Loading...
Staff Report/Annexation & ZoningCity of Kalispell Planning Department 1.7 - 2d Street East, Suite 211. Kalispell, Montana 59901. Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.com REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Sean Conrad, Senior Planner James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT The Meadows, Inc. — Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-4/PUD, Two -Family Residential with a Planned Unit Development overlay MEETING DATE: September 5, 2006 BACKGROUND: This is a request for an initial zoning designation of R-4/PUD, Two Family Residential, with a Planned Unit development overlay upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. The property contains approximately 14.65 acres and is located on the south side of Four Mile Drive, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive. The property address is 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive and can be described as Tract 4 located in Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. It is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural, and is developed with two homes and several outbuildings. It is intended to be developed as a residential planned unit development (PUD) with 138 condominium units. The Kalispell City Planning Board met on August 8, 2006 and held a public hearing to consider the request. During the public hearing two members from the public spoke in favor of the development. Three people spoke against the project with concerns regarding the additional traffic, the density of the proposed development being out of character with the surrounding area and the proposed height of the buildings impacting the views of existing homes located south of the development. Several other people spoke neither for or against the development but requested the planning board look at development patterns in the area rather than this particular site when making a recommendation and to insure that the traffic and building heights were adequately addressed. The planning board discussed the development proposal and the testimony. After discussion of the issues raised in the staff report and at the public hearing the planning board made several additions to the recommended conditions of approval as follows: • A motion was made to add a condition requiring the property owners to waive their right to protest a future special improvement district for the upgrade of Four Mile Drive. This motion was approved on a 5 to 1 vote. The planning board struggled with the building height issue but ultimately made a motion to amend condition no. 5 to provide for a maximum height of 21 feet as measured from the southern. property boundary for units 8, 17, 18 and 19. The consultant felt that the 21 foot height limit was workable for those units. The motion passed unanimously. The Meadows, Inc. - Annexation and initial Zoning of R-4 August 23, 2006 Page 2 .A motion was made to prepare a letter to be sent to the Montana Department of Transportation requesting that the intersection. of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive be studied for its current adequacy to handle the increase in traffic from this development and other developments proposed along Four Mile Drive. The motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote. After the amendments the original motion to recommend approval of the proposed R-4/PUD zoning overlay district was approved on a 5 to 1 vote. Note: The planning board, based on a recommendation by the Kalispell Public Works Department, did add a condition #24 that stated the property owners waive their right to protest the creation of an SID to upgrade Four Mile. The purpose of this condition was to create a vehicle which. would insure a complete unified upgrade to 4-Mile drive, not the piecemeal program currently occurring. However, in so doing, they forgot to amend and delete the last sentence of condition number 9, "In addition to the streets within the development, Four Mile Drive, as it fronts the development, shall be improved to the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. Therefore, the planning department requests that the City Council amend condition no. 9 and remove the reference to upgrade Four Mile Drive, as it fronts the development, to City design and construction standards. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to adopt the resolution for annexation and approve the first reading of the ordinance for initial zoning of R-4/PUD would be in order. FISCAL EFFECTS: Minor positive impacts once fully developed. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. Respectfully submitted, Af - Sean Conrad Senior Planner Report compiled: August 23, 2006 Attachments: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk )m�es H. Patrick City Manager Return to: Theresa White Kalispell City Clerk PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 RESOLUTION NO. 5144 A RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE ALTERATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL BY INCLUDING THEREIN AS AN ANNEXATION CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON "EXHIBIT A", LOCATED IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, TO BE KNOWN AS MEADOWS ADDITION NO.382; TO ZONE SAID PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, AND TO DECLARE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a petition from The Meadows, Inc., the owner of property located on the south side of Four Mile Drive, approximately 400 feet south of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive, requesting that the City of Kalispell annex the territory into the City, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell Planning Department has made a report on The Meadows' Annexation Request, #KA-06-8, dated July 28, 2006, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the territory be zoned City R-4, Two Family Residential, on approximately 14.65 acres upon annexation into the City of Kalispell, and WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell desires to annex said property in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2, Part 46, Montana Code Annotated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That all the real property as described above be annexed to the City of Kalispell and the boundary of the City is altered to so provide, and shall be known as Meadows Addition No. 382. SECTION II. upon the effective date of this Resolution, the City Cleric is directed to make and certify under the seal of the City, a copy of the record of these proceedings as are entered on the minutes of the City Council and file said documents with the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder. From and after the date of filing of said documents as prepared by the City Clerk, or on the effective date hereof, whichever shall occur later, said annexed territory is part of the City of Kalispell and its citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws and ordinances and regulations in force in the City of Kalispell and shall be entitled to the same privileges and benefits as are other parts of the City. SECTION III. The territory annexed by this Resolution shall be zoned in accordance with the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2006. ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor EXHIBIT "A" A tract of land, situated, lying, and being in Government Lot 2 of Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW corner of said Government Lot 2 of Section 1; thence South 00053' West, and along the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 2, a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on the Southerly boundary line of a county road and the True Point of Beginning of the tract of land being described; thence East and along the Southerly boundary line of said county road, a distance of 995.20 feet to a point; thence South 01 ° 13' West, a distance of 646.40 feet to a point; thence North 89049'30" West, a distance of 991.40 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 2; thence North 00°53' East, and along the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 2, a distance of 643.30 feet to the Point of Beginning. Return to: Theresa White Kalispell City Clerk PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 ORDINANCE NO.1583 .AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO.1460), BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS TRACT 4 LOCATED IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA (PREVIOUSLY ZONED COUNTY SAG-10, SUBURBAN AGRICULTURAL) TO CITY R-4 (TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL), WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL GROWTH POLICY 2020, AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Meadows, Inc., the owner of the property described above, petitioned the City of Kalispell that the zoning classification attached to the above described tract of land be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, with a Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 14.65 acres of land, and WHEREAS, the property is approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive, and WHEREAS, the petition of The Meadows, Inc., was the subject of a report compiled by the Kalispell City Planning Office, Staff Report #KPUD-06-04, in which the Kalispell Planning Department evaluated the petition and recommended that the property as described above be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, with a Planned Unit Development overlay, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board held a Public Hearing on the matter on August 8, 2006, and recommended that the initial zoning be City R-4, Two Family Residential with a Planned Unit Development overlay, and WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the proposal to zone the property as described R-4, Two Family Residential with a Planned Unit Development overlay, 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 the Kalispell Planning Department as set forth in Staff Report No. KPUD-06-4. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. 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 R-4, Two Family Residential with a Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 14.65 acres. SECTION II. The Planned Unit Development proposed by The Meadows, Inc. upon the real property described. above is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: General Conditions: 1. That the development of the site shall be in substantial compliance with the following plans: • PUD plan and phasing plan dated 7-3-06 • Building elevations submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Cross section view of buildings 3, 12, 10 and 18 submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Detailed landscape schematic plan for buildings 17, 18 and 19 dated 7-31-06 • Detail retention area enclosure dated 7-31-06; and materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the PUD as approved by the City Council. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit each building within the development shall be freestanding with regards to utilities and infrastructure being in place or bonded for to serve the individual building. Bonding for utilities and infrastructure shall not exceed 35% for the individual building. 3. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building all infrastructure and landscaping immediately adjacent to the building shall be in place to serve the individual unit. The infrastructure shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana and where appropriate accepted by the City of Kalispell. 4. The clubhouse, trail system and. putting green shall be completed as part of Phase I of the development. The clubhouse shall be approximately 4,000 square feet and provide for an indoor assembly area and recreational activities as indicated on the application materials. Prior to issuance of a building permit for buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19 a cross section shall be provided to the planning department showing the maximum building height to not exceed a height of 2-5 21 feet as measured from the southern property boundary immediately adjacent to the individual building sites.. 6. The development is permitted one 4' x 10' entry monument sign made of stone and wood elements used in the design of the buildings. The sign shall be located in the vicinity of the main entrance of the development. Prior to installing the sign, it shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee. 7. Street lighting shall be located within the development and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. 8. Approval of the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of four years from the date of approval. Prior to issuance of any building permit for Phase I: 9. New infrastructure required to serve the development shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards; and shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana. All work shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction. This infrastructure shall include but not be limited to streets, street lighting, street signage, curb, gutter, and sidewalks. In addition to the streets within the development Four Mile Drive, as it fronts the development, shall be improved to the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. 10. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current City standards for design and construction. 11. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure along Four Mile Drive and water and sewer lines located within the development have been accepted by the City of Kalispell. 12. Easements for water and sewer lines shall be dedicated to the City of Kalispell and shown on the approved utility plans. The easement widths shall meet the requirements of the Kalispell Public Works Department. 13. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: 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 5. 14. The developer shall submit a copy of the traffic impact study to the Montana Department of Transportation for a systems impact review. Any necessary improvements required from the Montana Department of Transportation to mitigate impacts of the development on the highway system shall be completed. 15. A final landscape design shall be submitted to the planning department and parks and recreation department for review and approval. 16. The PUD plan shall be revised to show 5-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to the street fronting buildings 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19. The PUD plan shall also be revised to provide for a minimum 20-foot setback from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door for all of the units. Note: The implementation of these conditions may result in the loss of units within the PUD. 17. That covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the development shall be provided that include a provision for the maintenance of the private roads within the development, notification of snow removal of the sidewalks adjacent to the roads and sidewalk adjacent to Four Mile Drive and include the maintenance and upkeep of the boulevard along Four Mile Drive. 18. The private roads within the development 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. 19, A letter from the US Postal Service shall be included stating the Service has reviewed and approved of the design and location of the mail delivery site. The mail delivery site shall be installed or bonded for prior to construction of buildings in Phase I. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall also be included in the plans to be reviewed by the Public Works Department. 20, 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. On going conditions: 21. All utilities shall be installed underground. 22. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 23. Hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-8. 24. The propea owners shall waive their right to protest a future sl2ecial improvement district for the upgrade of Four Mile Drive: 25. A letter shall be prepared by City staff and signed by the City Council requesting the Montana Department of Transportation to study the intersection of HighwayHighwAy 93 and Four Mile Drive to determine the intersections adequacy to handle the increase in traffic from this development and other developments pmposed along Four Mile Drive. 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 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2006. Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk KA-06-8 The Meadows Annexation Cost of Services Analysis (Residential) Once annexed to the City, full City services will be made available to the property owner. Any necessary infrastructure associated with this development will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Design and Construction standards and any other development policies, regulations or ordinances that may apply. Note that water and sewer are available along Four Mile Drive and would be extended to the property at the time the applicant develops the condominium development called "The Meadows". Number of Dwellin Units proposed to be annexed 138 condominium units Estimated Increase in Po ulation; (based on US Census Figure of 2.2 per household) 304 Cost of Services Per capita costs • Fire: $68.84 per person per year. Additional costs to the fire department Police: $ l 10 per resident per year. Additional costs to the police department Administration: $39.48. Additional cost to administration • Solid Waste: Additional cost to solid waste 304 x 68.84 = $ 20,927 304 x 110.00 = $ 33,440 304 x 39.48 = $ 12,002 (none for five years) = $ 0 Lineal. Feet Costs: (Lineal feet - All roads within development will be privately owned and mainted, the sewer and water mains will be maintained by the City) • Roads: $1.14 per lineal foot Additional cost in road maintenance Water: $3.44 per lineal foot Additional cost in water line maintenance • Sewer: $5.50 per lineal foot Additional cost in sewer maintenance Storm sewer maintenance costs: Average Square foot per unit - 4,624 square feet This is capped at if2 ac. 0x1.14= $ 0 2,400 x 3.44 = $ 8,256 2,600 x 5.50 = $ 14,300 1 No. of units x square foot x 0.004018 Total AnticiRgted Cost of Services: Anticipated Revenue Generated Assessments based on square footage: 138 x 4,624 x $0.004018 =$ 2,564 Avera a square foot per unit: 4,64 square feet 91 489 Storm sewer assessment $0.004018 per square foot Revenue from storm sewer assessments 138 x 4,624 x $0.004018 = $ 2,564 • Street maintenance assessment $0.0101 per square foot Revenue from street maintenance assessments 138 x 4,624 x $0.0101 - $ 6,445 • Urban forestry assessment $0.00135 per square foot Revenue from urban forestry assessments 138 x 4,624 x $0.00135 = $ 861 Special Assessments: There are no special assessments. General revenue: • Assessed value per unit: $ 250,000/unit Total assessed value: 138 x 250,000 = $ 34,500,000 Total taxable: 34,500,000 x 0.03543 = $ 1,222,335 • Total additional general revenue based on 1.70 mill levy: $1,222,335 x 0.170 Total Revenue Generated to the City NET ADDITIONAL ANNUAL REVENUE TO THE CITY: $ 0 $ 207,797 $ 2.7,667 126 1.78 NOTE: This information is based upon assumptions regarding building valuations and does not take into consideration the build -out time or changes in methods of assessment and estimated costs associated with services. This information can only be used as a general estimate of the anticipated cost of services and revenue. Z: \FRD0\TRANSMITRLS\2096�KA06-8 THE MEADOWS CSTOFSVC&DOC 2 City of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2 Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.com August 22, 2005 Jaynes H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell P.Q. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: The Meadows, Inc. - Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-4/PUD, a 138 unit condominium project. Dear Jim: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on August 8, 2006 and held a public hearing to consider a request for annexation and an initial zoning designation of R-4/PUD, Two Family Residential, on approximately 14.65 acres. The requested PUD overlay district would allow 138 condominium units on the property which would be a mix of multi- family buildings containing between 4 and 10 condominium units. The property is located on the south side of Four Mile Drive, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive. The property address is 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive and can be described as Tract 4 located in Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Sean Conrad of the Kalispell Planning Department, presented staff report #KA-06-8 and evaluated the proposal. He noted the proposed development plans for the property and neighborhood concerns and that staff is recommending approval of the proposed R-4 / PUD zoning. During the public hearing the consultants for the project provided an overview of the project regarding site design, architectural style of the units, water, sewer, road and storm water locations and anticipated traffic impacts associated with the development. Two other members from the public spoke in favor of the development. Three people spoke against the project with concerns regarding the additional traffic, the density of the proposed development being out of character with the surrounding area and the proposed height of the buildings impacting the views of existing homes located south of the development. Several other people spoke neither for or against the development but requested the planning board look at development patterns in the area rather than this particular site when making a recommendation and to insure that the traffic and building heights were adequately addressed. The Meadows, Inc. Annexation and Initial Zoning August 23, 2006 Page 2 The planning board discussed the development proposal and the testimony. After discussion of the issues raised in the staff report and at the public hearing the planning board made several additions to the recommended conditions of approval as follows: A motion was made to add a condition requiring the property owners to waive their right to protest a future special improvement district for the upgrade of Four Mile Drive. This motion was approved on a 5 to 1 vote. • The planning board struggled with the building height issue but ultimately made a motion to amend condition no. 5 to provide for a maximum height of 21 feet as measured from the southern property boundary for units 8, 17, 18 and 19. The consultant felt that the 21 foot height limit was workable for those units. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to prepare a letter to be sent to the Montana Department of Transportation requesting that the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive be studied for its current adequacy to handle the increase in traffic from this development and other developments proposed along Four Mile Drive. The motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote. After the amendments the original motion to recommend approval of the proposed R- 4/PUD zoning overlay district was approved on a 5 to 1 vote. The planning board member voting against the PUD zoning district cited concerns of traffic impacts, current status of Four Mile Drive, private roads within the development and design of the units within the development. Specifically, that the units have the garage doors in the front with the front door located down a long corridor. The planning board has discouraged such designs in the past. Please schedule this matter for the September 5, 2006 regular Kalispell City Council meeting. You may contact this board or Sean Conrad at the Kalispell Planning Department if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Kalispell City Planning Board WC Timothyrton President Attachments: Exhibit A - Petition to Annex Staff report ##KA-06-8/ KPUD-06-4 and application materials Draft minutes from the 8/8/06 planning board meeting c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk c w/o Att: The Meadows, Inc., 8-19t Street East, Kalispell, MT 59901 Sitescape Associates, Attn: Bruce Lutz, P.O. Box 1417, Columbia Falls, MT 59912 The Meadows, Inc. Annexation and Initial Zoning August 23, 2006 Page 2 EXHIBIT A THE MEADOWS R-4/PUD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS RECONEMENDED BY THE KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD AUGUST 8, 2006 The Kalispell City Planning Board held a public hearing on this matter at the regular meeting of the planning board of August 8, 2006. The following conditions are recommended for the planned unit development: General Conditions: 1. That the development of the site shall be in substantial compliance with the following plans: PUD plan and phasing plan dated 7-3-06 • Building elevations submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Cross section view of buildings 3, 12, 10 and 18 submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Detailed landscape schematic plan for buildings 17, 18 and 19 dated 7-31- 06 • Detail retention area enclosure dated 7-31-06; and materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the PUD as approved by the city council. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit each building within the development shall be freestanding with regards to utilities and infrastructure being in place or bonded for to serve the individual building. Bonding for utilities and infrastructure shall not exceed 35% for the individual building. 3. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building all infrastructure and landscaping immediately adjacent to the building shall be in place to serve the individual unit. The infrastructure shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana and where appropriate accepted by the City of Kalispell. 4. The clubhouse, trail system and putting green shall be completed as part of Phase I of the development. The clubhouse shall be approximately 4,000 square feet and provide for an indoor assembly area and recreational activities as indicated on the application materials. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19 a cross section shall be provided to the planning department showing the maximum building height to not exceed a height of 2& 21 feet as measured from the southern property boundary immediately adjacent to the individual building sites.. 6. The development is permitted one 4' x 10' entry monument sign made of stone and wood elements used in the design of the buildings. The sign shall be located in the vicinity of the main entrance of the development. Prior to installing the sign, it shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee, 7. Street lighting shall be located within the development and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. 8. Approval of the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of four years from the date of approval. Prior to issuance of an -building permit for Phase 1: 9. New infrastructure required to serve the development shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards; and shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana. All work shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction. This infrastructure shall include but not be limited to streets, street lighting, street signage, curb, gutter, and sidewalks. In addition to the streets within the development Four Mile Drive, as it fronts the development, shall be improved to the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. 10. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current City standards for design and construction. 11. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure along Four Mile Drive and water and sewer lines located within the development have been accepted by the City of Kalispell. 12. Easements for water and sewer lines shall be dedicated to the City of Kalispell and shown on the approved utility plans. The easement widths shall meet the requirements of the Kalispell Public Works Department. 13. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: 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 5. 14. The developer shall submit a copy of the traffic impact study to the Montana Department of Transportation for a systems impact review. Any necessary The Meadows, Inc. Annexation and Initial Zoning August 23, 2006 Page 2 improvements required from the Montana Department of Transportation to mitigate impacts of the development on the highway system shall be completed. 15. A final landscape design shall be submitted to the planning department and parks and recreation department for review and approval. 16. The PUD plan shall be revised to show 5-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to the street fronting buildings 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19. The PUD plan shall also be revised to provide for a minimum 20-foot setback from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door for all of the units. Note: The implementation of these conditions may result in the loss of units within the PUD. 17. That covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the development shall be provided that include a provision for the maintenance of the private roads within the development, notification of snow removal of the sidewalks adjacent to the roads and sidewalk adjacent to Four Mile Drive and include the maintenance and upkeep of the boulevard along Four Mile Drive. 18. The private roads within the development 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. 19. A letter from the US Postal Service shall be included stating the Service has reviewed and approved of the design and location of the mail delivery site. The mail delivery site shall be installed or bonded for prior to construction of buildings in Phase 1. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall also be included in the plans to be reviewed by the Public Works Department. 20. 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. On going conditions: 21, All utilities shall be installed underground. 22. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 23. Hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-8. 24. The Rroperty owners shall waive their ri t to protest a future special improvement district for the upgrade of Four Mile Drive. 25. A letter shall be prepared by City staff and signed by the City Council requesting the Montana Department of Transportation to study the intersection of Hi wa 93 and Four Mile Drive to determine the intersections adequacy to handle the increase in traffic from this development and other developments proposed along Four Mile Drive. THE MEADOWS, INC REQUEST FOR INITIAL ZONING OF R 4 UPON ANNEXATION KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #KA-06-08 JULY 28, 2006 A report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding the initial zoning of R-4 upon annexation to the City on property in northwest Kalispell along Four Mile Drive. A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for August 8, 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 property owner has petitioned for annexation and initial zoning classification of R-4, Two Family Residential. The property includes two single-family residences located on 14.65 acres. The property owners are requesting city services in order to construct 19 mulit-family dwellings requested through a Planned Unit Development (PUD) submitted concurrently with the annexation and initial zoning request. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. This property wyl be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7-2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. A. Petitioner and Owners: Technical, Assistance: The Meadows, Inc. 8-1st Street East Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 756-7373 Sitescape Associates P.O. Box 1417 Columbia Falls, MT 59912 (406) 892-3492 B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for annexation is situated on the south side of Four Mile Drive, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive. The property address is 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive and can be described as Tract 4 located in Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. C. E2dsting zoning: The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The purpose of the SAG-10 district is to provide and preserve agricultural functions and to provide a buffer between urban and unlimited agricultural uses, encourage separation of such uses in areas where potential conflict of uses will be minimized, and to provide areas of estate -type residential development. D. Proposed Zoning: City R-4, Two -Family Residential, has been proposed for the property. The R-4 zoning district allows both single-family residences and duplexes as permitted uses. The minimum lot size for the district is 6,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 50 feet with setbacks of 15 feet in the front, 10 feet in the rear and five feet on the sides. E. Saxe: The area proposed for annexation and zoning contains approximately 14.65 acres. F. Existing Land Use: Currently the property contains two single-family homes. G. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: The immediate area is primarily characterized by single-family homes to the south and a mix of single-family homes and commercial businesses to the east. North of the project site is a large park (160 acres) with a portion of the park comprised of soccer, football, baseball and softball fields with an associated parking and trail system. To the west of the project site is a vacant piece of property. North: Park; City P-1 zoning East: Single-family homes and commercial businesses; City R-4 and City R-5 PUD zoning South: Single-family homes; County R-2 zoning. West: Vacant land; City R-4 PUD zoning H. General Land Use Character: This site is in somewhat of a mixed use area generally characterized as residential with single-family neighborhoods to the south and east, a professional business office center east of the site at the intersection of Four Mile Drive and Highway 93, park area and open space to the north and vacant land to the west. I. Availability of Public Services and Extension of Services: Public services, including water and sewer are currently available to the east of this site. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M.C.A. Findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A. 1. Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan? The property is designated by the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 as "Urban Residential" which is defined as anticipating three to twelve dwellings per acre. Because of the plans for the provision of public sewer to the site, the proposed R- 4 zoning designation is in compliance with the growth policy designation. The R- 4 zoning has a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet, which would provide an anticipated density compatible with the growth policy designation. Typically, an R-4 zone would provide 5 single-family residential units or up to 10- 12 duplex or townhouse units per gross acre. The owners have submitted a Planned Unit Development (PUD) application in conjunction with the request for annexation and initial zoning. The PUD requests permission to construct 138 condominium units within 19 separate multi -family buildings. The proposed density in the PUD would be 9.4 units per acre, within the range of allowable dwelling, units per acre in the Urban Residential Growth Policy designation. 2. Is the re uested zone desigged to lessen congestion 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 relatively low density of the area currently. The proposed zoning carries with it the checks and balances, including the need for review, which will insure that traffic flows and access are appropriately addressed. The potential densities afforded by this zone will not overtax the existing City road systems. As part of any potential future development, the owners would need to take steps to help mitigate any significant traffic impact. 3. Will the re uested zone secure safety from firepanic, and other dangers? Adequate access and public facilities would be made 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 water and sewer will be extended to the property. 4. Will the requested zone promote the health and general welfare? The requested zoning classification will promote the health and general welfare by restricting land uses to those which would be compatible with the adjoining properties and provides a place for new housing in the community. 5. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? Setback, height, and coverage standards for development occurring on this site are established in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to insure adequate light and air is provided. 6. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land? As previously noted, this area has been anticipated for residential development and has, in fact, developed in that manner to the east. Since public water and sewer are available to the area, the urban land use designation is appropriate. The anticipated density generally falls within the proposed R-4 zoning designation. All public services and facilities will be available to serve this property. 7. Will the re uested 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 agricultural densities to a more intensive residential. use. However, the intensity of the uses of the property would be in direct relationship to the availability of public services, utilities and facilities as well as compliance with established design standards. The design standards and availability of facilities would provide the structure needed to insure that there wit not be an overcrowding of the land or undue concentration of people. Minimum lot standards and use standards as well as development standards will avoid the undue concentration of people at the time the property is further developed. S. Will the reguested zone facilitate the adequate rovision of transportation, water, sewerage, -schools arks and other public requirements? 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. New improvements to the property such as roads, water, sewer, parks and drainage would be installed in accordance with City policies and standards at the developers' expense thereby insuring that there is adequate provision of services to the site prior to development. 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. 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. 9. Does the requested zone &e consideration to the articular suitability of the property for particular_ uses? The proposed R-4 zoning district is consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area and will provide the basis for the future land uses on this property, in accordance with the Kalispell Growth Policy. This zoning gives adequate consideration to the suitability of this property for the proposed use and concurrent PUD proposal. The proposed zoning is consistent with the anticipated 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 reguested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The general character of the area is transition between existing urban residential located south and east of the site and larger undeveloped tracts of land to the west and northwest. The proposed zoning allows this development to address needs within the community for housing on public services and in reasonable proximity to existing commercial businesses, health care facilities and schools. Availability of public water and sewer to the area indicate that this type of 4 development will continue to occur along Four Mile Drive with similar types of uses as is proposed with this property, i.e. urban residential rather than rural. It appears that the proposed zoning gives reasonable consideration to the character of the district. 11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? City standards will ensure that there is high quality development that will ensure the value of buildings and homes are protected, maintained and conserved. Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the zoning will promote compatible and like uses on this property as are found on 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 property. The proposed zoning is consistent with the growth policy and surrounding zoning in the area. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-06-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two Family Residential. THE MEADOWS PUD KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #KPUD-06-4 JULY 28, 2006 A report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding the request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on a property located an northwest Kalispell along Four Mile Drive. A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for August 8, 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 INFORIWATION: This is a request for a PUD to allow the development of a residential condominium project in the City of Kalispell that would allow some flexibility in street design standards and allowing multi family units within the requested R-4 zoning district. A. Petitioner and Owners: The Meadows, Inc. 8 First Street East Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 756-7373 Technical Assistance: Sitescape Associates P.O. Box 1417 Columbia Falls, MT 59912 (406) 892-3492 B. Nature of the Request: This is a request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning overlay on property requesting City R-4, Two Family Residential, zoning. The property is currently zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The property owners have requested annexation into the City of Kalispell with the initial zoning of R-4. The PUD will be known as The Meadows and is proposing 138 condominium units on approximately 14.65 acres. The development consists of a mix of multi -family buildings with four to ten units per building. The proposed plan departs from the requested zoning of R-4 in that there will be multi -family dwellings on the property. The R-4 zoning district permits single-family and duplex units and conditionally allows for three or more attached townhouse units. Multi -family dwellings are typically found in the low, medium and high density residential apartment zoning districts and in some of the business zoning districts. The multi -family dwellings would maintain the minimum setback requirements within the R-4 zoning district with the closest building at approximately 22 feet to the property boundary. In addition to the multi -family dwellings on the property the proposed PUD calls for common landscaped open space, trails and a clubhouse facility. Access to the dwelling units and clubhouse will be provided by a private road with two accesses off of Four Mile Drive. The private access road will have a driving surface of 28 feet with gutters on both sides to handle storm water runoff. The storm water is proposed to be collected and contained in a detention basin located in the northeast corner of the project adjacent to Four Mile Drive. C. Location and Legal. Description of Property: The property proposed for annexation is situated on the south side of Four Mile Drive, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive. The address is 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive and can be described as Tract 4 located in Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. View of the property from Four Mile Drive. Houses in the background are located in the North Haven Subdivision., immediately south of the proposed development D. Existing Land Use and Zoning: The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The purpose of the SAG- 10 district is to provide and preserve agricultural functions and to provide a buffer between urban and unlimited agricultural uses, encourage separation of such uses in areas where potential conflict of uses will be minimized, and to provide areas of estate -type residential development. On the 14.65 acre property are two homes located on approximately two acres with the remaining land vacant at this time. E. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: North: Park; City P- 1 zoning East: Single-family homes and commercial businesses; City R-4 and City R-5 PUD zoning South: Single-family homes; County R-2 zoning. West: Vacant land; City R-4 PUD zoning F. General Land Use Character: This site is in somewhat of a mixed use area generally characterized as residential with single-family neighborhoods to the south and east, several townhouse units and a professional business office center east of the site at the intersection of Four Mile Drive and Highway 93, park area and open space to the north and vacant land to the west. 2 developed as part of this development. The potential densities afforded by this zone will not overtax the existing City road systems as shown in the traffic impact study submitted with the PUD application. 3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, 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 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 fire 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 promote the health and ggrieral 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. 5. Will the reguested zone pTovide for adequate 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 R-4 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 residential development. All public services and facilities will be available to serve this development. The requested density for the PUD is approximately 9.4 dwellings per acre. Given the surrounding land uses and zoning districts the proposed PUD density should not result in the overcrowding of land or exceed the density anticipated in this area. 7. Will the reguested zone avoid undue concentration of people? An increase in the number and concentration of people in the area will likely result after this land has been converted from agricultural densities to a more intensive residential use. However, the intensity of the uses of the property would be in direct relationship to the availability of public services, utilities and facilities as well as compliance with established design standards. The design standards and availability of facilities would provide the structure needed to insure that there will not be an overcrowding of the land or undue concentration of people. Minimum lot standards and use standards as well as development standards will avoid the undue concentration of people at the time the property is developed. 11 8. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools arks 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 is available to this site. 9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the property for particular uses? The proposed PUD zoning gives adequate consideration to the suitability of this property for the proposed use by providing a mix of residential buildings with complimentary open space. The property is fairly level with some slopes located on the southwest corner however the type and intensity of development proposed in the PUD can be accommodated on the property. The proposed zoning is consistent with the anticipated land uses in the area and gives due consideration of the suitability of this property for the requested use in the PUD. 10. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The general character of the area is a transition between existing residential subdivisions located south and east of the site and larger undeveloped tracts of land to the west and northwest. The proposed zoning allows this development to address needs within the community for housing on public services and in reasonable proximity to existing commercial businesses, health care facilities and schools. Availability of public water and sewer to the area indicate that this type of development will continue to occur along Four Mile Drive with similar types of uses as is proposed with this property, i.e. urban residential rather than rural. It appears that the proposed zoning gives reasonable consideration to the character of the district. 11. Will the ro osed zone conserve the value of buildings? "Values of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the R-4 zoning and PUD will promote compatible uses on this property and the proposed buildings will be held to a higher architectural and design standard which will complement the surrounding area and conserve the value of buildings. 12. Will the requested zone encoura e the most a ro riate use of the land throughout the municipality? Urban scale residential development should be encouraged in areas where 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. 5 EVALUATION OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: Project Narrative: The Meadows is a residential planned unit development proposed on property currently in the County. The property owners have filed a petition to annex application and have requested the R-4, Two Family Residential zoning district, upon annexation to the City. The property is located on the south side of Four Mile Drive approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive. The owners are proposing a total of 138 condominium units on approximately 14.65 acres that would be a mix of multi -family buildings containing between 4 and 10 condominium units. The overall density of the development is approximately 9.4 dwellings per acre. The multi -family buildings would all be two stories with the building heights at 32.5 feet. The ground level footprint of the buildings would range in size from 4,917 square feet (4 plex) to 11,640 square feet (10 plex). The individual condominium units would range in size from approximately 1,300 square feet to 1,700 square feet and each would be provided with a minimum one car garage and one additional off-street parking space between the garage and the road. The property owners have requested the R-4 zoning district which has a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet and permits either a single-family dwelling or duplex on the lot. Multi -family dwellings are not permitted in the R-4 zoning district. However, the PUD provides the owners some flexibility in the lot layout and type of residential use, which the owners have used to propose multi -family dwellings as well as providing open space throughout the project. The minimum setbacks for the R-4 zone are 15 feet in the front and side corner property boundaries, 10 feet from the rear boundary and 5 feet from the side property boundaries. The owners have provided a minimum setback of 22 feet from the rear and western property boundary, 28 feet from the eastern property boundary, and a 40.5 foot setback from the front property boundary. The development of the 19 proposed multi -family buildings and clubhouse would occur in four separate phases. The PUD application and proposed layout plan note that all roadways and utilities for the buildings will be installed during Phase 1. The PUD application notes that each building phase is scheduled to take one year so that the project will be built out in four to five years depending on market conditions. Pursuant to the PUD phasing plan included with the application, phase 1 will consist of buildings 4, 5, 10, 11 and 12. The clubhouse will also be constructed during this phase. Phase 2 will include buildings 1, 2, 3, 6, and 13. Phase 3 will include buildings 7, 8, 9, and 16. Phase 4 will consist of buildings 14, 15, 17, 18, and 19. The open space/common area element of the PUD will include 6.2 acres or 42% of the site. The entire open space within the PUD will be landscaped and irrigated and have a three rail cedar split rail fence along the perimeter of the properly. The preliminary PUD plan calls for a mixture of evergreen trees and small and large varieties of deciduous trees. The trees will be placed along the access road and lining the perimeter of the project. Around each of the residential buildings within the PUD a combination of shrubs and perennials will be planted. Other areas not immediately adjacent to the residential buildings or clubhouse will be seeded and irrigated. 0 Criteria for the Creation of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District The following information and evaluation criteria are from Section: 27.21.020(2), of the 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 setbacks or height restrictions but does deviate as far as the type of residential units proposed on the property. Single family and duplex units are anticipated in the R-4 zoning district whereas multi -family dwellings are not permitted or conditionally permitted within the zoning district. The proposed multi -family dwellings would allow a greater density on the properly that might otherwise not be achievable if the owners were to propose a subdivision creating a number of duplex lots. With the increase in dwelling units on the property the owners are proposing over 40% of the property to be placed in a common landscaped area. The proposed PUD is deemed to be in the public interest because it provides housing options in an area of the City for which the type of density proposed has been anticipated. Higher density housing is encouraged to be located in close proximity to schools, businesses and services such as the sports complex, junior college, fixture high school and commercial centers which are all located within '/2 mile of the property. The owners have also requested a sign located on the west side of the main entrance off of Four Mile Drive. The sign shown on the PUD plan and accompanying application requests a 4' x 10' entry monument sign utilizing the project logo and made of stone and wood elements used in the design of the proposed buildings. The zoning ordinance allows for subdivision identification signs however these are limited to one sign which cannot exceed 20 square feet in area or two signs which cannot exceed 12 square feet each per exclusive entrance to the subdivision or tract. The proposed monument sign exceeds the allowable signage in the zoning ordinance however, given the density of the development, providing one larger sign indicating the name of the development and constructed out of materials complimenting the buildings within the PUD would appear to be in the public's interest because it would maintain the aesthetic value the development is trying to achieve and limit the signage along Four Mile Drive to one sign instead to two. ii 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. The preliminary PUD plan calls out 6.2 acres of open space. The entire open space within the PUD will be landscaped and irrigated. The preliminary PUD plan calls for a mixture of evergreen trees and small and large varieties of deciduous trees. The trees will be placed along the access road and lining the perimeter of the project. Around each of the residential buildings the PUD plan shows a combination of shrubs and perennials will be planted. Other areas not immediately adjacent to the residential buildings or clubhouse will be seeded and irrigated. The proposed PUD would allow 138 condominium units on the property and the city could expect the PUD to house an additional 300 residents. if the PUD were treated as a subdivision the owners would have to provide parkland dedication or cash in lieu payments equal to 4.1 acres. The proposed PUD will be providing 6.2 acres of open space within which will be a trail system totaling 1,626 linear feet, a putting green and 4,000 square foot clubhouse. The open space proposed and the amenities which would be provided on -site for the residences of The Meadows appear to be adequate. The homeowners association would be responsible for the maintenance of the open space and the amenities within the open space. The owners have submitted a draft set of the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the proposed project which include the maintenance of the common facilities including the clubhouse. if properly developed and maintained it appears that the proposed open space areas will provide adequate useable park and open space area for the residents within the planned unit development. 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 water and sewer to the site will be required to serve the development. Most of the public utilities will come from existing utilities in the immediate area. Four Mile Drive, located along the north end of the property, will be required to be upgraded to current City standards including widening of the roadway and the installation of curb, gutters, a landscape boulevard and sidewalk. 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 development include two accesses off of Four Mile Drive. The access road, shown as The Meadows Loop on the PUD plan, will be a 28 foot wide roadway with curb and gutters on both sides. Sidewalks are shown fronting most of the buildings within the PUD however the current plan does not show sidewalks immediately adjacent to buildings 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19. The owners have agreed to place 5-foot wide sidewalks fronting these units and to provide street crossings to tie into the sidewalk system shown on the PUD plaza.. Therefore, a revised PUD plan will be required prior to issuance of the first building permit showing the additional sidewalks adjacent to buildings 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19. A view of Four Mile Drive. The project site is located on the left side of the road in the vicinity of the trees. The streets are intended to be private as well as the sidewalks and trail system. As a recommended condition of approval the covenants will need to be clarified that the internal streets serving the development are private and all repairs and maintenance is up to the homeowners association. In addition, the covenants will need to note that during snow periods sidewalks adjacent to the street will need to be cleared of snow in accordance with the City of Kalispell ordinance code. The zoning code requires that each unit have a minimum of two off-street parking spaces. The PUD plan shows garages between 15 and 30 feet from the edge of the curb along the private roadway. During discussions with the owners at the City's site review committee meeting, the owners will need to revise the PUD plan to show a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door in order to allow a vehicle to park off the street and off of the 5-foot sidewalk. The detail landscape plan for buildings 17, 1.8 and 19 shows the increased setbacks for those buildings to accommodate the 20- foot setback for the garages, however, a revised PUD plan will be required prior to issuance of the first building permit if the PLTD is approved. The proposed multi -family units will be located throughout the property with the majority of 8 plex units proposed in the development located along Four Mile Drive. The buildings will be a maximum height of 32.5 feet with the exterior of the buildings comprising a combination of rock, horizontal and vertical siding and pitched roofs with composite shingles. 9 Residents along the southern boundary of the proposed development have provided comments to the planning department regarding the effects the buildings would have on their views. Specifically, residents along the southern property boundary are concerned with those buildings closest to them, buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19. As stated above, the maximum building height would be 32.5 feet. Buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19 are located down slope from existing homes in the North. Haven Subdivision adjacent to the southern boundary of the proposed development. The existing homes along the southern property boundary of the proposed development have a prominent view of Big Mountain and the adjacent mountain ranges. Due to this prominent view and the large size of the multi -family buildings the planning department would agree that views should be a consideration in reviewing the PUD. It would be reasonable to expect development to eventually happen on this property and moreover residential type development. The homes in North Haven are all single-family with some two story homes. Therefore, homeowners adjacent to the southern property boundary of the development could assume that if a residential development were to be developed that housing heights would be up to two stories in height, somewhere between 25 and 30 feet. The consultant has provided a cross section view of building 18 and the height of the building as it would appear at the southern property boundary. The cross section indicates that the building would be a maximum height of 21 feet because some excavation into the hillside would be required. Although the planning department would agree with neighboring property owners that new development should not negatively impact their view, the department also recognizes that a maximum building height at the property boundary between the development and the lots in North Haven Subdivision could be up to 25 feet in height and that this would be reasonable given the scale of the buildings proposed and the proximity to the property lines. Therefore, the planning department would recommend that prior to the issuance of a building permit for buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19 that a cross section be provided to the planning department showing that the building will be under the maximum height of 25 feet as measured from the southern property boundary. To address some of the concerns of neighboring property owners, the consultant has provided a detailed landscape schematic for buildings 17, 18 and 19. The plan calls for evergreen and deciduous trees to be planted between the proposed buildings and the property boundary. The plan also calls for a 3-3.5 foot segment wall located behind the building to provide for a level area to be landscaped with trees, shrubs and perennials for the further screening of the buildings to neighboring properties to the south. Storm water management will be required to be handled and retained on site. A retention pond is proposed in the northeast corner of the property adjacent to Four Mile Drive. The retention pond will be surrounded by a six foot high wood fence with cultured stone columns with concrete caps located at points around the pond. The attached landscape plan for the retention area indicates a mixture of shrubs and bushes between the fence and the sidewalk along Four Mile Drive to help give some visual relief to the fence. The common area and clubhouse, putting green and walking trails in the open space area will provide the recreational amenity within the development. These facilities will be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. 10 4. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established; The general character of the area is a transition between existing residential subdivisions located south and east of the site and larger undeveloped tracts of land to the west and northwest. The future development of these tracts of land to the west and northwest will most likely not be completely single-family residential but a combination of single-family and multi -family units and possibly some office buildings. Existing R-4 and RA-1 (Low Density Residential Apartment) zoning located to the west of this site has had an approved PUD in the past to allow a mixture of a convalescent care facility with duplex and triplex units surrounding the facility. To the northwest of the site are 80+ acres of land zoned R-4 PUD. This PUD allows for the single-family, duplex and multi -family units to be constructed on the property as well as professional offices. The requested PUD would deviate from the typical residential subdivisions located to the south and east of the project site. However, given the surrounding zoning districts and the potential for a mixture of housing types, the proposed multi -family buildings would not adversely affect the character of this changing neighborhood. The traffic generated by the proposed 138 condominium units has concerned several neighboring property owners. The owners had WGM Group, Inc. out of Missoula prepare a traffic impact study as part of the application. package. The traffic impact study concluded that at full build out, traffic generated by the development would not decrease the level of service along Four Mile Drive. At the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive the traffic impact study indicates increased delays to be expected at the proposed developments full build out. The delays noted in the traffic impact study are referenced as the Level of Service (LOS) for each of the turning movements at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive. The LOS for the intersection is determined by the control delay experienced by drivers and is calculated for each movement, for each approach, and for the intersection as a whole. The delay value used in determining LOS is known as control delay. Control delay is defined as the total delay experienced by a driver and includes initial deceleration delay, queue move -up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. The delay a vehicle experiences is a function of the capacity of the approach, the volume of traffic, and the signal timing. The LOS values of a signalized intersection are represented by the letters A through F. LOS A represents the best control delay scenario which has little or no waiting time at the intersection. LOS F represents the worst case scenario where waiting times at a particular intersection may take 80 seconds or longer for a vehicle to execute the desired movement; making a left turn, right turn or continuing straight through the intersection. The traffic impact study notes that current PM peak hours, between 4:00 and 6:00 pm, at the intersection. of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive, for left turns from Highway 93 onto Four Mile Drive, have a LOS of F. The future build out of the development, which in the traffic impact study is suggested to be in 2009, will 'increase the delay for this turning movement from is current 261 seconds per vehicle to 641 seconds per vehicle during the PM peak hours. 11 The concern of neighboring residents is that certain turning movements, including left turns onto Four Mile Drive, at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive are already impacted as noted above. The additional traffic projected to be generated by the proposed development will only compound the problem. The traffic impact study was forwarded to the Kalispell office of the Montana Department of Transportation (MDOT). The MDOT office commented that as a condition of approval the developer will need to submit a copy of the traffic impact study to MDOT for a systems impact review to be conducted out of Helena. MDOT's office in Helena will review the traffic impact study and, if necessary, require improvements to the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive in order to mitigate traffic impacts from the proposed development. This recommendation has been added as a condition of approval for the PUD. View of the intersection of Hwy. 93 and Four Mile Drive looking north. Left turn movements onto Four Mile Drive from Hwy. 93 are already difficult during PM peak hours of traffic. Impacts to the level of service will occur at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive as a result of the proposed development. Whether mitigation for the decrease in level of service at the intersection is required will be up to MDOT. Potential future development in the area may alleviate some of the congestion at Four Mile Drive and Highway 93. This future development would include the 25 acres immediately west of the property zoned R-4 and RA-1 and the $0+ acres located northwest of the property zoned R-4 PUD. In reviewing development projects on these properties, the developers will need - provide connections between Four Mile Drive and existing or future roadways in the area. This would help alleviate some of the traffic concerns in the area but, to date, the planning department has not received any development proposals on these sites. 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; 12 The developers are anticipating that the project would be in four separate phases over the course of four or five years. 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 specific deviations from the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance can be identified based upon the information submitted with the application other than those addressed in the beginning of this report. Public Comments: The planning department has received six comment letters from neighboring property owners as well as office visits from neighbors with the following concerns: L Density of the proposed development This is discussed under PUD evaluation criteria number 4 2. Traffic impacts • This is discussed under PUD evaluation criteria number 4. 3. Building height and impacts to existing views • This is discussed under PUD evaluation criteria number 3. 4. Potential for condominium units to be rented daily or weekly The underlying zoning district for the PUD would be R-4, a residential zoning district within the City of Kalispell. Residential zoning districts do not allow units to be rented daily or weekly. Rentals on a month to month basis are acceptable. Daily or weekly rentals would be considered hotels or motels and found in commercial zoning districts within the City. 5. Garbage collection and maintenance of the common area • The project consultant has stated that garbage collection would be collected by a private contract hauler and that residents would provide individual garbage cans to be placed out on the curb the day of garbage pick up. The draft covenants for the development require a homeowners association to be created for the maintenance of the common areas. 6. Noise and outdoor lighting Noise associated with the development would be typical of a residential neighborhood. All outdoor lighting associated with the buildings would have to comply with the lighting standards in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. These standards require outdoor lighting to be shielded in such a manner that 13 the light does not leave the perimeter of the site. 7. Impact fees The City is currently working on impact fees to be collected prior to the issuance of a building permit. These fees are not required to date and could be expected to be in place by early 2007. RECOhEMNDAT ON The staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-06-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD for The Meadows be approved subject to the following conditions: General Conditions: That the development of the site shall be in substantial compliance with the following plans: • PUD plan and phasing plan dated 7-3-06 • Building elevations submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Cross section view of buildings 3, 12, 10 and 18 submitted with application on 7-3-06 • Detailed landscape schematic plan for buildings 17, 18 and 19 dated 7--31-06 • Detail retention area enclosure dated 7-31-06; and materials and other specifications as well as any additional conditions associated with the PUD as approved by the city council. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit each building within the development shall be freestanding with regards to utilities and infrastructure being in place or bonded for to serve the individual building. Bonding for utilities and infrastructure shall not exceed 35% for the individual building. 3. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building all infrastructure and landscaping immediately adjacent to the building shall be in place to serve the individual unit. The infrastructure shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana and where appropriate accepted by the City of Kalispell. 4. The clubhouse, trail system and putting green shall be completed as part of Phase 1 of the development. The clubhouse shall be approximately 4,000 square feet and provide for an indoor assembly area and recreational activities as indicated on the application materials. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for buildings 8, 17, 18 and 19 a cross section shall be provided to the planning department showing the building under the maximum height of 25 feet as measured from the southern property boundary. 14 6. The development is permitted one 4' x 10' entry monument sign made of stone and wood elements used in the design of the buildings. The sign shall be located in the vicinity of the main entrance of the development. Prior to installing the sign, it shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Architectural Review Cornrnittee. 7. Street lighting shall be located within the development and shall have a full cutoff lens so that it does not intrude unnecessarily onto adjoining properties. 8. Approval of the planned unit development shall be valid for a period of four years from the date of approval. Prior to issuance of any building permit for Phase I: 9. New infrastructure required to serve the development shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards; and shall be certified by an engineer licensed in the State of Montana. All work shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction. This infrastructure shall include but not be limited to streets, street lighting, street signage, curb, gutter, and sidewalks. In addition to the streets within the development Four Mile Drive, as it fronts the development, shall be improved to the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. 10. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current City standards for design and construction. 11. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure along Four Mile Drive and water and sewer lines located within the development have been accepted by the City of Kalispell. 12. Easements for water and sewer lines shall be dedicated to the City of Kalispell and shown on the approved utility plans. The easement widths shall meet the requirements of the Kalispell Public Works Department. 13. The following requirements shall be met per the Kalispell Fire Department: 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. 14. The developer shall submit a copy of the traffic impact study to the Montana Department of Transportation for a systems impact review. Any necessary improvements required from the Montana Department of Transportation to mitigate impacts of the development on the highway system shall be completed. 15 15. A final landscape design shall be submitted to the planning department and parks and recreation department for review and approval. 16. The PUD plan shall be revised to show 5-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to the street fronting buildings 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19. The PUD plan shall also be revised to provide for a minimum 20-foot setback from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door for all of the units. Note: The implementation of these conditions may result in the loss of units within the PUD. 17. That covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the development shall be provided that include a provision for the maintenance of the private roads within the development, notification of snow removal of the sidewalks adjacent to the roads and sidewalk adjacent to Four Mile Drive and include the maintenance and upkeep of the boulevard along Four Mile Drive. 18. The private roads within the development 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. 19. A letter from the US Postal Service shall be included stating the Service has reviewed and approved of the design and location of the mail delivery site. The mail delivery site shall be installed or bonded for prior to construction o buildings in Phase 1. In addition, the mail delivery site and improvements shall also be included in the plans to be reviewed by the Public Works Department. 20. 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. On going conditions: 21. All utilities shall be installed underground. 22. All areas disturbed during development shall be re -vegetated with a weed -free mix immediately after development. 23. Hazardous weed abatement shall be provided in accordance with City of Kalispell Ordinance 10-8. V E I 1 Planning Departmeni 17.2"d Street East, Suite' 11, Kalispell]. MMLA&L44ANKIING DEPARTMENT Telephone: ( 051751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING NAME OF APPLICANT: THE MEADOWS INC. MAIL ADDRESS: 8-1st Street East INTEREST IN PROPERTY: OWNERS CITY/STATE/ZIP: Kalispell, MT 59901 PHONE: 756-7373 Other Parties of Interest to be Notified: PARTIES OF .INTEREST: Sitescape Associates, Attention: Bruce Lutz MAIL ADDRESS: Box 1417 CITY/STATE/ZIP: Columbia Falls, MT PHONE: 892-3492 INTEREST .IN PROPERTY: Land Planning and Landscape Architectural Consultant PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Address of the property: 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive Legal Description: Tract #4 (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract 4) SECTION 1, T28N, R22W (Section, Township, Range) (Attach metes and bounds as .Exhibit A) Land in project (ac) 14.65 Acres The present zoning of the above property is: Flathead County, SAG 10 The proposed zoning of the above property is: Kalispell R-4 with a PUD Overlay State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: The owners of the property seek to change the use of the land from suburban to a planned unit development with attached condominium style residences and common open space, walkways and a clubhouse facility. The property will be accessed off of Four Mile Drive and be located just south of the Kalispell Youth Athletic Complex and north of the North haven Subdivision, east of the Touchmark Property and west of the Greenery Development. 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. (Applicant) (Date) Return to: Theresa White Kalispell City Clerk P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 5990a 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 ;4 v o,. � �; _ 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 interest, 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. ` aq -a6 Poft�ner/Ogn Date z� 6 - 2 L,06 Pe do erI er Date MOTE: You must attach an Exhibit A that provides a bona fide legal description of the property to be annexed. STATE OF MONTANA ) County of Flathead County ss On this day of s .ter` Zdc t , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared —to--- 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 ' ffixed my Notary S the day and year in this certificate first above written.'' Notary Public, State of Montana Residing at My Commission expires: 31 ! ,� -iW STATE OF MONTANA } ss County of Flathead County On this 29 day of , .� r �� , before me, the undersigned, allotary Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared ,-a 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 nay Notary S -the day and year in this certificate first above written. Nam -Public, State of Montana Residing at '1u My Commission expires: 3 { i ai3 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 Exhibit A — Property Descriptions The Meadows A tract of land, situated, lying, and being in Government Lot 2 of Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.,M., Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW Garner of said Government Lot 2 of Section 1; thence South 00°53' West, and along the Westerly boundary line of said Lot 2, a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on the Southerty boundary line of a county road and the True point of Beginning of the tract of land being described, thence East and along the Southerly boundary line of said county road, a distance of 995.20 feet to a point; thencE South 01*13' West, a distance of 646.40 feet to a point; thence North 89'491W West, a distance of 991,40 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary fine of said Lot 2; thence North 00053' East, and along the Westerly boundary fine of said Lot 2, a distance of 643.30 feet to the Point of Beginning. 3 Lf City of KaHSP%4 LLPEANNINGDEPARTMENT Planning Department 17 - 2nd Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 APPLICATION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PROJECT NAME THE MEADOWS I . NAME OF APPLICANT: The Meadows, INC. 2. MAIL ADDRESS: 8-1st Street East 3. CITY/STATE/ZIP: Kalispell, MT 59901 PHONE: 406-756-7373 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER IF DIFFERENT THAN APPLICANT: 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. M.-..0 MAIL ADDRESS: CITY/ STATE / ZIP: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: MAIL ADDRESS: CITY/ STATE/ ZIP: PHONE: PHONE: If there are others who should be notified during the review process, please list those. Sitescape Associates, Attn.- Bruce Lutz, 892-3492, Box 1417, Columbia. Falls Check One: X Initial PUD proposal Amendment to an existing PUD A. Property Address: 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive B. Total Area of Property: 14.65 Acres C. Legal description including section, township & range: Tract 4 in Section 1, T28N, R22W, Flathead County, Montana D. The present zoning of the above property is: Flathead County SAG 10 E. Please provide the following information in a narrative format with supporting drawings or other format as needed: 1 a. An overall description of the goals and objectives for the development of the project. The proposed Meadows development is situated on 14.65 acres of land designated in the Kalispell Growth Policy for between 3 and 12 units per acre. The property is located just south of the Kalispell Youth Athletic Complex, north of North Haven Subdivision, east of the Touchmark (Waterford) and Northland Properties and west of the Greenery Development. The proposed Planned Unit Development calls for 138 condominium units with common landscaped open space, trails and a clubhouse facility. The owners hope to market the project to local soon to retirees', `empty -nesters', °down-sizers' and snowbirds. b. In cases where the development will be executed in increments, a schedule showing the time within phase will be completed. Please refer to the PUD plan sheet that illustrates the phasing plan for the project. There will be four phases of building construction with all of the roads and infrastructure built during the first phase. Each unit building phase is scheduled to take one year so that the project will be built out within four to five years depending on market conditions. 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; The perimeter and interior building setbacks proposed are well within the stipulations set forth in the Kalispell R-4 Zoning District. The minimum setback between buildings and the external property line is 22 feet. The minimum distance between the sides of buildings is 20 feet. The area where the plan departs from typical subdivision development is that the project proposes 32 foot back of curb to back of curb private drives within the condominium development. Since there are no lots being created within the parent tract, there is no call for a 60-foot right-of-way. However, utility and drainage easements will be created and recorded to define infrastructure routes. 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; This project proposes to provide 6.77 acres of open space, a 4000 square foot clubhouse and 1/4 miles of sidewalk and trails as a common open space component of the project. This component equals 42% of the gross area of the property. The gross density of the project is 9.4 units per acre. C. The manner in which services will be provided such as water, sewer, storm water management, schools, roads, traffic management, pedestrian access, recreational facilities and other applicable services and utilities. 2 Please see the attached preliminary water, sewer and storm drainage plan prepared by 48 North Engineering. Also, please see the attached Traffic bnpact Study prepared by WGM Group. The site is adjacent to a regional youth athletic complex (K""fiAC) which also has a pedestrian link that connects with North Meridian Road. The site will be served by Kalispell Public Schools and the site is within walking distance of Flathead Valley Community College. There is a traffic signal at the intersection of Four Mile Drive and U.S. Highway 93. f. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established The area proposed for the Meadows project has been transitioning from semi -rural suburban development to urban residential for the past several years. Developments such as the Greenery and Northland are prime examples of this trend. To the west, the former Waterford Development will be resurrected and proposed at a future date. In addition, State Lands has just sold a large tract of land to the northwest of the site for urban residential development. This is all supported by the Kalispell Growth Policy. g. How the plan provides reasonable consideration to the character of the neighborhood and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed use. The proposed plan conforms to the stipulations set forth in the current Kalispell Growth Policy and provides for efficient use of land for residential housing while encouraging the generous dedication of common and consistently maintained open space. 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. The project open, space will be landscaped and maintained by a homeowner's association set forth in the attached covenants. The final plans will include an automated irrigation system. The level of landscaping will meet or exceed anything else in the surrounding neighborhood. See preliminary landscape plan illustrated on the PUD Plan. i. How the development plan will further the goals, policies and objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy. The proposed plan is intended to fit exactly with the stipulations set forth in the Kalispell Growth Policy. ("Single -Family, Duplex and Lower Density Multi -Family") j. Include site plans, drawings and schematics with supporting narratives where needed that includes the following information: (1). Total acreage and present zoning classifications; See Purr (2). Zoning classification of all adjoining properties; 3 See Attached (3). Density in dwelling units per gross acre; See Plan (4). Location, size height and number of stories for buildings and uses proposed for buildings; See PUD and Architectural Plans (5). Layout and dimensions of streets, parldng areas, pedestrian walkways and surfacing; See PUD and Preliminary Engineering Plans (6). Vehicle, emergency and pedestrian access, traffic circulation and control; See PUD and Preliminary Engineering Plans (7). Location, size, height, color and materials of signs; The development signage will be located on the west side of the main entry road. The sign will be a monument style sign utilizing the project logo and made of stone and wood elements used in the unit design. The sign will conform to the Kalispell Sign. Ordinance. (S). Location and height of fencing and/or screening; A three rail cedar split -rail fence will be installed along the property perimeter to provide a delineation of the boundaries of the Meadows. (9). Location and type of landscaping; See PUD Plan (10). Location and type of open space and common areas; See PUD Plan (11). Proposed maintenance of common areas and open space; See Covenants (12) . Property boundary locations and setback lines See PUD Plan (13). Special design standards, materials and / or colors; See Architectural Plans (14). Proposed schedule of completions and phasing of the development, if applicable; See PUD Plan (15). Covenants, conditions and restrictions; See Covenants (16). Any other information that may be deemed relevant and appropriate to allow for adequate review. SEE ATTACHED PLANS, COVENANTS, TRAPPIC IMPACT STUDY and other supplemental information. 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. F The signing of this application signifies that the aforementioned information is true and correct and grants approval for Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during review process. , (Applicant Signature) -7- 3 - oto (Date) All,rAYk T •-7ot�.tv,5oa.,I/Gl.,+���.j� Wirk T. Johr oor� 650 Stone St. Kaliopell, MT 59901 (406) 756-0354 (406) 756-5592fax Meadows Bullding Footage Building One (BPIex--Car) Ground Level Living Area Garage Area Covered Patio / Porch Area Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 2`d Floor Living Area 2"" Floor Balcony Area Total Building Area 5ullding Two (4FIex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area Garage Area Covered ratio / f orch Area Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 2"a Floor Living Area 2' Floor 13alcony Area Total Building Area Building Three (8Flex--9Car) Ground Level Living Area Garage Area Covered Patio ! Porch Area Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 2"d Floor Living Area 2" Floor Balcony Area Total Building Area 5,600 5F 2,730 5F 840 SF 9,170 5F 6,270 SF 500 SF 15,940 5 F 3,047 SF 1,370 5F 500 SF 4,917 5F 3,388 5F 300 SF 8,605 5F 5,600 SF 2,990 SF 640 SF 9,430 5F 6,270 SF 500 5F 16,220 5F 1 Building Four (&Flex-9Car) Ground Level riving Area 5,600 5F Garage Area 2,990 5F Covered Patio / Porch Area 840 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 9,430 5F 2"d Floor Living Area 6,270 5F 2"a Floor Daicony Area 500 5F Total Building Area 16,220 5F Building Five (&Flex-9Car) Ground Level Living Area 5,600 5F Garage Area 2,990 5F Govered Patio f Porch Area 840 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 9,430 5F 2' Floor Living Area 6,270 5F 2"Q Floor Balcony Area 500 5F Total Building Area 16,220 5F Building Six (41Flex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area 3,047 5F Garage Area 1,370 5F Covered Patio / Porch Area 500 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 4,917 5F 2"4 Floor Living Area 5,388 5F 2r' Floor balcony Area 500 5F Total Building Area 8,605 5F Building Seven (10FIex-10Car) Ground Level Living Area 6,890 5F Garage Area 3,740 5F Covered Patio i Porch Area 1,010 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 11,640 5F 2'a Floor Living Area 7,670 5F 2"k Floor balcony Area 600 5F Total Building Area 19,910 5F 2 Building Eight (1OPIex-10Car) Ground Level Living Area 6,890 5F Garage Area 3,740 5F Covered Patio / Porch Area 1,010 OF Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 11,640 5F 2' Floor Living Area 7,670 5F 2"d Floor Balcony Area 600 5F Total Building Area 19,910 SF Building Nine (8I'lex-9Car) Ground Level Living Area 5,600 OF Garage Area 2,990 5F Covered Patio / Porch Area 640 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 9,430 5F 2' Floor Living Area 6,270 OF 2"d Floor Balcony Area 500 5F Total Building Area 16,220 SF Building Ten (bFlex-9Car) Ground Level Living Area 5,600 5F Garage Area 2,990 OF Covered Fatio / Porch Area 840 OF Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 9,430 SF 2"° Floor Living Area 6,270 OF 2' Floor balcony Area 500 5F Total Building Area 16,220 5F Building Eleven (4Flex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area 3,047 OF Garage Area 1,570 OF Covered Patio / Porch Area 500 OF Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 4,917 5F 2"a Floor Living Area 3,388 SF 2' Floor balcony Area 300 5F Total 5ullding Area 8,605 5F 3 building Twelve (4111ex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area 3,047 SF Garage Area 1,370 SF Covered Patio / Porch Area 500 SF Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 4,917 5F 2"4 Floor Living Area 3,568 5F 2' Floor Balcony Area 300 SF Total Building Area 8,605 5F building Thirteen (4Plex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area 3,047 SF Garage Area 1,370 SF Covered Patio f Porch Area 500 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 4,917 5F 2"' Floor Living Area 3,588 5F 2"' Floor Balcony Area 300 SF Total building Area 8,605 5F Building Fourteen (10Flex-10Car) Ground Level Living Area 6,890 SF Garage Area 5,740 SF Covered Patio f Porch Area 1,010 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 11,640 5F 2"" Floor Living Area 7,670 5F 2"' Floor balcony Area 600 SF Total Building Area 19,910 SF building Fifteen (10Flex-10Car) Ground Level Living Area 6,890 SF Garage Area 5,740 SF Covered Ratio I Porch Area 1,010 SF Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 11,640 5F 2"d Floor Living Area 7,670 SF 2"d Floor l3alcony Area 600 5F Total Building Area 19,910 5F 4 Building Sixteen (Wlex-10Car) Ground Level Living Area 6,590 5F Garage Area 5,740 5F Covered Patio f Porch Area 1,010 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 11,640 5F 2"' Floor Living Area 7,670 5F 2"' Floor Balcony Area 600 5F Total building Area 19,910 5F building 5eventeen (4Flex-4Car) Ground Level Living Area 3,047 5F Garage Area 1,370 5F Covered Patio / Porch Area 500 5F Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 4,917 5F 2"4 Floor Living Area 3,388 5F 2"4 Floor Balcony Area 300 5F Total Building Area 8,605 5F building Eighteen (&i'lex-&Car) Ground Level Living Area Garage Area Covered Patio I Porch Area Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 2"' Floor Living Area 2"° Floor Balcony Area Total building Area building Nineteen (BFlex-BCar) Ground Level Living Area Garage Area Covered Patio 1 Porch Area Ground Level Footprint (roofed) Area 2' Floor Living Area 2"d Floor Balcony Area Total 5uilding Area 5,600 5F 2,750 5F 840 5F 9,170 5F 6,270 5F 500 5F 15,940 5 F 5,600 5F 2,730 5F 840 5F 9,170 5 F 6,270 5F 500 5F 15,940 5 F 5 The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Prepared for: Desert Mountain Ventures LLC. First & Main Building 8 1 st Street East #204 Kalispell, MT 59901 June 2006 Prepared by: VMIN GROUP, INC. ENGINEERING•SURVEYING* PLANNING 3021 Painter • (406) 728-4611 PO. Box 16027 • Missoula, MT 59808 WGM Group Project #: 060419 The Meadows Traffic Impact Study Table of Contents Introduction.............................. ................................................... ......,........................ 2 ExistingTraffic Volume.............................................................................................5 AdjacentDevelopments............................................................................................6 2009 No -Build Traffic Volumes.................................................................................7 Site -Generated Traffic...............................................................................................8 Assignment of Site -Generated Trips........................................................................8 2009 Build Traffic Volumes.....................................................................................11 CapacityAnalysis....................................................................................................12 Report Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations.....................................18 US Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive/Grandview Drive...........................................21 Four Mile Drive and North Haven Drive..................................................................22 Site Access 2 and Four Mile Drive.........................................................................23 Site Access 1 and Four Mile Drive.........................................................................24 List of Tables Table 1 The Meadows Subdivision Estimated Site Generated Trips ....................... 8 Table 2 US 93 North and Four Mile Drive Level of Service Summary.....................13 Table 3 North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive Level of Service Summary.............15 Table 4 Four Mile Drive and Site Access 2 Level of Service Summary....................16 Table 5 Four Mile Drive and Site Access 1 Level of Service Summary....................17 List of Fig- ures Figure1 Site Location ................................................................................................................ 3 Figure2 Site Plan................................................................ ...._......... 4 Figure 3 2006 Existing, Traffic Volumes................................................................................ 5 Figure 4 2010 No -Build Traffic Volumes ................... .......................................................... ._ 7 Figure 5 Site Arrival/Departure Pattern ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 Figure 6 Site Generated Peale Hour Trip Assignment ......................................... _.........-_ --- 10 Figure 7 2010 Build Traffic Volumes .............................. .....----- .............................................. 11 The Meadows Subdivision Traffic impact Study Page 2 Introduction Desert Mountain Venture proposes construction of a residential development, The Meadows Subdivision, on the south side of Four Mile Drive on the north end of Kalispell, Montana (Figure 1). The proposed development will consist of approximately 138 townhomes. Vehicle access to the planned development is proposed from Four Mile Drive (Figure 2). Four Mile Drive is a local collector street that connects with US Highway 93 N at a signalized intersection. The property on which the proposed subdivision will be built is approximately 14.68 acres in size. There are currently two residences on the property, the remainder of which is undeveloped. Land uses in the vicinity of the site include a mix of residential, recreation, and office. This traffic study was prepared using standard traffic engineering techniques to determine the impacts of the proposed development on traffic within the study area A traffic capacity and level -of -service analysis is presented both with and without the proposed development to identify the incremental impact on traffic operations. Construction of the development is expected to begin in 2006, and will be complete in 2009. The following intersections were identified for analysis in this study through coordination with the City of Kalispell Planning office. • US 93 North and Four Mile Drive/Grandview Drive • North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive • Four Mile Drive and Site Access #2 • Four Mile Drive and Site Access #1 The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 3 Figure 1 — Project Vicinity Map Fm- The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 4 Figure 2 — Site Plan Four We Drive The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 5 Existing Traffic Volume To identify existing traffic volumes within the study area, AM and PM peak -period, manual traffic counts were conducted at the study intersections on May 3 and 4, 2006, and May 10, and 1 l , 2006. The AM peak -period counts were conducted between 7:00 and 9:00 AM and the PM peak -period counts were conducted between 4:00 and 6:00 PM. The count data (in Appendix A) was then analyzed to determine the peak - hour traffic volumes for each intersection. Kalispell Community College and the area high schools were in session during this period which added to the AM and PM peak - period volumes. Figure 3 shows the existing peak -hour traffic volumes derived from the traffic counts and used for this report. Figure 3 — 2006 Existing Peak -Hour 4— 5/97 4—5/97 r— 5/194n- [► f__ Four Mile Dr. f° r6/15 5130--11. 41 f* 5130—► 411* 5/60--► —+ 411* 12/49—+ + 012 w to 1 /5­10- o � 29/67 --+ C Q Q CD > Cn CD 1 Legend AM1PM I North +-1 s197 �+-0/14 r" 56192 The Meadows Subdivision Traffic impact Study Page 6 Adiacent Developments Other planned developments in the vicinity of this project were discussed with the City of Kalispell Planning Department for inclusion in this report. However the adjacent developments were not sufficiently outlined at the time of this report to adequately estimate the impact they may have on traffic operations in the area. During discussions with the planning department it was agreed that other pending developments in the vicinity would not he analyzed in this report. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study 2009 No -Build Traffic Volumes Page 7 The 2006 existing traffic volumes on US Highway 93 N. and on Grandview Drive were projected to the study year 2009 using a four point four -percent -per -year (4.4%s), peak - hour -traffic growth rate. This growth rate was based on data from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) publication, Traffic By Sections, for US 93 North between Jet U6704 (Grandview Drive) and Jet 3-548. These projected traffic volumes result in the 2009 No -Build traffic volumes shown in Figure 4. These volumes represent the baseline condition that is projected to exist in 2009 without development of The Meadows Subdivision. Figure 4 — 2009 No -Build Traffic Volumes 29% Four Mile Dr. 100% �rrrrrrrr•w�nrrrrsrarr r r �}rrrrrrwsw�w�----rrrrrr— rrrrrr---- nwrrrrrrr---+ -r 100% k 45% A A 45°/Q 5a I y 55% 1 i A 69% i N > Cn U Q Legend - Entering rrr, Exiting 4t North A 29% 2°/Q 69% The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 8 Site -Generated Traffic The proposed The Meadows Subdivision will consist of approximately 138 townhomes. Information contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication Trip Generation (7th Edition) was used to estimate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed development. Table 1 shows the results of the trip - generation calculations. Table 1: The Meadows Subdivision Estimated Site -Generated Trips Land Use Size ITE Land Weekday Average AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Use Code Daily Enter Exit Enter Exit Traffic Town homes 138 1 230 1 844 1 11 58 1 52 26 Assignment of Site -Generated Trips Existing traffic patterns throughout the study area were studied to identify commuter travel patterns. The existing volumes at the study intersections are greatly influenced by the surrounding recreational land uses (city soccer, softball, and football fields on Four Mile Drive) during the PM peak hour; therefore, emphasis was placed on existing AM peak hour volumes. For this traffic analysis it is estimated that approximately fig% of site -generated peak -hour trips will be destined to US 93 south of the site, approximately 29% will be destined toward Whitefish and other locations north on US 93, and approximately 2% will travel to/from Grandview Drive east of the site. The trip distribution pattern for The Meadows Subdivision site -generated trips established for this study is illustrated in Figure 5. The site -generated trips from Table 1 were distributed to the roadway network in accordance with the trip distribution patterns. This resulted in the AM and PM peak - hour, site -generated trips shown in Figure 6. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic impact Study Page 9 Figure 5 — Site Arrival/Departure Pattern LO 4— +-- 5123 - —11 f52 `) 4— pit r-5123 Four Mile ter. f-6f29 f— 41s r ---► 41 25f12-•-O� 41 r* 56f26--O� �► 1Ef8�' 41 1f1—► cn 38f18--+ m cv cn 1= V Q N Ca Q 7 _ z O 7- I" North The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Figure 6 -- Site Generated Peak -Hour Trip Assignment 5/97---10/120 4-161246 •-5/23 Four Mile Dr. f-6129 f-6115 5130—► -41 r* 30/42-1- 41 r 61/86--► 41 f► O/0�• of N 010� d 012- n' 4? N r M N N P r 04 C U) U 1 CU Ca U Q < Legend AMIPM North Page 10 N OD CO r [] �rt cv "_ L201110 �--0il 5 64/105 28/57--+ 41 t 1 216-10- 68185" + ti cn ca Z'O! U c CV cG ih [ri <- O Z CO The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study 2009 Build Traffic Volumes Page 11 The site -generated traffic was combined with the 2009 No -Build traffic volumes resulting in the projected 2009 Build traffic volumes shown in Figure 7. These are the traffic volumes projected to exist in 2009 when The Meadows Subdivision is complete and fully occupied. Figure 7 -- 2009 Build Traffic Volumes cc M N Cn m�= = to C%J N 4— 5197 4-101120 661246 i f-5123 Four Mile Dr. f-6129 (, 5130—► 41 �► 30142: 61186--i 1► 28i57� 01a� N Ola o d 012 % 216--1- a 6a�s5� N M N L.. L ❑ O Z r CV L. eclend AN]IPM North i 201110 4-•- 0115 .-64i105 41 I I" Wr CD CV LO Y z Ln N CO Ln M r 03 The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study page 12 Capacity Analysis To identify the potential traffic impacts of the subject development proposal, an intersection capacity analysis was performed for each of the study intersections using the No -Build and Build traffic volumes developed in this report. The analyses were performed in accordance with the procedures presented in the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition, published by the Transportation Research Board. The analyses worksheets are contained in Appendix B. The analysis procedures result in traffic Level of Service (LOS) rankings from A to F, with A representing essentially free -flow conditions and F representing over -capacity conditions. See Appendix C for a description of the various LOS categories. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 13 Intersection of US 93 North and Four Mile Drive Existinq Conditions US 93 North is a north/south major arterial roadway consisting of two lanes in each direction. At this intersection, US 93 provides one left -turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right-turn lane Southbound and one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane, northbound. Four Mile Drive forms the eastbound approach to this intersection providing one left/through lane and one right -turn lane. Grandview Drive forms the westbound approach to this intersection and provides one lane for the left/through/right movements. This is a signalized intersection with a two-phase timing plan. Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis was conducted for this intersection using the 2009 No -Build and Build traffic volumes developed in this report, and the above -described intersection configuration. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 2. Table 2: US 93 North and Four Mile Drive Level of Service Summary AM Peak Hour PM leak Hour 2006 2009 2009 2006 2009 2009 Existing No -Build Build Existing No -Build Build Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS relay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound 26.1 C 26.1 C 26.7 C 28.5 C 28.6 C 29.0 C Left Eastbound 26.1 C 26.1 C 27.4 C 27.3 C 27.3 C 27.9 C Through/Right Westbound 28.3 C 28.8 C 29.1 C 41.2 © 53.5 D 57.8 E LeftirhroughiRight Northbound 3.9 A 4.2 A 4.8 A 261.0 F 484.8 F 641.3 F Left Northbound 4.9 A 5.2 A 5.2 A 9.8 A 11.8 B 11.8 B Through Northbound 4.0 A 4.1 A 4.1 A 5.0 A 5.1 A 5.1 A Right Southbound 5.8 A 7.2 A 7.2 A 35.0- C 175.3 F 175.3 F Left Southbound 6.3 A 7.0 A 7.0 A 9.2 A 10.5 B 10.6 B Through/Right _.._..... -- ............. . Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 14 The AM peak hour at this location is projected to operate a good LOS even with the traffic added by the proposed development. Analysis of the PM peak hour indicates an LOS F for the left -turn movements on US 93. Based on the existing signal phasing and Nigh volume of traffic turning onto Four Mile drive for recreational purposes, this is not altogether unexpected. Implementation of an actuated protected left -turn phase may be warranted if delay becomes unacceptable. The City would coordinate with the Montana Department of Transportation to request this signal operations modification. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Intersection of North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive Existing Conditions Page 75 Four Mile Drive is an east/west collector roadway consisting of a thirteen -foot lane in each direction. At this intersection, Four Mile Drive provides one [eft/through lane westbound, and one through/right-turn lane eastbound. North Haven Drive forms the northbound approach to this intersection providing one lane shared by both left- and right -turning vehicles. The North Haven Drive approach is stop -sign controlled. Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis was conducted for this intersection using the 2009 No -Build and Build traffic volumes developed in this report, and the above -described intersection configuration. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 3. Table 3: North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive Level of Service Summary Peak AM Hour Peak PM Hour 2009 No -Build 2009 Build 2009 No -Build 2009 Build Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Westbound LeftfThrou h 7.2 A 7.3 A 7.4 A 7.4 A Northbound Left/Right 8.4 A 8.7 A 9.2 A 9.4 A Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle. This intersection is projected to operate at a good LOS in both the No -Build and Build conditions. No improvements are required at this location. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 16 Intersection of Four Mile Drive and Site Access 2 Existing Conditions This intersection does not currently exist. Four Mile Drive is an eastlwest collector roadway that consists of one lane in each direction. Site access 2 is proposed as a full movement intersection with stop -sign control. Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis was conducted for this intersection using the 2009 Build traffic volumes developed in this report and the above -described intersection configuration. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 4. Table 4: Four Mile Drive and Site Access 2 Level of Service Summary AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour 2009 2009 Build Build Intersection Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS Westbound 3 A 7.3 A LefilThrou h Northbound 8.6 A 8.6 A Left/Right ht Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle This intersection is projected to operate at an acceptable LOS as a full movement driveway. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 17 Intersection of Four Mile Drive and Site Access 1 Existing Conditions This intersection does not currently exist. Four Mile Drive is an east/west collector roadway that consists of one lane in each direction. Site access 1 is proposed as a full movement intersection with stop -sign control. Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis was conducted for this intersection using the 2009 Build traffic volumes developed in this report and the above -described intersection configuration. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 5. Table 5: Four Mile Drive and Site Access 1 Level of Service Summary AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour 2009 2009 Build Build Intersection Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS , Westbound 7.2 A 7.3 A Lef#lihmu h Northbound 8.4 A 8.5 A LeftlRi h# Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle This intersection is projected to operate at a good LOS as a full movement driveway. The Meadows Subdivision Traffic Impact Study Page 18 Report Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations The discussion and analyses contained in this report can be summarized as follows: Desert Mountain Venture proposes to construct a residential development, The Meadows Subdivision, consisting of approximately 138 townhomes. Access to the proposed development will be from Four Mile Drive. • Each of the intersections analyzed in this report are projected to operate at generally good LOS under the forecasted 2009 No -Build traffic volumes. The site -generated traffic added to these intersections by the proposed subdivision will result in only minor increases in driver delay. No improvements to the un- signalized study intersections are necessary. • At the point that delay for left -turns from US 93 becomes unacceptable, the implementation of an actuated, protected, left -turn phase may become necessary. • Each of the site driveway intersections are projected to operate at very good levels of service under stop -sign control. WAProjects\0604191Trafificl4-M!1e TIS final KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT July 31, 2006 Kalispell Planning Department 17 2° Street East, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: The Meadows Inc., for annexation, initialed zoning and planned unit development (PUD) for the Meadows on a 14.65 acre property. The property address is 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive, Kalispell., Montana. Dear Kalispell Planning Department and Whom it may concern: The owner of the Real Property has submitted a Planned Unit Development and Condominium. Residential Community on Tract 4 located in Section 1 Township 28 North, Range 22 West, Flathead County, Kalispell, Montana. There are a number of concerns I have regarding the pending approval of this Real Property Development by the current landowner. Impact Fees: Is the Developer or Owner paying any impact fees to the city or to School District #5 on individual lots? By paying impact fees, the fees would have a positive affect for the City and School District #5. Road Safety: Each Councilperson should go to the Kids Sport Real Property any weekend during September and October as well April through July; there are usually more than 1,000 children plus parents and a large number of vehicles each Saturday. There are practices and games for football and soccer 3 to 4 nights a week during the fall. During the spring and summer months there are practices and games 6 to 7 days a week for softball, baseball and soccer. Four Mile Drive is probably up to city Code for Vehicle traffic; however, there are not any bike or walking paths on the North or South sides of the road. Turning on and off Highway 93 to the Kids Sport complex and the three current subdivisions, is almost impossible to do anytime of the year. There isn't a turn arrow light on Highway 93 North to turn West onto Four Mile Drive. I would suggest to each councilperson to turn. onto Four Mile Drive during the hours of 7:30 AM to 8:15 AM, 11:30 AM to 1:30 PM, and 4:30 PM to 6:a0 PM; Monday through Saturday. You will be taking your life in your own hands. As a suggestion the City" Police Force could earn their salaries by issuing speeding tickets and reckless driving tickets to motorists during the above hours. Many residents of the three subdivisions on Four Mile Drive turn onto Grandview Drive and then turn around at the college, to use the light to get onto Four Mile Drive. Residents do this because of the high volume of traffic during the above mentioned hours. Flathead County Planning Office stated at Commissioners hearing regarding the Ashley Lake South Subdivision pending Plat hearing that each lot owner will have 5 round trips to and from their residence this adds up to 1380 trips per day on Four Mile Drive; if there are two drivers per residence. This definitely puts more traffic stress on Four Mile Drive, Highway 93 North and South and the left turn lane on Highway 93 going West onto Four Mile Drive. Character of the Current Subdivisions: North Ridge, Summit Ridge, and North Haven Heights are three subdivisions located near the pending subdivision. These subdivisions are single family residences on lots of `/4 to %z acre and some lots are larger. The Meadows is requesting approval to build 138 condominiums on 6.7 acres. The total housing population of the 27 homes in the North Haven Heights subdivision is 76 individuals or 2.81 persons per residence. If the Meadows has 138 condominiums with 2 persons per residence there is a population of 276 individuals, which is 3.63 times greater than the North Haven Heights population. North Haven has 2 homes per acre or approximately 5.6 people per acre, using an average of 2.8 people per home. The Meadows subdivision will have approximately 20.6 homes per acre or 41.2 people per acre using 2 people per unit or 82.4 people per acre using 4 people per unit. At 2 people per unit that is 7.35 times as many people per acre than North Haven. If there are 4 people per unit that is 14.7 times as many people per acre than North Haven. The North Haven subdivision has many view lots, with the proposed height of the 138 condominiums it will lessen the views for the homes in North Haven.. Many homeowners paid extra when purchasing their homes for the views and may possibly sell their homes at a lessor sale price, because their views have been obstructed. If the Meadows subdivision is approved as is, it will create the following issues: a density problem, many safety issues, reductions of views for the residence owners of North Haven Heights, and the subdivision is not in character with the surrounding subdivisions in its land usage. Kalispell Planning Department if you have any questions please call me at my work 406-755-4271 or at my home 406-752-1242. Thank you for your time to read my thoughts. Sincerely, r` John R. King Homeowner at 134 North Haven Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 To: City of Kalispell Planning Department °200 From: Dan and Cary Heskett 129 N. Haven Dr. MLISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Kalispell, MT 59901 Re: Request for 138 condominium units on Four Mile Drive July 31, 2006 I urge the City of Kalispell Planning Department to reject the request from The Meadows INC. to develop 138 condominium on Four Mile Drive. I refer you to the "Kalispell Growth Policy 2020" section entitled "Suburban Housing," which reads: 9.a. Densitites should be appropriate to the limitations of the particular site and should not exceed two to four dwellings per gross acre. b. The suburban residential designation is intended to reduce density and development impacts in sensitive areas and existing rural neighborhoods. c. Single-family houses are the primary housing type. The Meadows proposal contradicts each of these policies adopted by the Kalispell City Council. I will elaborate some specific concerns that we have: ■ A high density condominium development does not fit the character of the Northridge and North Haven neighborhoods. (Housing policy #2 dictates that "developments be consistent with the character of the area... )" This development, which would have approximately 10 units per acre, would directly border a neighborhood with a density of less than two houses per acre. And two story condominiums would be built approximately 20 feet from our backyards. This is not smart growth which values the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods. ■ I urge you to consider the area that surrounds the proposed development: -across Four Mile Drive is Kid's Sports, which has shown a tremendous increase in usage and significant traffic problems on Four Mile Drive and HWY 93. During sports seasons, it now takes 4-5 light changes to make a left hand turn onto Four Mile Drive! -directly west of Kid's Sports is a proposed 600 unit subdivision. How many trips per day on Four Mile Drive does each house represent? -a little further west on Four Mile Drive is property to be developed into a long term care facility. -on the south-west comer of Four Mile Drive and HWY 93 is a new office park. All of these indicate that such a high density development would be very problematic to traffic and safety. Four Mile Drive could not handle the amount of traffic that currently exists and will be created by this growth. I favor smart growth and I favor fill in growth rather than sprawl. But this is not smart growth because it does not respect the character of the neighborhood and the density is not appropriate to the surrounding area. p City of Kalispell July 24, 2006 �CCOVIR w r Planning Department J U L. � `� ��` 17 2 Street East Suite 211 KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: Notice of Public Hearing, Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission August 8, 2006 Item 4 -- Request from Meadows, Inc. for annexation, initial zoning, and planned unit development. As a property owner with 150 feet of the proposed project noted above, most directly affected by its development, we are taking this opportunity to present comments and concerns. Concerns center around density of population affecting traffic safety, view, and effective management of noise, cleanliness, and light. First and foremost, traffic. [1] Presently, thought no parking is allowed on Four Mile Dr., cars park on both sides leaving a single lane for moving cars to pass by. In emergency situations this causes a delay in services to annexed taxpayers projected to be living in this area as developments seek and are granted permission to fill the land. Does this match our goals for development of our jewel of the Northwest? [2] The present traffic light system does not provide a choice other than waiting til traffic traveling south on Hwy 93 passes to enter Four Mile Drive conning north on Hwy 93. As a result, often traffic backs up all the way to Buffalo Hill Funeral Home and further waiting for cars to turn. The density of cars on the road can only create frustrations we read about from cities with much larger populations. Does this match our goals for development of our jewel of the Northwest? [3] Cars leaving Four Mile Drive seeking to go north on Hwy 93 have a similar wait. This not due solely to the heavy flow of traffic coming south on Hwy 93, but also because of the short tinning of the light allowing traffic out of Four Mile Drive. This is currently a problem with the number of vehicles during athletic field heavy use, Church service hours from the Christian Center and our preferred solitary means of entering and leaving North Haven Drive. It will increase with the heavy traffic due to appear with the proposed anachronistic `Bypass' traffic feeding into 93, and increased development on both sides of 93 between Four Mile Drive and Reserve. Adding vehicles associated with 138 residential condominium units can only make less safe conditions for every person in a vehicle. The safety of other travelers is similarly dimished — imagine walkers and bikers. Does this match our goals for development of our jewel of the Northwest? View, and effective management of noise, cleanliness, and light. — while our specific property is impacted less than others on the north side of North Haven Drive because of the slope of our land, it is still impacted. In a perfect world, concerns about where the trash containers will be placed and how well the property will be maintained on the backside (Our view of the property), what activities the inhabitants will be prone to in terms of noise level, and what level of light pollution will be chosen for security and general use would be unnecessary. However, past experience has shown us that receptive inhabitants make all the difference in the world. When we had horses in the pasture, owners would help us return them.; when farmhouse dog barking from a single family occurred, that one family finally accepted responsibility for correcting that situation; when the Kalispell Youth Shelter first came, they respected the light shining directly into our bedrooms and realigned the light as well as turning it down in intensity With so many residents projected for ownership, these concerns demand attention at the `before' stage. Making these concerns part of ownership is essential to `good neighboring'. . Does this match our goals for development of our jewel of the Northwest? It is said, strong fences make good neighbors. We prefer to believe that good planning provides the opportunity for creating villages, rather than individual communities allowing for anonymity, discouraging consensus for the good of all. Respect°ly submitted, �.---- '• cam, Steven I an Elsie A Johnson REOEBY E a �fjj� D .2[ KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT July 27, 2006 Charles J. and Lorraine S. Wingard 117 N. Haven Dr. Kalispell, Mt. 59901 Kalispell Planning Dept. 17 Second Street East, Suite 211 Kalispell, Mt. 59901 We live in the North Haven Heights Subdivision south of the proposed "Meadows" development. We feel that the proposal by "The Meadows" for 138 condo's south of Kidsports is too dense for the area. The road, the stop light on 93 and the area would be overwhelmed with the added traffic. Even now it is almost impossible to make a left turn off Hiway 93 onto 4 Mile Dr. Can you imagine how many more cars, SUVs and trucks there will be on 4 Mile Dr. if 138 units are built there? .lust close your eyes and think about it. If it is really necessary to fill this lovely open space, please do so in a manner that will not make life harder and less beautiful for us all. Sincerely, Charles J. Wingard Lorraine S. Wingard Cc D r= t;:hG0 E D City of Kalispell} July 30, 2006 Planning Department 17 2n" Street East, Suite 211 KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Kalispell, Montana 59901 Ref: Notice of Public Hearing, Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission August 8`', 2006, Line Item Number 4. I. am a property owner at 110 North Haven Drive, Kalispell, Montana. I have been advised the Meadows, Inc. has requested annexation, initial zoning and a planned unit development (PUD) on 14.65 acres at 430 and 450 Four Mile Drive_ The legally described property is described as Assessors Tract 4, located in Section 1, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, The Meadows, Inc is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with an R-4 .zoning district. The owner is requesting a PUD for 1.38 condominiums. The property is currently zoned as SAG-10. As a property owner that will be adversely affected by this PUD, I am forwarding my concerns to the City of Kalispell, Planning Department regarding this PUD. I am asking that my concerns be made a part of the official planning process and forwarded to the Planning Board and City Council for consideration. My concerns will focus on the following areas: density, Four Mile Drive traffic, and height of condominium buildings. Density. The City growth plan describes this area to be developed at a density level of 4 —12 units per acre. Currently the North Haven Heights subdivision is the only subdivision adjacent to the proposed PUD. North Haven Heights lot sizes are mainly made up of lots that are .1l2 to 3l4 an acre. Having this PUD adjacent to the property line of six landowners with large lots will possibly affect the retail value of these houses in a negative way. In order for the Meadows, Inc to accomplish 138 condominium units in this PUD, they will have to build approximately 9.4 condominiums per acre. This equates out to each condominium being on a tenth of an acre. I hereby request the Planning Board recommend denial of the PUD based on the current request by the Meadows, Inc. I would offer that a less dense area would make for a better transition between neighbors and would suggest the minimum of 4 condominiums per acres. Four bile Drive Traffic and Road Surface: Currently in its present state, Four Mile Drive is unsuitable for the additional traffic that will be generated by the addition of the residential drivers created by this PUD. As you are aware, the Sports Complex has added a sizeable increase in traffic flows to Four Mile Drive that may not have been properly documented and included in the Meadows, Inc traffic survey. When the Sports Complex is in full operational mode, traffic coming and going is horrifying. Drivers that who live or work in the North Haven Heights Subdivision, the Greenery, or the Sunrise Subdivision are confronted with a traffic light configuration that is extremely dangerous. Traffic is observed almost every day backing up from the Four Mile Drive light to the intersection of Summit Ridge Drive_ These drivers are waiting to make a left turn to proceed westerly along Four Mile Drive due to no delayed turn signal light. When southbound traffic on Hwy.93 is moving, normally only one or two vehicle are able to make the turn westerly before the light changes color. Additionally when the Sport Complex is in operation, visitors to the complex park their vehicles on the road surface or grass strip on both sides of Four Mile drive as the number of visitors to the complex at times out numbers the parking spaces provided by the sports complex. The Planning Board needs to take into consideration the recent purchase of 82 acres by a Las Vegas company in the southwest corner of Section 36. The purchase was made with the intent of developing additional housing. This subdivision in planning will certainly incorporate a feeder road off Four Mile Drive to connect to the new neighborhood. It will most certainly also create a roadway that will connect to the bypass by connecting to the planned roadway in front of the North Fire Station. These roads that are quite possibly in the planning phases need to be considered as factors that would influence traffic flows on Four Mile Drive. While these numbers are yet to be determined, the current state of Four Mile Drive is inadequate to accommodate additional tragic in its present state. The sports complex generates an inormous amount of children riding bicycles along Four Mile Drive. Their safety as well as the safety of the residents from the subdivisions of North Haven, Sunrise and the Greenery need to be addressed with a view for the future planning of Section 36 and this requested PUD. I would recommend that The Meadows, Inc or the City of Kalispell be required to upgrade Four Mile Drive from the far west end of the proposed PUD to North Haven Drive. The upgrade needs to incorporate a widened road surface to a size determined by the City that adequately accommodates the increase in traffic usage and street parking. Approximately five years ago the Waterford Company was responsible for upgrading the roadway when they applied and received their PUD. I do believe the PUD for Waterford has since lapsed and a requirement to make improvements to Four Mile Drive may be null and void at this time. Thus leaving the roadway with no promise of improvement from a developer. To summarize this concern, Four Mile Drive needs an adequate road width, signage for no parking on either side of the roadway unless a proper road width is created, a traffic light that has delayed turn arrow at all four junctions of the intersection. Building Height: The residents of North Haven Drive who are directly adjacent to the proposed PLTD will be faced with losing a substantial amount of their view of the Whitefish Range and Glacier Park due to the condominiums being two stories in height. The decimated view will undoubtly reduce the retail value of each residence. Resale of a residence always takes into consideration, location, location, and location. Our lots in North Maven are highly coveted for their view. The property owner view of the magnificent mountain ranges to the north will be obscured by the close proximity of the condominiums to the property line. I would recommend that the condominiums that are located in the .PUD and labeled as Buildings g, and 14 through 19, be single story condominiums. While the present view will be forever changed, it is more palatable if single story condominiums were erected. I have given my concerns serious thought after making a trip to the City Planning Office to review the material on file concerning this requested annexation and PUD. While change in the valley is impacting everyone daily, we can make changes that are good changes. Currently, the Meadows, Inc. request for annexation and zoning change does not bring upon good change. 5in�'er�le y, 1 J y W. �Ylies 406-756-5790 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL R RESOURCES AND CONSERVATIOI NORTHWESTERN LAND OFFICE j `;•' � "� BRIAN SCHWEITZER, GOVERNOR KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT -- -STATE OF i1 ONTANA KALISPELL UNIT POLSON FIELD OFFICE 2250 Highway 93 lit., Kalispell, MT 59901 F0 Box 640, Polson—Nieff 59860 Phone: (406) 751-2241, Fax: (406) 751-2286 Phone: (406) 883-3960, Fax: (406) 883-1874 July 31, 2006 Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2nd Street East, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 Re: The Meadows, annexation, initial zoning and PUD Dear Planner, This letter is written as a follow up to your request for comments regarding the above referenced subdivision. Our concerns lie in the area of access as follows: 1. As you may be aware, a portion of Four Mile Drive has been sited without proper authorization. Research of records indicates that no easement has ever been purchased or perfected on the north 30-feet of what has been represented as a 60- foot wide Four Mile Drive corridor between U.S Highway 93 and Stillwater Road. Please require that this situation be resolved as a condition of approval. 2. The stoplight at Four Mile Drive and U.S. Highway 93 does not allow for smooth traffic movement at times of peak traffic. The wait times associated with making left turns from U.S. Highway 93 cause people to resort to risky driving actions or "creative" indirect intersection approaches. The addition of the traffic from 138 condominium units will exacerbate this hazardous situation. Please require that an appropriate study of traffic impacts be undertaken, and that intersection., and intersection control modifications be implemented as may be necessary as a condition of approval. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steve Lorch,a.i.c.p. Community Planner NIT DNRC, Northwest Land Office Cc: KalCal e-copy: Kuennen; Sandman; Poncin G: jco41171Rea1 Estate Mgmt\Spring Prairie\Subdivision Comments-Meadows,doc 'AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPtOYEW KIUS SPORT COMPLEX `, + Subject, Property .... . ..... . L l>T672'6'13/ w -r 21 19 2 4 i13 7 2XA 3 7� 1 UNITY 81 01 NOR. TH r u DF;t::. I 14 5 4 9 19, 12 13 14 15 16'�L 17\ 9 1. 1 2\ \ 62W 1 2 3 7 14 10 f 91, . ... ...... . .. .... ..... ..... ............... .. .. ... .. <: e4 7-,� 2 9/ VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 400' THE MEADOWS, INC. REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & INITIAL ZONING OF R-4 TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FROM COUNTY SAG-10 SUBURBAN AGRICULTURAL - FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PWT DATE 7/5/06 F I L E # H.*\gis\stte\ka08-08.dwg Meadows--25-O6.dgn 7rMOO610:24:10 AM THE MEADOWS PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TRACT 4 Located in Section I , T.28N., R.22W P AA AA FIBH—A ('.mint,. KAnn — GRAPHI� SCALE building J` Main I=loor July 3 2006 tE�DO Y J guiEdinv 5 `jecond FEoor JuEy 3 2006 North Property Lloo !!p S Mauch. Lapp (W.) jVI 4DOWS awe OWWWO 12 6u1dM910 MtiAe a _I-p South Landscape Schematic Plan, Bldg 17-19 e Meadows MeadowaLS-Det-7-29-06.dgn 7/37l20082:03:38 PM