Document Missoula_doc_42099f1d59

MISSOULA OFFICE OF PLANNING & GRANTS 435 Ryman MISSOULA MT 59802-4292 PHONE: (406) 258-4657 MISSOULA COUNTY Jared Langley 1440 Woodbine Place Missoula, MT 59803 July 20, 2006 RE: The Gables Dear Jared: At its regularly scheduled meeting of May 22, 2006, the Missoula City Council voted to approve The Gables Subdivision plat dated February 13, 2006, subject to the 26 conditions in the attached document entitled “Conditions of Approval”. The reasons for the decision to approve the subdivision, including the imposition of any condition of approval, may also be found in the attached document entitled “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.” As part of this action, the City Council took action on the following variances: 1. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-3(1)(E) requiring a 60’ lot width at the building setback line be approved, based on the findings of fact set forth in the staff report. 2. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-6 to permit a 10’ drainage easement width be approved. 3. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-2(3) requiring a 36’ paved width for Third Street be denied based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions in the staff report. 4. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-2(14)(A) requiring curb and gutter on Third Street be denied based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions in the staff report. 5. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-2(15)(A) requiring a concrete boulevard sidewalk along Third Street be denied based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions in the staff report. 6. THAT the request to vary from Article 3-2(15)(B) to permit a curbside sidewalk along Hiberta Street be approved based on the findings of fact in the staff report. 7. THAT The Gables be approved based on the findings of fact in the staff report and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. If you wish to appeal this decision you must follow the procedure established by M.C.A. §76-3-625(2) which states as follows: A party . . . who is aggrieved by a decision of the governing body to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove a proposed preliminary plat or final subdivision plat may, within 30 days after the decision, appeal to the district court in the county in which ---PAGE BREAK--- the property involved is located. The petition must specify the grounds upon which the appeal is made. The statute includes within the definition of an aggrieved party the applicant. If you have any questions or concerns with regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us at 258-4657. The deadline to submit for final plat approval is May 22, 2008. You must submit the final plat by these dates or request an extension to the effective period of plat approval. If you have further questions, please contact me at 258-4794 or email me at [EMAIL REDACTED]. Sincerely, Tim Worley Planner, OPG cc: Kristin Smith, WGM Group Mary McCrea, OPG Lettie Hunnakko, OPG Casey Wilson, OPG Steve King, City Engineer Bob Rajala, City Fire Marshal Jackie Corday, Parks & Recreation Scott Stringer, Parks and Recreation Missoula Consolidated Planning Board ---PAGE BREAK--- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE GABLES SUBDIVISION MAY 22, 2006 Roads/Sidewalks/Boulevards 1. Plans for installing curb/gutter and paving the portion of South Third Street West adjacent to this subdivision to an 18’ width from back-of-curb to centerline of right-of- way shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3), 3-2(9), 3-2(14) and City Engineering recommendation. 2. Plans for installing curb/gutter and paving the portion of Hiberta Street adjacent to this subdivision to a 16’ width from back-of-curb to centerline of right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3), 3-2(9), 3-2(14) and City Engineering recommendation. 3. Plans for installing curb/gutter and paving Summerfield Drive and Charleston Street to 32’ width from back-of-curb to back-of-curb shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3), 3-2(9), 3-2(14) and City Engineering recommendation. 4. The RSID waiver shall be amended to include South Third Street West, Hiberta Street, Summerfield Drive and Charleston Street subject to review and approval of OPG prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3)(E) and OPG recommendation. 5. Plans for the Winston Lane short court, including but not limited to overflow parking shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and included in the covenants, subject to OPG approval prior to final plat approval. If overflow parking is required, maintenance responsibilities shall be included in the covenants and an overflow parking easement shall be shown on the final plat, subject to review and approval by OPG prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(I)(7)(d) and OPG recommendation. 6. Final driveway design for Lots 20 and 21, including paving and locations to provide adequate backing area onto the short court, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit approval. All driveways shall be at least twenty (20) feet long, measured from face of garage to back of curb on the short court street. Subdivision Regulations 3-2(16)(A), 3-2(2)(A), 3-2(I)(7)(d) and OPG recommendation. 7. The homes on Lots 22-30 shall be accessed from the alley, and this requirement shall be included in the covenants in a section that cannot be amended without prior written consent of the governing body, subject to OPG approval prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations 3-1(I) and OPG recommendation. 8. Final driveway design for Lots 1, 2 and 11, lots with existing dwellings as shown on the plat dated April 2006, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and driveways shall be paved prior to final plat approval. The covenants shall be amended to include the requirement that all subdivision driveways be paved. Subdivision Regulations 3-2(16)(A, 3-2(2)(A), 3-2(I)(7d) and OPG recommendation. 9. Plans for installation of 5’ sidewalks with 7’ boulevards on both sides of Summerfield Drive and Charleston Street and the north side of Third Street shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(15)(A-C) and City Engineering recommendation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 10. The plat shall be revised to show a 1’ no-access strip along the Hiberta Street frontage of Lots 26-30 and Lot 42. A deed restriction shall be filed prior to final plat approval, subject to City Attorney and City Engineer approval, that includes the language "No access shall be located along the Hiberta Street frontage of Lots 26-30 and Lot 42 subject to City Engineer approval." Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(1)(E) and City Engineering recommendation. 11. A 1’ public sidewalk maintenance easement shall be granted along the South Third Street West frontage of the subdivision and shall be shown on the plat prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(1)(C) and City Engineering recommendation. 12. Plans for street-tree plantings shall be reviewed and approved by City Parks and Recreation prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(15)(B) and OPG recommendation. Fire/Emergency Response 13. Plans for address signs and location of hydrants prior to combustible construction for the new homes shall be reviewed and approved by the City Fire Department prior to building permit submittal. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(2)(G), 3-7 and City Fire Department recommendation. Groundwater/Irrigation Ditch 14. A Dike Maintenance Easement shall be shown on the final plat and shall be reviewed and approved by the Floodplain Administrator prior to final plat approval. The Riparian Resource Management Plan shall be amended to include information about levee maintenance requirements carried out by the local sponsor of the Army Corps of Engineers, including but not limited to tree removal, structural repair and motorized access, subject to review and approval by OPG prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-6 and Floodplain Administrator recommendation. 15. An irrigation ditch easement for the overflow ditch shall be reviewed and approved by the Missoula Irrigation District and the Orchard Homes Ditch Company prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-6, MCA 76-3-504(K)(1) and OPG recommendation. 16. An easement shall be shown on the final plat for the irrigation ditch that parallels Hiberta Street to be reviewed and approved by the Missoula Irrigation District prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-6 and OPG recommendation. 17. The planned road crossings of the ditch that parallels Hiberta Street shall be submitted to and approved by the Missoula Irrigation District prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-6, MCA 85-7-1922 and OPG recommendation. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Floodplain 18. Final plans for grading, drainage and erosion control shall be reviewed and approved by City Engineering and the Floodplain Administrator prior to final plat approval. If the final plans show roadways beneath the 100-year flood elevation, a note shall be placed on the plat and in the covenants indicating the roads would not be passable in a 100-year flood event, with wording to be reviewed and approved by the Floodplain Administrator prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Articles 3-4(1), 3-1(1)(B) and Floodplain Administrator recommendation. 19. The developer or individual lot owners shall include pre-construction elevation certificates at the time of Zoning Compliance Permit submittal documenting the lowest floor and utility elevations with post-construction elevation certificates submitted upon building completion. Fill for building sites shall be compacted to ---PAGE BREAK--- 95% proctor as certified by a geotechnical engineer. Language shall be included in the Covenants subject to OPG approval prior to final plat approval and a note shall be placed on the final plat that states the following: “The lowest floor elevation, including basements, mechanical equipment, and ductwork shall be a minimum of 2’ above base flood elevation. Pre-construction elevation certificates shall be required at the time of Zoning Compliance Permit submittal documenting the lowest floor and utility elevations, with post-construction elevation certificates submitted upon building completion. All building sites shall be compacted to 95% proctor as certified by a geotechnical engineer.” Subdivision Regulations Article 3-1(1)(B) and Floodplain Administrator recommendation. Natural Environment/Health and Safety 20. The Area of Riparian Resource and buffer on the plat shall include the label “No Build/No Improvement Zone—see Riparian Resource Management Plan for details.” Exceptions permitting disturbance for the construction of Hiberta Street, the alley, drainage swales, and the extension of the sewer line shall be included in the Riparian Resource Management Plan and include restoration requirements. The Riparian Resource Management Plan shall be amended to include necessary changes based on the plat dated April 2006 subject to OPG approval, prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-13(9) and City Parks & Recreation recommendation. 21. Article II, Section 28 of the covenants shall be amended to require the lot owners and the Homeowner’s Association to revegetate any ground disturbance with beneficial species at the first appropriate opportunity after the disturbance occurs. A Revegetation Plan for disturbed sites shall be submitted to and approved by the Missoula County Weed Board and shall be included as an attachment to the covenants prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-1(1)(B) and Missoula County Weed District recommendation. 22. Plans for removal of the two black cottonwood trees on Lot 41 following the 2006 nesting season shall be reviewed and approved by Parks and Recreation prior to final plat approval. Subdivision Regulations 3-1(2), 3-1(10) and City Parks and Recreation recommendation. Covenants 23. The covenants shall contain a section notifying potential owners that lots are classified as irrigated and may continue to be assessed for irrigation water delivery though the water may not be deliverable subject to OPG approval, prior to final plat approval. MCA 76-3-504(1)(k)(ii)(A) and OPG recommendation. 24. Article III, Section 2 (“Amendment”) shall be amended to include irrigated land, radon, address signage, paved driveways, no-access for Lots 26-30 and 42, short court parking and the Riparian Resource Management Plan as sections of the covenants that may not be amended without Governing Body approval. Subdivision Regulations Article 3-1(10) and OPG recommendation. 25. The covenants shall be amended to include the following section subject to OPG approval, prior to final plat approval: Living with Wildlife Homeowners must accept the responsibility of living with wildlife and must be responsible for protecting their vegetation from damage, confining their pets, and properly storing garbage, pet food, livestock feed and other potential attractants. Homeowners must be aware of potential problems associated with the occasional ---PAGE BREAK--- presence of wildlife such as white-tailed and mule deer, black bear, mountain lion, fox, raccoon, skunk, squirrels and magpie. Please contact the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks office in Missoula (3201 Spurgin Road, Missoula, MT 59804) for brochures that can help homeowners “live with wildlife.” Alternatively, see the Education portion of FWP’s web site at www.fwp.mt.gov. The following covenants are designed to help minimize problems that homeowners could have with wildlife, as well as helping homeowners protect themselves, their property and the wildlife that Montanans value. a. Homeowners must be aware of the potential for vegetation damage by wildlife, particularly from deer feeding on green lawns, gardens, flowers, ornamental shrubs and trees in this subdivision. Homeowners should be prepared to take the responsibility to plant non-palatable vegetation or protect their vegetation (fencing, netting, repellents) in order to avoid problems. Also, consider landscaping with native vegetation that is less likely to suffer extensive feeding damage by deer. b. Gardens and fruit trees can attract wildlife such as deer and bears. Keep produce and fruit picked and off the ground, because ripe or rotting vegetable material can attract bears and skunks. To help keep wildlife such as deer out of gardens, fences should be 8 feet or taller. Netting over gardens can help deter birds from eating berries. c. Garbage should be stored in secure animal-resistant containers or indoors to avoid attracting animals such as bears, raccoons, and other wildlife. If stored indoors, it is best not to set garbage cans out until the morning of garbage pickup; bring cans back indoors by the end of the day. d. Do not feed wildlife or offer supplements (such as salt blocks), attractants, or bait for deer or other wildlife. Feeding wildlife results in unnatural concentrations of animals that could lead to overuse of vegetation and disease transmission. Such actions unnecessarily accustom wild animals to humans, which can be dangerous for both. It is against state law (MCA 87-3-130) to purposely or knowingly attract bears with supplemental food attractants (any food, garbage, or other attractant for game animals) or to provide supplemental feed attractants in a manner that results in “an artificial concentration of game animals that may potentially contribute to the transmission of disease or that constitutes a threat to public safety.” Also, homeowners must be aware that deer might occasionally attract mountain lions to the area. e. Birdseed can attract bears. If used, bird feeders should: 1) be suspended a minimum of 20 feet above ground level, 2) be at least 4 feet from any support poles or points, and 3) should be designed with a catch plate located below the feeder and fixed such that it collects the seed knocked off the feeder by feeding birds. f. Pets must be confined to the house, in a fenced yard, or in an outdoor kennel area when not under the direct control of the owner, and not be allowed to roam as they can chase and kill big game and small birds and mammals. Keeping pets confined also helps protect them from predatory wildlife. Under current state law it is illegal for dogs to chase hoofed game animals and the owner may also be held guilty (MCA 87-3-124). ---PAGE BREAK--- g. Pet food should be stored indoors, in closed sheds or in animal-resistant containers in order to avoid attracting wildlife such skunks, raccoons, and other wildlife. When feeding pets do not leave food out overnight. Consider feeding pets indoors so that wild animals such as bear, skunk or magpie do not learn to associate food with your home. h. Barbecue grills should be stored indoors. Keep all portions of the barbecues clean. Food spills and smells on and near the grill can attract bears and other wildlife. i. Consider boundary fencing that is no higher than 3-1/2 feet (at the top rail or wire) and no lower than 18 inches (at the bottom rail or wire) in order to facilitate wildlife movement and help avoid animals such as deer becoming entangled in the fence or injuring themselves when trying to jump the fence. We encourage the use of split rail fences or other wildlife-friendly desgins. j. Compost piles can attract skunks and bears. Compost piles should be limited to grass, leaves, and garden clippings, and piles should be turned regularly. Adding lime can reduce smells and help decomposition. Do not add food scraps. (Kitchen scraps could be composted indoors in a worm box with minimum odor and the finished compost can later be added to garden soil.) k. Residents of this subdivision must recognize that the subdivision is located about a quarter-mile from the Clark Fork River and/or its associated sloughs and wetlands, where lawful waterfowl hunting and the associated discharge of shotguns could occur from early morning until sunset, and the season can run from September into January. 26. The plat shall show a 20’ pedestrian easement on Winston Lane extending to the common area. PAZ recommendation. ---PAGE BREAK--- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW THE GABLES SUBDIVISION MAY 22, 2006 SUBDIVISION FINDINGS OF FACT ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE Findings of Fact: a) Zoning Compliance 1. The 12.04 acre parcel is currently zoned Z.D. 13. The applicant has originally requested to annex the property into the city and the City Council intends intended to apply the city zoning of RLD-IV to the entire acreage. 2. Staff recommended the comparable city zone of RLD-IV upon annexation. The maximum residential density in the RLD-IV district is four dwelling units per acre and the minimum lot size is 10,000 square feet per single-family dwelling. 3. The proposed subdivision will have a density of 3.5 dwelling units per acre. 4. Lot sizes and lot width may vary through subdivision review in the RLD-IV zoning district to allow flexibility in site planning and project design. Proposed lots sizes range from 4052 square feet to 10,825 square feet. 5. The required front and rear-yard setbacks in the RLD-IV district are 20 feet. Side-yard setback requirements in the RLD-IV district are 7 ½ feet or 1/3 the building height, whichever is greater. Building height is limited to 30 feet. 6. The submittal includes a building setback exhibit showing the RLD-IV setbacks on each of the 42 lots. 7. The parcel was annexed into the city unzoned. b) Comprehensive Plan Compliance 8. The 1998 Missoula Urban Comprehensive Plan Update (“Plan”) is the applicable plan for this property. The recommended land use designation is Residential, with a maximum residential density of up to two dwelling units per acre, and Parks and Open Space. This property is in the Urban Growth Area (UGA). 9. The applicant proposes 42 lots on 12.04 acres for a residential density of 3.5 dwelling units per acre. 10. The Plan encourages compatibility with surrounding land uses, as well as preservation and enhancement of the diversity, integrity, and unique values of neighborhoods, communities and rural areas. Development in this area is a combination of established single family homes, duplexes, multi-dwellings and a school. Open space areas remain in some locations with small numbers of grazing animals. 11. Surrounding lot sizes are ½ acre to the south, 2.5 to 5 acres to the west, 5 acres to the north, and roughly ½ to 1 acre to the east. Residential uses range from single family to multi-dwelling units. 12. The Plan encourages a density of two dwelling units per acre in locations adjacent to the growth area with no community sewer, including Orchard Homes. The Plan goes on to state that “greater density may be appropriate” where sewer and other services are available. The Juneau Drive sewer lift station is adjacent to the subdivision, and all lots are proposed to be served by city sewer. 13. The Plan states that “within the urban growth area, residential, commercial, public, and other forms of development should be encouraged at urban densities ---PAGE BREAK--- 14. Residential land use goals stated in the Plan include the following: “Establish development standards to encourage smaller lots and more flexible use of land 80).” 15. The Parks and Open Space designation is used for large, publicly-owned recreation areas such as Blue Mountain, the Pattee Canyon Recreation Area and the Rattlesnake Recreation Area. Also included are areas where environmental constraints such as slope, floodplain, wildlife habitat or public values such as open space, utility corridors, etc. make development inadvisable. 16. Limited development is recommended for the Parks and Open Space designation. Development should only be undertaken when Plan goals and policies can still be achieved. 17. The subject property is in private ownership. Floodplain constraints have been partially mitigated by proposed elevation of the homes above the 100-year flood elevation. An Open Space connection is facilitated by the proposed dedication of the levee area to the City of Missoula. Conclusions of Law: 1. The proposal was consistent with the intended zoning for the property. 2. The proposed subdivision exceeds the recommended density of the Suburban Residential and Parks and Open Space land use designation in the 1998 Missoula Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Update. 3. The proposal substantially complies with some of the goals and objectives of the 1998 Missoula Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Update. 4. Missoula City Subdivision Regulations require that subdivisions be reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Due to changes in state law, no land use proposal shall be conditioned or denied based solely upon the lack of compliance with the Growth Policy. For that reason, no conditions are recommended based upon failure to comply with the Growth Policy or its amendments. PRIMARY CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CRITERION 1: EFFECTS ON AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL WATER USER FACILITIES Findings of Fact: 1. The property has been used in the past for grazing animals. 2. The soils on the property are primarily classified as Xerofluvents, 0 to 2 percent slopes. These are not considered soils of agricultural importance by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. 3. A former river slough in the middle of the property functions as an overflow ditch. State Law, MCA 76-3-504(1)(m), requires the subdivider to describe, dimension, and show utility easements in the subdivision on the final plat in their true and correct location. Jerry Supola, Ditch Rider for the Missoula Irrigation District, commented in a telephone conversation that water from both Orchard Homes Ditch Company and Missoula Irrigation District ditches is contained within the overflow ditch during certain times of the year. This ditch has users of the subdivision. 4. Jerry Supola commented that an irrigation ditch easement exists for the overflow ditch, and that it would be appropriate for both Orchard Homes Ditch Company and the Missoula Irrigation District to review this easement. This requirement is included in a condition of approval. 5. Missoula Irrigation District commented that separate easements need to be provided to each subdivision lot for the delivery of irrigation water. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. All lots in this subdivision are less than one acre in size. State law, MCA 76-3- 504(1)(k)(ii)(A), states that establishment of irrigation easements for each lot owner is not required if the average lot size is one acre or less and the subdivider provides for disclosure, in a manner acceptable to the governing body, that adequately notifies potential buyers that the lots are classified as irrigated and may continue to be assessed for irrigation water delivery even though the water may not be deliverable. This required disclosure is lacking, and therefore is included as a condition of subdivision approval. 7. The Missoula Irrigation District comments on the existence of a wastewater ditch along the west side of Hiberta Street that will continue to be used and serviced by the district. This would require an easement for district access, and would require subdivision development to accommodate ongoing ditch use. A condition requires an irrigation ditch easement along the west side of Hiberta Street. A second condition requires the ditch crossings to be reviewed and approved by the Missoula Irrigation District prior to final plat approval. Conclusion of Law: 1. No impacts to agricultural water users or agricultural water user facilities are anticipated if the recommended conditions are adopted. CRITERION 2: EFFECTS ON LOCAL SERVICES Roads Findings of Fact: Third Street 1. Lots 1, 2 and 3 front the north side of South Third Street West, which is currently paved to a 28’ width with no curb and gutter within a 60’ public right-of-way. 2. South Third Street West is classified as a Collector Street within the Urban Growth Area under Missoula City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3), requiring a minimum road surface width of 36’ with curb and gutter within a minimum 60’ right- of-way. Equivalent half-street improvements would be 18’ from back-of-curb to centerline. 3. The applicant is not proposing improvements to Third Street and therefore requests a variance. City Engineering is not in support of the variance request, and recommends a 36’ road width. Equivalent half-street improvements would be 18’ from back-of-curb to centerline. 4. The average South Third Street West frontage for Lots 1-3 is 66 feet, requiring curb and gutter improvements per City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(14). Curbs and gutters are not proposed by the applicant, who requests a variance from the standard. City Engineering does not support the request and recommends installation of curb and gutter improvements along the South Third Street West frontage of the subdivision. 5. Staff recommends a condition requiring review and approval of plans for curb and gutter installation plus half-street paving of South Third Street West adjacent to the subdivision. Hiberta Street 6. Hiberta Street is classified as a local street with the Urban Growth Area under City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3), requiring a minimum road surface width of 28’ with curb and gutter within a minimum 60’ right-of-way. Equivalent half-street improvements would be 14’ from back-of-curb to centerline. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Hiberta Street north of South Third Street West has a variable paved width but with no curb or gutter within a 60’ right-of-way. The paved roadway does not continue north along the entire subdivision frontage. 8. The applicant is proposing to pave the west half of Hiberta Street to a 16’ width, including curb and gutter, from back-of-curb to centerline adjacent to the subdivision. This proposal is supported by City Engineering based on moderate neighborhood density and potential on-street parking needs. A condition of approval requires review and approval of plans for curb and gutter installation plus half-street paving of Hiberta Street adjacent to the subdivision. 9. Hiberta Street access points for the subdivision include the two proposed cul-de- sacs, an alley and an existing access that serves a duplex on Lots 3 and 4. The duplex uses an existing 25’ paved access that is shared with a second duplex south of the subdivision. 10. City Engineering supports restricting Hiberta Street access points to the existing duplex access and the three others proposed, and recommends a 1’ no-access strip along the Hiberta Street frontage of Lots 26-30 and Lot 42. A condition of subdivision approval includes this requirement, along with a deed restriction explaining the limited access. Summerfield Drive 11. Summerfield Drive is proposed to be a 28’ paved cul-de-sac road (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) within a 54’ public access easement. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3) requires a 28’ cul-de-sac width. 12. The length of Summerfield Drive has increased 50’ according to a revised subdivision plat submitted April 2006 with no change in the proposed street section. 13. The City Fire Department recommends a 32’ paved width (back-of-curb to back-of- curb) for subdivision streets to meet Uniform Fire Code standards for a 20’ unobstructed width. 14. City Engineering recommends 32’ of pavement (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) for Summerfield Drive. Staff recommends a condition requiring review and approval of plans for curb and gutter installation plus paving Summerfield Drive to 32’ prior to final plat approval. Charleston Street 15. Charleston Street is proposed to be a 32’ paved cul-de-sac road (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) within a 54’ public access easement. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(3) requires a 28’ cul-de-sac width. 16. The length of Charleston Street has decreased by 37’ according to a revised subdivision plat submitted April 2006 with no change in the proposed street section. City Engineering supports the proposed paved width of 32’ (back-of-curb to back-of- curb). 17. A condition of approval requires review and approval of plans for curb and gutter installation plus paving Charleston Street to 32’ prior to final plat approval. Winston Lane 18. Winston Lane is a 21’ wide paved short-court within a 28’ private access easement proposed to serve Lots 20-25. City Subdivision Regulations require a 20’ width with a minimum 28’ easement. 19. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(7)(d) requires no-parking on short courts and lot design to accommodate off-street parking for each residence and common area for overflow parking. An overflow parking area was shown in the original ---PAGE BREAK--- submittal but removed on the plat dated April 2006. Alley-loading is proposed for Lots 22-25. 20. The short court standards prohibit parking on the internal short court street. A condition of approval requires that the driveways on two short court lots be at least twenty feet in length from the face of the garages to the back of curb of the short court. 21. A condition of approval requires review and approval of final plans for Winston Lane, including but not limited to overflow parking area with access easement. 22. Winston Lane is a 150’ long short court that was recognized as having potential for a common area pedestrian connection. A condition of approval requires a 20’ pedestrian easement on Winston Lane extending to the common area. 23. The developer proposes alley access for Lots 22-30, and City Engineering recommends a 1’ no-access strip along the Hiberta Street frontage of Lots 26-30. A condition of approval requires the no-access strip along Hiberta, along with documentation of this via deed restriction. A separate condition of approval requires the covenants to include information about the alley access requirement for Lots 22- 30. Driveways 24. A partially-paved driveway serves the existing home on Lot 1, and a gravel driveway serves the home on Lot 2. The home on Lot 11 is served by a gravel driveway from South Third Street West, but will require an individual driveway from the Summerfield Drive cul-de-sac. A new driveway from South Third Street West will be required to serve Lot 3, which is currently vacant. 25. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(16)(A) requires driveways accessing paved roadways to be paved. A condition of subdivision approval requires driveways for Lots 1, 2 and 11 to be paved and the driveway requirements included in the covenants. 26. The plat dated April 2006 shows a 20’ private access easement crossing the northern end of Lot 33 for the benefit of Lot 34. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control 27. Storm water will be piped from impervious surfaces to five vegetated swales to receive primary treatment. Excess water will be released from the swales to low- lying riparian areas on the site. 28. The storm water plan segregated the subdivision into 11 sub-basins based on the original lot layout. Changes based on the plat dated April 2006 include alterations in cul-de-sac, short court and alley in addition to lot layout and locations. 29. The subdivision grading plan shows finished grade in locations requiring fill to elevate improvements above base flood elevation. A new grading plan will be required based on changes shown in the April 2006 plat. 30. A condition requires City Engineering review and approval of final plans for grading, drainage and erosion control. Other 31. The plat contains an RSID/SID waiver for future improvements to the streets within this subdivision. A condition of approval requires subdivision streets to be cited in the statement, including Summerfield Drive, Charleston Street, Hiberta Street and South Third Street West. 32. Steve Earle of Mountain Line reviewed the subdivision proposal, and stated that the property is currently within the Missoula Urban Transportation District and is served by Route 9. ---PAGE BREAK--- Conclusions of Law: 1. Subdivision Streets meet or exceed the Uniform Fire Code Minimum requirement for a 20’ unobstructed width if the recommended conditions of approval are imposed. 2. South Third Steet West, Hiberta Street, Summerfield Drive and Charleston Street meet required public road standards if the recommended conditions are adopted. Pedestrian Access Findings of Fact: 1. There are no pedestrian facilities along South Third Street West and Hiberta Street adjacent to the subdivision. 2. The applicant is not proposing boulevard sidewalk improvements along the South Third Street West frontage of the subdivision, and therefore requests a variance from the City Subdivision Regulation Article 3-2(15)(B). 3. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(15)(B) requires 6’ concrete sidewalks with 10’ boulevards, but City Engineering recommends installation of a 5’ sidewalk with a 7’ boulevards based on width limitations presented by the existing 60’ width of South Third Street West right-of-way. 4. Staff recommends denial of the variance and installation of a 5’ sidewalk with a 7’ boulevard plus a 1’ sidewalk maintenance easement to avoid private property encroachment. 5. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(14)(F) requires bike lanes on Collector Streets. Steve King, City Engineer, commented that the recommended 36’ street width for South Third Street West permits flexibility in design to accommodate bike lanes plus a possible center turn lane. 6. The developer is proposing a 7’ curbside sidewalk for the subdivision along Hiberta from Charleston Street to the Third Street intersection. A variance is requested because the City Subdivision Regulations require installation of boulevard sidewalks. 7. City Engineering reviewed the variance and initially recommended a 5’ concrete sidewalk with a 7’ boulevard. Steve King, City Engineer, later confirmed that he did not object to the 7’ curbside sidewalk based on site constraints. 8. The applicant is proposing 5’ sidewalks with 6’ boulevards on both sides of Charleston Street and Summerfield Drive. 9. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-2(15)(B) requires a minimum 7’ boulevard width. City Engineering recommends a 7’ boulevard, which is also the minimum feasible width to raise and maintain required shade trees. 10. A condition of approval requires plans for installation of 5’ sidewalks with 7’ boulevards on both sides of Charleston Street and Summerfield Drive. 11. The covenants require the developer to plant street trees on 30’ centers to be maintained by the Homeowner’s Association. A condition of approval requires City Parks and Recreation to review and approve plans for street tree plantings. 12. The applicant proposes a 2’ gravel trail within a 20’ pedestrian access easement along the common lot boundary between Lots 15 and 16. This trail would provide common area access near the terminus of Summerfield Drive. City Subdivision Regulations 3-2(15)(L) permits a minimum 2’ wide low-impact trail. 13. Winston Lane was recognized as having potential for a common area pedestrian connection. A condition of approval requires a 20’ pedestrian easement on Winston Lane extending to the common area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Conclusions of Law: 1. If the variance for sidewalks on South Third Street West is denied and the recommended conditions are adopted, the proposed subdivision will meet the required standards for non-motorized pedestrian facilities. 2. If the boulevard sidewalk variance for Hiberta Street is approved, the proposed subdivision will meet the required standards for pedestrian facilities. Water & Sewer Systems Findings of Fact: 1. The proposed subdivision will be served by Mountain Water, which confirms it will provide water to this development. 2. The developer proposes to connect all lots to City sewer. Conclusions of Law: 1. Review of water and sewer systems is under the jurisdiction of state and local health authorities under the Montana Sanitation in Subdivision Act. Parks and Recreation Findings of Fact: 1. The park area requirement for this subdivision is 0.67 acre. The applicant is proposing 3.62 acres common area plus 0.48 acre of land to be dedicated to the City of Missoula as open space. 2. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-8(7) requires dedicated area to meet at least one of several parks, open space, and common area goals. One goal is preservation of an Area of Riparian Resource. 3. The former river slough in the middle of the subdivision is being preserved as common area, and has been designated an Area of Riparian Resource. A 10’ riparian buffer is proposed, but Jackie Corday of City Parks and Recreation notes that a 25’ buffer is the typical minimum width for small streams or lower-quality riparian areas. Jackie Corday encourages a minimum 20’ buffer. 4. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-8(9) encourages linear parks to serve as pedestrian paths or trail systems. The 0.48 acre of land dedicated to the City of Missoula potentially provides bicycle and pedestrian connections to other City open space. The top of the levee can be used to access lands both east and west of the subdivision. 5. Parks and Recreation is in support of the park dedication total, including the portion to be dedicated as open space to the City of Missoula, but objects to the inclusion of Lot 34 as this has been added since the original submittal. This lot eliminates 8374 square feet of open area that could be used as a play area or picnic area. 6. Flat areas west of the Charleston Street cul-de-sac remain accessible because of a 15’ gap between Lots 33 and 35. Conclusion of Law: 1. The proposed subdivision meets the required standards for parkland dedication. Schools Findings of Fact 1. The applicant estimates that 42 elementary and 32 secondary school-aged children will be added to the Missoula County Public School District with this subdivision. 2. Children from this subdivision will attend Hawthorne Elementary School, C.S. Porter Middle School and Big Sky High School. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. Rachel Vielleux, Missoula County Superintendent of Schools, had no comments on the subdivision. Conclusions of Law: 1. No adverse impacts on schools requiring mitigation have been identified. Fire Department Findings of Fact: 1. Upon annexation, the subdivision will be located within the jurisdiction of the Missoula Fire Department. The nearest fire station is within the Missoula Rural Fire District on South Avenue. 2. Missoula City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-7 establishes options for fire protection purposes, including residential sprinkler systems and fire hydrants. The applicant is proposing fire hydrants near the intersection of each cul-de-sac road and Hiberta Street. 3. The City Fire Marshal comments that hydrants capable of producing the required fire flow shall be in place prior to commencement of combustible construction, with hydrant location placed by the Fire Marshal. 4. The property is currently in the Missoula Rural Fire District. Curt Belts of Missoula Rural Fire comments that fire hydrants are acceptable if water flows are 1000 gallons per minute (GPM) for two hours, and that the district is not responsible for fire hydrant installation and maintenance. 5. Bob Rajala, City Fire Marshal, commented in a telephone conversation that hydrants in the City of Missoula are maintained by the City Fire Department. 6. The City Fire Marshal comments that Address signs shall be visible from the street. This requirement is included in the covenants 7. A condition of approval requires plans for hydrant locations and address signs be reviewed and approved by the City Fire Department prior to final plat approval. Conclusions of Law: 1. Fire service is available to the subdivision if the recommended condition is adopted. Law Enforcement Findings of Fact: 1. Upon annexation, the subdivision will be located within the jurisdiction of the Missoula Police Department. 2. The Missoula Police Department did not comment on the subdivision. Conclusions of Law: 1. Law enforcement service will be available to the subdivision. CRITERIA 3 AND 4: EFFECTS ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT Findings of Fact: 1. The subject property includes three river terrace levels, with the highest being approximately the same elevation as Third Street. A former river slough divides the property and functions as an irrigation drainage ditch overflow. 2. A site analysis was conducted to assess the presence of Areas of Riparian Resource and the potential for jurisdictional wetlands on the site. The Army Corps of Engineers determined that the river channel north of the levee was the only section of jurisdictional wetlands and/or “Waters of the United States” on the property. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3. The submittal includes a Riparian Resource Management Plan describing the location of riparian areas, mitigation measures proposed, noxious weed management and approved activities within these areas. Motorized vehicle access, structures, roads and livestock grazing or watering are prohibited within the Areas of Riparian Resource. 4. Additional, unmapped riparian areas were observed during multiple site visits. These include vegetation at the base of the levee, an area around a grove of cottonwoods west of Lot 35 larger than what was originally mapped, and riparian vegetation associated with the former slough. A 10’ buffer was included but was contained within some of the subdivision lots. 5. City Subdivision Regulations Article 3-13(9) requires the mapping of riparian vegetation plus a buffer area of varying width to protect the Area of Riparian Resource. The developer’s representative re-mapped riparian vegetation on the site to include formerly unmapped areas and exclude riparian buffer from lotted areas as shown on the plat dated April 2006. 6. Jackie Corday of City Parks and Recreation noted that a 25’ buffer width is typically recommended for lower-value riparian areas and smaller streams, while 50’ is recommended for higher-quality wetlands and larger streams. She recommends a 20’ riparian buffer outside of subdivision lots and within the designated common area. 7. A condition of approval requires Areas of Riparian Resource to be designated No Build/No Improvement Zones with a reference to the Riparian Resource Management Plan in the covenants. It permits planned riparian area disturbances regarding construction of the alley, Hiberta Street, drainage swales and extension of the sewer line south of the circular cottonwood grove, but requires these activities be included in the Amended Riparian Resource Management Plan with reference to restoration requirements for disturbed areas. The plan, including the exhibit, is also required to be consistent with the plat dated April 2006. 8. Two large cottonwood trees on Lot 41 were included following re-mapping. The plat indicates these are dead, but the Urban Forester found these trees to be alive but having the potential for loss of limbs. These are cavity trees that have the potential to be used by nesting birds. 9. Vultures and other bird species were seen perching in the large cottonwood trees on Lot 41 during site visits. The Urban Forester notes that these trees are a great benefit to birds that inhabit the Clark Fork River Corridor. 10. The Urban Forester recommends that the trees be retained for bird habitat with an appropriate development buffer zone due to the 90’ and 110’ heights of the two trees. As an alternative he recommends that the trees be removed before or after the bird nesting season. 11. Staff recommends a condition permitting removal of the two cottonwood trees after the bird nesting season, with plans for tree removal to be reviewed and approved by Parks and Recreation prior to final plat approval. 12. The County Weed district recommends language in the covenants regarding revegetation of ground disturbances with beneficial species, in addition to a revegetation plan. These are recommended in a condition of approval. 13. Shotgun reports can be heard in this area during waterfowl hunting season on the Clark Fork River. The location is adjacent to the Clark Fork River and is an area of potential human/wildlife interactions. Living with wildlife information is therefore recommended for the covenants. ---PAGE BREAK--- Conclusions of Law: 1. Impacts to the natural environment, wildlife, or wildlife habitat will be minimized if the recommended conditions are adopted. CRITERION 5: EFFECTS ON PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Findings of Fact: General 1. The City of Missoula Fire Department will serve the property. The Missoula Police Department will provide law enforcement services. 2. This subdivision is within the Missoula Wastewater Treatment Plant Service Area It is the applicant’s intent to connect to city sewer. 3. The property is located within the Air Stagnation Zone. The City-County Health Department comments that all new driveways must be paved 20’ back from the edge of the pavement or right of way boundary, whichever is greater. All new driveways will be paved, and staff recommends a condition requiring paving for driveways serving existing homes on Lots 1, 2 and 11. It is recommended that the covenants include information about the paving requirement. 4. The City-County Health Department comments that that the EPA has designated Missoula County as having a high radon potential and recommends that all new construction incorporate radon resistant construction features. A condition of approval requires this information to be included in the covenants. Floodplain 5. The property is outside the regulatory FEMA 100-year floodplain, but a portion of it falls within Shaded Zone X, a designation including 100-year floodplain subject to shallow flooding, 500-year floodplain or 100-year floodplain protected by levees. The majority of the subdivision is below the 100-year elevation of the Clark Fork River, but protected by a levee. 6. Todd Klietz, County Floodplain Administrator, comments that while floodplain permits would not be issued for this property, the land has historically been susceptible to flooding. A 1997 high water event on the Clark Fork River caused ponding near the base of the levee, and water backed up in the former channel that is now used for irrigation water overflow. 7. In order to mitigate the flood risk, the applicant proposes to elevate the first floor of homes in the subdivision 2’ above the base flood elevation. A grading plan shows first floor and garage elevations. 8. Todd Klietz recommends pre and post-construction elevation certificates be submitted documenting that lowest floors and utilities are two feet above the 100- year flood elevation, with fill meeting a 95% compaction threshold. 9. A condition requires pre-elevation certificates to be submitted at the time of Zoning Compliance Permit submittal with post-elevation certificates also required to confirm finished floor elevations. The condition requires a geotechnical engineer to certify 95% compaction for the fill, and all these requirements to be included in the covenants and on the plat. 10. A revised site plan dated April 2006 shows the same number of lots, but different lot locations and interior street The original submittal included a grading plan that will require revisions to reflect the changes. 11. The existing grading plan shows portions of roadway below the 100-year flood elevation. It is currently not known whether the proposed subdivision changes will result in roadway elevation changes. ---PAGE BREAK--- 12. A condition requires final plans for grading, drainage and erosion control to be reviewed and approved by City Engineering and the Floodplain Administrator final to plat approval. The condition requires a note on the plat and in the covenants if roadways would be inundated during a 100-year flood event. Levee 13. The Orchard Homes Levee is roughly one mile long and was constructed in the late 1940’s to protect area properties from flooding. The property proposed for subdivision includes approximately 440’ of this levee as measured along its southern base. 14. The Army Corps of Engineers oversaw original levee construction but delegated maintenance to local governments. Levee maintenance typically includes repair of the structure itself and routine tree and brush removal. Inspection remains the responsibility of the Army Corps. 15. The Orchard Homes Levee was last inspected by the Army Corps of Engineers in March 2005. It was confirmed to have an “active” status but the Corps recommended brushing and tree removal. An active status is defined by public sponsorship (i.e. city or county government), a minimum level of flood protection, structural soundness of the levee and active maintenance while meeting minimum maintenance standards. 16. To facilitate levee inspection, access and maintenance, a condition of approval requires a dike maintenance easement on the plat. The condition requires amendment of the Riparian Resource Management Plan so that that dike maintenance responsibilities, carried out by a local government representing the Army Corps of Engineers, may be facilitated despite not necessarily being consistent with the goals of the Plan. Tree Removal 17. Two large black cottonwood trees exist on Lot 41. These trees are alive but are considered “decadent,” having the tendency of losing larger branches and limbs. Tree heights of 90’ and 110’ make these trees a potential safety hazard for Lots 40- 42. A condition of approval permits their removal following the bird nesting season. Conclusions of Law: 1. Emergency services, water, and sanitation are available to the subdivision. 2. Adverse effects on public health and safety as a result of this subdivision may be mitigated if the recommended conditions are adopted. COMPLIANCE: This subdivision complies with: 1) SURVEY REQUIREMENTS Findings of Fact 1. The Seal of a Professional Land Surveyor or Engineer is required on all final plats, which states that the subdivision complies with part 4 of M.C.A. 76-3. Conclusion of Law: 1. This proposal meets the survey requirements. 2) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Findings of Fact 1. Subdivisions are required to comply with the local subdivision regulations provided for in part 4 of M.C.A. 76-3. ---PAGE BREAK--- Conclusions of Law: 1. The developer has submitted a plat which complies with the requirements of local subdivision regulations or conditions have been required that will bring the plan into compliance. 3) REVIEW PROCEDURE Findings of Fact 1. Subdivisions are required to comply with the local subdivision review procedure provided for in Article 4 of the Missoula City Subdivision Regulations. 2. Notice of public hearing of this major subdivision was published in the Missoulian on February 16th and 23rd, 2006. Certified letters were mailed to adjacent property owners on April 14, 2006, and a mailing noting a change in Planning Board location was mailed April 20, 2006. A poster was placed at the intersection of Third and Hiberta, and adjacent to the subdivision on April 18, 2006. 3. The Missoula Consolidated Planning Board held a public hearing on the subdivision on May 2, 2006. 4. The Missoula City Council held a public hearing on the subdivision on May 22, 2006. 5. A decision of the governing body rejecting or approving a proposed subdivision may be appealed to the district court within thirty days of such decision. The application shall specify the grounds upon which the appeal is made. An appeal may be made by the subdivider, a contiguous landowner, an owner of land within the City of Missoula who can establish a likelihood of material injury to property or its material value, or the City Council. In order to file an appeal, the plaintiff must be aggrieved by the decision, demonstrating that a specific personal and legal interest, as opposed to a general interest, has been or is likely to be specifically and injuriously affected by the decision. Conclusion of Law: 1. This subdivision proposal has followed the necessary application procedure and has been reviewed within the procedures provided in Article 4 of the Missoula City Subdivision Regulations. D) PROVISION OF EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES: Findings of Fact: 1. Public utility easements are located within the South Third Street West, Hiberta Street, Charleston Street and Summerfield Drive rights-of-way. A 32’ utility easement is shown along Winston Lane. 2. Northwestern Energy provides electricity to the subdivision. Qwest provides telephone service. 3. A 20’ Public Utility Easement is shown at the end of the Summerfield Drive cul-de-sac, and includes Lots 11, 12, 2 and 3. 4. A future sewer extension is shown west of the Charleston Street cul-de-sac within a 20’ Public Utility Easement. 5. A 10’ storm drainage easement is shown along the common lot boundary between Lots 16 and 17, requiring a variance from Article 3-6 of the Subdivision Regulations. Staff supports the variance request. 6. Jerry Supola of the Missoula Irrigation District commented that an easement exists for the overflow ditch in the center of the property, but this is not shown on the plat. A condition of approval requires this irrigation ditch easement be shown on the final plat ---PAGE BREAK--- to be reviewed and approved by Missoula Irrigation District and Orchard Homes Ditch Company prior to final plat approval. 7. A ditch along the eastern end of the subdivision is not shown within an easement. A condition of approval requires this ditch be shown within an easement, and be reviewed and approved by the Missoula Irrigation District prior to final plat approval. Conclusions of Law: 1. The provision of easements for utilities will be met by this subdivision if the variance is approved and the recommended conditions are adopted. E) PROVISION OF LEGAL AND PHYSICAL ACCESS: Finding of Fact: 1. Physical and legal access will be provided to the subdivision via South Third Street West, Hiberta Street, Charleston Street and Summerfield Drive rights-of-way. 2. A 28’ private access easement permits access to Lots 20-25. 3. A 20’ private access easement crosses Lot 33 for the benefit of Lot 34. 4. The duplex on Lots 4 and 5 has access to Hiberta Street via a 40’ private access easement as shown on COS 884. 5. A condition of approval requires a 20’ pedestrian easement on Winston Lane extending to the common area. This would extend the entire length of the short court street. Conclusion of Law: 1. The proposal meets physical and legal access requirements.