridge Drive stated he agrees with
everything that the Graham's have said especially about the
density of the proposal and if it was more like The willows
and Leisure Heights that would be more compatible with the
community. Anderson said if they work together with the
developer it will be a nice community to live in. His concern
is the traffic and with an additional 32 cars going out on to
Willow Glen with very little site distance it will be a mess.
Anderson added he agrees with the plan to move the park
because it would be dangerous so close to willow Glen Road.
Hugh Robertson -- 545 Howard Drive stated he shares a lot of
the sane concerns as his neighbors. He said his concerns
are with the stormwater and drainage issues. He indicated
the report summarizes 2 options relating to disposing of
stormwater. The least expensive option calls for installing an
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 6 of 13
infiltrator system on -site to allow absorption of the
stormwater with an overflow into a drainage Swale along
Howard Drive. Robertson's property is adjacent to the
eastern portion of the development and is reached by a
driveway near the proposed interior road and cul-de-sac
entrance off of Howard Drive. when the horse stables were
up and going there was no asphalt or concrete on the site so
there was never much of a problem. Robertson said he now
wonders how much water will be collected on that cul-de-sac
and interior roadway when it is paved. Even if it was
funneled into a dry well or an overflow swale the water will
migrate towards the Stillwater River. He asked if the
eventual path of that groundwater flow would go through his
and his neighbor's property. Robertson urged the board to
look forward and protect their neighborhood by requiring a
bond to cover any future drainage problems that could be
associated with this subdivision.
Allen Seiler resides at the corner of Treasure Lane and
Willow Glen and stated he is there to talk about the bike
path. He distributed pictures to the board that shows what
happens when you don't build the bike path and you set
aside an easement that will be a bike path inn the future. He
noted that along The Willows subdivision there is 11/4 mile of
fences on the bike path R/ W and when they do build they
will have to negotiate with those people for over $50,000
worth of fences and moving them. He added those people
probably bought their property believing that it was part of
their back yard. The rip -rap that was put in at Leisure
Heights was to disperse the stormwater and was supposed to
be absorbed. He noted the rip -rap is also on the bike path.
Seiler said by the 'Toyota Dealership, another city project,
they negotiated to not put a sidewalk in but set it aside to
collect stormwater. That has kept them from putting in a
sidewalk or using that side of the road for part of a 2 mile
bike path. Seiler said he would encourage them not to use
any kind of ditching, etc. in any type of developments to
collect and disperse stormwater. It leaves out a lot of options
in the future. He firmly believes that water, even down to the
drains on houses, should go into a collection system and be
taken down in this case to Woodland Creek by pipe and get it
out of the neighborhood.
Seiler said the State put in a water collection system for their
new roadway on Woodland hill and stormwater did not
collect properly. The highway department is working on this
problem and added a section is over the Evergreen Sewer
Main and they don't want it to slump off too much.
Seiler said the county awarded a CTEP project which is 2
miles of bike path from Four Corners to the Montessori
School on willow Glen. His thinking is that if the developer
can be made to -put the bike t)ath in, have him t)ut it in and
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 7 of 13
--
then there will be no question about what that real estate is
for. They have some cash -in --lieu money set aside in these
other developments partly for bike paths but they have not
reached an agreement with the city on the amount for the
path. Since it has been a year and 3 months since the CTEP
was awarded he would prefer to see the path built rather
than see in lieu of money paid out.
Sam. Scull, 778 Greenridge Drive stated his concern is the
density of this new subdivision.. They all have large lots and
nice homes and putting a bunch of houses on little lots on
that corner is putting a square peg in a round hole. The
Montana lifestyle is to have some space and Willow Glen is
busier and busier every day. Turning left onto Greenridge is
dangerous. willow Glen will continue to get busier and to
have 32 more cars on that road is not a good idea. He knows
there will be a subdivision going in but 16 homes is just too
many.
Bob Lopp - 52 westview Drive stated he is there to represent
Flathead Audubon. Lopp said if you go to the end of
G reenx idge Drive and Howard there is an access to the Owen
Sauerwein Nature Area. Because of its proximity to this
development they want to lay out the purpose of the nature
area. It was not developed as a recreational area, recreation
is not prohibited it's restricted. Vehicles are not allowed and
they try to eliminate bicycles as well as much as they can. It
is a riparian area heavily watered in the spring and much
through the summer with channels all over it to provide
habitat for wildlife and birds. The problem he has with this
subdivision is there will be additional subdivisions coming
into the area creating a continuous strip along willow Glen.
To restrict the park area to a little over 8,000 square feet
instead of the 20,000 square feet will cause the children to
find other places to recreate and having this natural area
nearby will be a draw for them. They would also support
moving the location from Willow Glen. Lopp asked the board
to consider the impact of these developments on a natural
area because they don't want to loch the gate.
Lorinda Baker, 801 Greenridge Drive stated she agrees with
everything that her neighbors have said and added the
density is the problem. They are not against the development
they just think the lots should be larger so that they fit in
with their rural community and neighborhood. Another
concern is the width of the cul-de-sac at 28 feet will only
allow one side parking which could be a problem in the
future.
Donald Howard - 571 Howard Drive stated his concerns are
that the water drainage is not adequate and not enough
study has been put into it. He described the soils and the
crater problems that he has experienced since putting in a
new basement. Howard said at one time they had spring
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, goof
Page 8of13
runoff and the water came down and pooled along the edge
of the bank. He added he doesn't think either of the options
for stormwater runoff and drainage will work. Howard said
that he agrees with everything else that has been said.
Dorothy Merola -- 801 Greenridge Drive stated she agrees
with everyone here. She pointed out that the letter that the
board received had. 29 signatures on it which represented the
entire neighborhood, 100% signed it. Merola asked the
board to table the proposal and give the neighborhood a
chance for their planner to represent them.
Brent Mitchell - 298 Red Fox Run stated he is the manager
of the Owen Sauerwein Natural Area for Flathead Audubon.
Mitchell said DNRC does not want stormwater dumped on
their state land. He indicated a small culvert on the map that
drops into the Owen Sauerwein area. The Owen Sauerwein
area is not a park it is a natural area. He noted that the
Birch and Cottonwood trees are coming down in the natural
area, especially in windy conditions which will create a
hazard for anyone entering the area. Rids will probably
wander down there and not pay attention to the signs.
Mitchell reviewed his concerns with the additional traffic and
he thought the fire trucks will have problems turning on the
cul-de-sac because it isn't wide enough. Mitchell suggested
that the proposal be tabled so that the consultant for the
neighborhood can represent them.
MOTION - ANNEXATION Albert moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff
report KA-06-06 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property
upon annexation. by R-2, Single Fancily Residential.
BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom noted that she doesn't have any problem with the
annexation and has no questions.
Hinchey said that R-2 zoning is very appropriate in this area.
Schutt said that R-2 is appropriate but just because they can
have 9,600 square foot lots doesn't mean that size lot
dictates the layout of the subdivision.
Albert doesn't have any problem with the R-2 zoning.
Norton agrees with Schutt regarding the lot size proposed.
Norton said that they heard from the neighbors, he agrees
that development will occur in this area and R-2 is the least
impact that they could expect for this area. Norton does not
have a problem with the annexation of R-2 into the city.
Norton stated for the record that board member Gabriel had
to leave the meeting but noted to him that she doesn't have a
problem with the R-2 zoning designation.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 9 of 13
ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION - RIATA RIDGE Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to adopt staff
PRELIMINARY FLAT report KPP-06-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for Riata
Ridge subdivision be approved subject to the 21 conditions
listed in the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom said she went out to the site to look around and it is
a hard call to make. She is impressed with the neighbors'
unanimous opposition to the density of this proposal.
Balcorn said it seems to her to be too many lots on that
property. There has to be a give and take and she
appreciates that the neighborhood is not trying to shut the
whole project down but they want the developer to work with
them.
Hinchey said he also went out to the site and he came down
Woodland and made the jog on willow Glen and realized he
was taking his life into his hands as he was turning left into
the subdivision in the wrong lane. Hinchey said traffic is a
problem and he would like to see a traffic plan for that
intersection., the cul-de-sac road width should be increased
to 32 feet, a stormwater drainage plan should be requested,
and he is adamant that they should be required to provide a
20,000 square foot park. If that is the size of parkland that
the city is asking for that is what should be provided.
Hinchey suggested that the plat needs to be redesigned with
those amendments.
Schutt said that he echoes Hinchey's concerns with the need
for a stormwater drainage plan. Schutt said that he drives
through the Willow Glen/Woodland Avenue intersection
every day and added the intersection of Greenri.dge on to
Willow Glen is a safety concern. Schutt said that he would
like to look at ways to connect Howard Drive to 'Willow Glen.
He is in full support of the 20,000 square feet of parkland
and he would like it moved off of willow Glen and back to the
southeast corner. Schutt said in looking at the layout he
thanks that they can provide a better layout with increased
lot sizes and decreased density. Schutt also agrees that a full
width road is certainly appropriate in subdivisions.
Albert agrees with Hinchey and Schutt on the stormwater
issues. He doesn't like the improvements to half of a road it
should be the whole road. Albert also agrees that the park
should be 20,000 square feet. Traffic is going to be a problem
and that will have to be dealt with through MIST. Albert feels
the number of lots should be reduced.
Hull said that they have had this density issue before and
the lots are somewhat larger than what they typically see in
town, but he does see the neighbors concern. Hull said the
layout is not what he would like to see and the fact that the
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 10 of 13
cannot access the subdivision south of the property makes it
difficult. Hull agrees that there should be a 20,000 square
foot park and the stormwater should be dealt with off -site.
Norton said the board didn't touch on the future connectivity
with the subdivision to the south. Norton added they made a
mistake in not ensuring that Leisure Heights and Howard
Drive were connected which would alleviate some of the
traffic problems. Norton added that it was also Schwarz
Engineering who platted Leisure Heights and there have been
stormwater problems in that subdivision. Norton agrees that
a stormwater plan needs to be in place. Norton said that
there is a 30 foot roadway easement north of Leisure Heights
but does not believes that MDT would grant access there.
Hull suggested that the project be tabled and further Norton
added a recommendation that the Riata Ridge consultants
meet with the planner, Brian wood, who was hired by the
neighborhood.
Hinchey felt that tabling the preliminary plat was the
reasonable option rather than rejecting the proposal entirely.
Schutt asked about the empty lot in Leisure Heights that
would allow the roads to connect. Jentz said that was a
significant issue when Leisure Heights was reviewed because
the neighborhood did not want the added traffic coming
through their subdivision.
Schutt suggested that the board should start thinking
outside the box when faced with a situation like Greenridge
to willow Glen perhaps Greenridge Drive could be
abandoned and a new road along the south side of this
subdivision be constructed that would connect with Howard
Drive which would increase the sight distance. Greenridge
could then be a dead end cut -de -sac to access all of the lots.
Schutt added he doesn't want to design someone's project
but when they box themselves in they have to start to think
creatively on how to solve these issues.
Norton restated the board's concerns for the development
appears to be density, lot size, and the need for a traffic plan
to provide interconnectivity to future subdivisions to the
south. The developer should also be required to improve the
entire width of Howard and Greenridge Drive not one-half of
those roads. Norton added the internal roadway width
should be increased to 32 feet, a stormwater plan needs to
be submitted, and the 20,000 square foot park should be
required. The developer should submit a redesigned layout
with larger lots, and another way to funnel traffic out of the
neighborhood.
Jentz said in determining whether another public hearing
should be held if the project is tabled the board is asking the
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 11 of 13
applicant to complete a redesign, meet with the
neighborhood and resubmit the application. Norton said he
feels another public hearing would be appropriate because
they would have a whole new subdivision plat for the board
to review. Jentz suggested that the board table the proposal
not to exceed 90 days.
MOTION TO 'TABLE
Hull moved and Albert seconded a motion to table the
preliminary plat of Riata Ridge not to exceed 90 days to
address the board's concerns and revise the plat.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL
The original motion failed due to the motion to table being
MOTION - RIATA RTODG E
approved unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
SILVERBR OK ESTATES -
A request by 93 & Church, LLC for annexation and initial
ANNEXATION, PLANNED
zoning on approximately 325 acres located 2.2 miles north of
UNIT DEVELOPOMENT,
West Reserve Drive along Highway 93 North. The owners are
AND PHASE I OF THE
requesting the R-2 (Single Family Residential) , R-4 (Two
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Family Residential), and B-1 (Neighborhood Buffer District)
zoning designations on the property. The owners are also
requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay to
allow 466 single family residences, 120 townhomes and 12
neighborhood commercial building lots with a 2 1/2 acre site
set aside for a future fire station. Along with the PUD
application is a request for preliminary plat approval to
create Silverbrook Subdivision., Phase 1 with 249 residential
lots varying in size from 1 /4 to 1/2 acre in size.
STAFF REPORTS -
Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning
KA-05-13, -06-06
Department reviewed staff reports KA-06 -13, KPUD-06-06 8�
KPP-06-13
KPP-06-13 for the board.
Conrad oriented the board as to the location of this property
noting that it lies a little over 2 miles from the city limits. The
property is surrounded by County zoning districts which he
reviewed. The PUD will cover the entire 325 acre site and the
majority of land use in Phase 1 will. be 249 single family
residential lots averaging x� to acre in size including a-
1/2 acre future fire station lot. Phase 2 will include
townhouse units and neighborhood commercial lots in the
northeast portion of the development. The proposed zoning
districts are R-2, single family residential with 9,600 square
foot rn i rl imum lot size, R-r4 , two family residential for the
townhouse units with 6,000 square foot minimum lot size
and B-1, neighborhood commercial district.
Conrad said a main roadway will be built from Church Drive
heading south and connecting with Highway 93 at the
intersection of Tronstad Road. He reviewed the street profiles
for the board. Conrad noted that the roadway that will serve
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 14, 2006
Page 12 of 13