Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 10.06.2011 MINUTES LAUREL - YELLOWSTONE CITY COUNTY PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 6, 2011 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Members Present: Kathy Siegrist, Chairman Dan Koch, City Rep. Dick Fritzler, County Rep. Judy Goldsby, County Rep. Lee Richardson, County Rep. Hazel Klein, City Rep. John VanAken, County Rep. Members Absent: Greg Nelson, City Rep. Don Brown, City Rep. Others Present: Heidi Jensen, City Planner The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Siegrist. Public Input: Chairman Siegrist asked if there was any public comment on non - agenda topics. There was none. Approval of Minutes of June 2, 2011: Because of the secretary's absence, the minutes of the June 2, 2011 meeting were not available and review of the minutes was postponed to the next meeting. Chairman Siegrist stated that two public hearings were scheduled. The first public hearing is a variance for Anne Kero, and the second is for the River Retreat Subdivision Preliminary Plat application. Chairman Siegrist read the procedure for the public hearings at this time. Public hearing and recommendation on a variance for Kero Chairman Siegrist asked City Planner Heidi Jensen to introduce the matter to the council. Heidi Jensen stated that the Kero variance is for 215 East Fifth Street. She stated that Gary Colley, the city building inspector, attended the meeting to answer questions regarding modular, manufactured and mobile homes. Heidi stated that the variance has been going on for some time. Centennial Homes called at the beginning of the year and talked to Gary about the zoning for the lots. There was some confusion as to what was said, and this has turned into a "he said, he said" disagreement. Ms. Kero purchased a mobile home, or manufactured home, which is not allowed in that zoning. Ms. Kero's recourse is to request a variance recommendation from the Planning Board and a formal recommendation from the Laurel City Council. Heidi spoke regarding the staff findings, which included Ms. Kero's request. Pictures of the proposed home were attached to the staff report. The second page of the staff report listed the seven criteria that the Planning Board must use to make the findings for a recommendation, as required in Chapter 1 17.60.020 of the LMC Zoning Code. Heidi asked the Planning Board to note the seven criteria in the recommendation. The staff report also included a request to the City Council and three staff suggested conditions regarding application for a building permit, upkeep and maintenance of the property and control for noxious weeds, and the return to the R -6000 zoning regulations in the case of removal, a fire or natural disaster to the home. Heidi stated that Ms. Kero's attorney, Bill Cole, and Fred Keller, who represents Centennial Homes, would speak at this time. Fred Keller, 7339 Symatra Place, Billings, Montana, distributed pictures like the home that Anne purchased, as well as current pictures of the lot that Anne is developing. He stated that Anne's house is not the traditional view of a trailer house, double -wide, or HUD coded home. The differences between a modular home, which is allowed in that zoning, and a HUD coded home are the codes in which they are built. HUD codes are a Federal code and IRC or modular codes are local or state codes. The main difference is the way the floor system in the house is built. A HUD coded home has a steel frame or substructure underneath the floor and a modular home is built to the same codes that municipalities would use to govern building. Anne's house is 100 percent dry walled with %z -inch drywall and is built to the same standards many builders would use. In many cases, it is much more energy efficient and a better product. She has chosen nice finishes in her home, and the layout of the house is the best use for this lot. Fred also had a sketch of the actual floor plan in Anne's house. Fred had a copy of Bill Cole's letter, as well as a copy of a letter from Jason Lillie, a realtor from Prudential Floberg Realtors. Fred read the letter from Jason Lillie, which stated: City of Laurel: The proposed construction of the home located at 215 East 5 Street in Laurel is a manufactured home on an FHA approved permanent foundation. It is approximately 1,540 square feet. There will be a newly constructed attached garage with the home. In addition there will be new concrete flat work done — stairs and walk ways. The home will be located on a city lot. It can be argued that the proposed new construction at 215 East 5 Street is the "highest and best use" of the property. This area of Laurel is primarily older homes. In the last six months there have been 7 homes of comparable style to the proposed construction at 215 East 5 Street sold. The 7 homes in this area with similar features that have sold had a sales price in the range of $121,000 to $178,000. The average age of the homes sold was 1966. The average sales price was $154,977.14. There was no new construction sold. Of the homes currently on the market that are in the 1,500 square foot range with no basement, there are 2 newer construction homes. One built in 2010 and one in 2003. They are 1,561 square feet listed at $219,900 and 1,568 square feet listed at $229,900 respectively. The other 6 homes currently on the market for sale that are comparable in size to the proposed home at 215 East 5 Street have an average listing price of $126,450 and an average age of 1956. 2 A new construction home of this size, while a manufactured or HUD code home, should not negatively impact home values in the immediate area. This proposed construction can be argued to be an improvement to the neighborhood and a "highest and best use" of the property. Fred stated that Anne has spent the money to remove the old foundation from the house that burned down, to have the utilities brought up to standard, and she is ready to place her home. This home will be a nice addition to the City of Laurel and a very nice home for Anne to retire in. Fred thinks it is the highest and best use for this property. Dan Koch asked if the home would have a deed or a title. Fred stated that, once the house is put on a permanent foundation, it will be de- titled and will be real property, just as a site built home would be, and it will have a deed. Gary Colley asked regarding the foundation. Fred stated that the home would have a Magnum foundation system, which is relatively new to this area. Magnum Construction, the company that builds the foundation system, just bought the old Furniture Outlet building and is relocating the business to the Laurel area. Fred has done hundreds of foundations with their product, which is a phenomenal product. It is backfilled, completely engineered, and comes with an engineered certificate to include with the building permit. The garage foundation will be a monolithic slab. The flatwork for Anne's house and the new sidewalks will be poured by Design Creek Construction. Dick Fritzler asked for more information about the foundations. Fred stated that Laura Mussetter, the owner of Magnum Construction, was at the meeting to explain the information. Gary asked if it would be a regular basement or a crawl space. Fred stated that it will not be a crawl space foundation. It will be a permanent foundation and have a crawl space for access underneath it. It is not a four -foot stem wall foundation that would be traditionally known as a crawl space foundation. There will be approximately 32 inches of access space and the foundation will be backfilled. The support on a manufactured home is not on the exterior walls like site -built construction. The support on a manufactured HUD coded home is on the steel rails of the house itself. Even if it is on a crawl space foundation, it would need a transferous beam in the foundation because the weight of the home is supported on the steel rails and not on the exterior walls. From the floor system up, the house will look like a site -built home, with the same wall construction and interior features. Someone asked if it is constructed with the beams so wheels and axels can be put under it to transport it. Fred agreed and invited anyone to look at 27 examples of the construction on his lot. Dan Koch stated that it is still actually a mobile home if there are axels and wheels under it. 3 Fred stated that the axels and wheels will be removed at the time the house is placed on the foundation and the house will be attached to the ground permanently. It will be de- titled, so it will be real property, cannot be resold, and has to remain on the ground. It becomes real property at the time it is placed on a permanent foundation and the de- titling process through the State of Montana is done. When originally constructed, any manufactured home has a title. Dick questioned the statement in the application regarding removal, fire or other natural disaster voiding the variance. Fred stated that the purpose of the statement is that the land would revert back to the R -6000 zoning. If someone wanted to place another manufactured home there, they would have to go through the variance process again. They are not asking to change any zoning in the City of Laurel, but are asking for a variance for this specific lot. Gary asked if the building meets all International Residential Codes and International Building Codes. Fred stated that the building itself will not meet all International Residential Codes. It is built to HUD codes, which are Federal codes. International Residential Code is typically used by municipalities to govern building. There are some differences in some plumbing codes and some electrical codes that pertain to HUD construction versus IRC modular construction. As a contractor who specialized in modular construction and has done 250 to 300 projects as a contractor and also worked as a site builder, Fred stated that the construction of these homes exceeds a lot of the homes that were built pre - 1960's that are in the same neighborhood. Dick asked if these were standard 2x6 walls. Fred stated that Anne's house is built with 2x6 walls 16 inches on center. The structural sheeting is 7/16" OSB sheeting on all exterior walls, just like a site builder would use. The home has full Tyvek type wrapping around the entire house, Pella windows, R -44 insulation in the attic, and a composite shingled roof. Anne has invested approximately $185,000 into this project. She has chosen to retire in the Laurel area and looked long and hard for a lot. The lot she found belonged to a contractor that Fred knew, and the contractor sold it to Anne. Fred stated that he made a phone call to Laurel and apparently there was a miscommunication as far as how the house was coded. He stated that he has done a lot of construction over the years and has sold a lot of homes, and the company is not in the business of not checking things out. In the City of Billings, he has put many HUD coded homes on permanent foundations, built garages, and not had any issues. After finding the lot, Anne proceeded from there. When applying for permitting for the garage and the foundation, they found out that the lot would not work. Anne's house is built and she has paid for it with all of her savings. He stated that it would be really easy to get into a "he said, he said" type of argument, and he certainly does not want to do that. There was just a pure misunderstanding as to how that lot was zoned. It should have probably been checked out more thoroughly, but it was not. Dick asked the differences in electrical and plumbing construction between HUD codes and IRC codes. Fred stated that the difference is the type of plumbing used, an ABS plastic plumbing, versus a schedule 40 PVC plumbing for some of the plumbing. Fred spoke about venting codes. In the old days, one -inch pipe was used to vent bathrooms. HUD codes for plumbing venting require 11/2-inch 4 pipe, whereas IRC plumbing codes require a 2 -inch pipe. Fred stated that this house fits 90 percent of the codes or 95 percent of the codes associated with IRC construction. The way the homes are manufactured is a little different than some other companies. Fred sells Friendship Homes, which are all built in Montevideo, Minnesota. The houses he sells, from the single wides to the $250,000 modulars, are all built in the same line by the same people. They use a lot of the same products throughout the construction process and do not have to warehouse a lot of materials. Most companies have a different line build their single wides, double wides and modulars. Laura Mussetter, Magnum Development, is a new resident at 1920 East Maryland Lane. The house she resides in on Maryland Lane is actually a 1984 manufactured home, which they totally redid and installed their foundation system under it. Laura explained that the foundation system is a fully engineered HUD permanent foundation compliant system. Manufactured homes are supported uniquely or opposite from site built homes. Site built homes have a footer and a stem wall, and the home is actually built on the top of the stem wall. To use that kind of foundation on a manufactured home is almost inappropriate. One would actually have to pour more concrete because the home is not being supported on the stem wall and still needs to be supported. All the structural foundation support still has to be directly under the frame that remains on the home. So one has to do a footer and a stem wall and has to pour runners under the house, ending up with a footer and a stem wall that was intended to be the sole structural foundation and support for the home. It now acts as a non -load bearing, non - structural skirt wall. A little bit of perimeter support under window and door openings. For an average $16,000 project in a concrete foundation like that, probably $12,000 of it is in the footer and the stem wall, which is not doing what it was intended to do. It is basically acting as a $12,000 skirt wall. Laura stated that the system is fully engineered, is HUD permanent foundation compliant, and is a frost protected shallow foundation. The perimeter wall is still a non -load bearing skirt wall, but they construct a galvanized steel frame from the bottom of the rim joist to the ground. The bottom steel track is spiked into the ground for lateral movement. The panels are mounted on a steel frame. This adds insulation to the perimeter and stops the frost encroachment at the perimeter. All of the foundation supports are interior and are 18 to 24 inches away from the perimeter of the home. No heave will occur and the home is still anchored. If concrete runners are used under the frame of the home, they molly -bolt the arms right to the concrete. If there is no concrete, they embed a really heavy gauge steel pan into the ground. The pan goes on the ground, a jacking plate is used to embed it into the ground, and the arms are attached to the base and then clamped and bolted to the frame. The arms are tensioned based on the size of the home and the wind and seismic zones of the location. The site is then backfilled and finished. There was some discussion regarding insulated concrete foundations. Laura stated that her foundation is a frost protected shallow foundation that uses insulation to protect the concrete. She spoke further about insulated concrete forms, the panel system used for the perimeter wall, and some Zoo Drive buildings that used the foam construction. She stated that the system they use for the foundation saves about half the cost of pouring concrete. In areas where there is a lot of seismic activity, these systems are referred to as floating foundations and they are very resilient where there is seismic activity. There are a lot of benefits to them. They are insulated, so heating and cooling costs are saved. There was further discussion regarding setting the home. The home will be set on CMU blocks. They add the HUD compliant securing and anchoring so there is a base to each base. Three arms come up 5 and everything is designed in a triangular fashion using leverage and compression. The system used to anchor the home to the frame secures the home from movement with natural forces like wind and seismic movement. From an engineering standpoint, the blocks are intermediate vertical support only. Laura stated that the home will actually have more vertical support between the blocks and the steel I- beams than any site built home. Dan stated his concern regarding sagging. Laura stated that the home is on concrete runners, or CMU block. Every eight feet there is a CMU block set on a concrete runner, and then interspersed between the CMU blocks on a concrete runner there is the HUD compliant anchor system, too. It provides more support than any site built house, according to Laura. There was further discussion regarding tornadoes and the system. Bill Cole, 3733 Tommy Armour in Billings, is an attorney with Cole Law Firm. He stated the request that the board make a positive recommendation to the City Council for approval of the variance. It is a variance, not a zone change. The zoning remains the same, despite the variance, as it is a one -time request for this particular property. He stated that Anne is fine with the three conditions recommended by star Mr. Cole stated that this is a very good case for meeting the seven criteria. He stated that it would be fair to say that the variances are intended to establish what is fair for the community and the neighbors and what is fair for the applicant. Mr. Cole stated that Fred and Laura explained that this is kind of a unique situation. This is a high quality Cadillac version manufactured home. In researching on www.zillow.com, he found that the average value of the neighboring four houses was about $118,500. The houses were built in the 1920's on 7,000 square foot lots. Anne will have invested in excess of $185,000, so she will have $65,000 more invested than the average value of the neighbors. If it costs that much to put a manufactured home on the site, his concern would be for the neighborhood. If the variance is not approved, the lot would still be an eyesore because it was a burned out hole. A site built home would probably cost in excess of $200,000 for this lot. He is not sure anybody would want to invest so much money to have a house that is worth twice as much the houses in the neighborhood. Anne plans to fix the sidewalk, which goes back to the 1930's. Mr. Cole stated that Anne has invested the money in this property and she owns the real estate. The circumstances are unfortunate, but maybe not, as it allows this body to deal with how to redevelop some of the older neighborhood lots. Given the cost of new construction, it is going to be difficult to do infill when there are gaps in the older part of the community. Mr. Cole asked for a positive recommendation to the city council. Chairman Siegrist opened the hearing for public comment. She asked three times if any proponents would like to testify. Seeing none, she asked three times if any opponents wanted to speak against the request. Seeing none, the public portion of the hearing was closed. Chairman Siegrist stated that it was time for discussion. Lee Richardson asked who the neighbors are and if they approve or not approve. Chairman Siegrist stated that the neighbors were not at the meeting. Heidi stated that all the neighbors were sent certified public notice. One e-mail was received from Christine Goodpaster, who was opposed to the variance. Christine is the property owner, not the occupant of the property, as her mother resides in the property. 6 Chairman Siegrist stated that nobody in the neighborhood chose to speak either way. Chairman Siegrist stated that there are seven criteria, which Cole Law Firm addressed in the letter, and Heidi suggested three conditions, to which they have agreed. She asked the board for any questions, based on the input tonight and the information presented in writing. Heidi stated that she wrote the staff report with the three conditions prior to receiving the attorney's letter. The conditions would be outside of the letter. The attorney's letter is just additional public comment that was submitted in advance by the applicant's attorney. It has no reflection on the Planning Department or any recommendation made. Heidi stated that the three conditions are her recommendation. The Planning Board must decide whether to approve, deny, or conditionally approve the variance request and make a recommendation to the council. Someone asked about Gary's concerns regarding the zoning. Gary stated that he could only speak about what the code says, and the home does not meet the code requirements for R -6000 zoning. Gary stated that, in the section where it allows or disallows different things, manufactured homes are listed but are not allowed in R -6000. Modular homes are allowed in R -6000 because they meet International Residential and International Building Codes. A manufactured home and a modular home are totally separate. Several years ago, a modular home was set on a full basement at 102 East 12 Street, which is zoned R -7500. There is a manufactured home across from the police department. Heidi explained that the requirement for a building permit just follows city procedure. Gary stated that a building permit would be needed for the foundation and the garage, as the house is already permitted by someone else. There was discussion regarding the technology to anchor the homes, comparison of the engineered foundation versus some existing foundations in Laurel, de- titling a mobile home, taxing a de- titled home the same as real estate with a stick built home, mortgages on a mobile home, and FHA inspections and FHA loans. There was further discussion regarding the main difference between modular and manufactured homes, which is the different requirement in HUD codes and IRC or IBC codes. One difference is the 1'A -inch HUD requirement versus the 2 -inch requirement by the State. Hazel spoke regarding adding new construction into the neighborhood, the de- titling process to make a mobile home taxable real estate, and the probable increase in value to the surrounding houses if the variance is allowed and the home is placed. She does not think this would be harmful to the neighborhood. If the home burned down, the variance would be void and the lot would revert back to the R -6000 zoning. She can see that the misunderstanding has created a hardship for Anne, and it will create further hardship if the variance is not approved. There was further discussion regarding the engineered foundation, which is HUD compliant. Since a modular home meets all International and Residential Codes, it could be placed in the R -6000 zoning without a variance. Hazel stated that the foundation system is the real issue as to whether the board should go forward. 7 Heidi stated that the Planning Board needed to meet the seven criteria. At this time, the Planning Board took time to review the letter from Mr. Cole, Anne Kero's attorney. Motion by Dan Koch to move forward with the conditions and the language as stated in the letter by Mr. Cole, the representative's attorney, seconded by Judy Goldsby. Motion carried, with all members voting aye. Public hearing and recommendation for River Ranch Retreat Maior Subdivision Chairman Siegrist stated that the public hearing for the preliminary subdivision plat for River Ranch Retreat. Heidi presented the staff report for River Ranch Retreat Subdivision. Heidi stated that this is for 22 lots on 160.9 acres. Since Yellowstone County does not condition much, it is all in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement and the conditions are short and basic things concerning utilities and Federal requirements. Heidi asked the Planning Board to include them in the motion whether to recommend approval to the Yellowstone County Commissioners or to conditionally recommend, to recommend or to disapprove. Heidi stated that the applicant's representative, Mr. Foley from the Foley Group, was prepared to give a presentation of the applicant's proposal. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement covers all conditions that the city would require. A copy of the phasing diagram and replies from Yellowstone County regarding the conditions were attached to the staff report. Heidi explained that a Subdivision Improvements Agreement binds the applicant to the items listed in the table of contents. She is used to conditioning things in the staff report that would be done by final plat, but Yellowstone County does things differently in that it is signed off by the bank, by a notary, and by the applicant instead of planning staff conditioning them. Jim Foley, a planner with Foley Group at 100 North 27 in Billings, spoke to the board. Using a map pointed to the north, he stated that River Road borders the property on the south and showed the actual location of the parcel proposed for development. The property is owned by his client, Jerry Williams, who also attended the meeting. It is his understanding that the land is in the County, so it is not in any type of zoning jurisdiction or planning jurisdiction and the owner could farm it, develop part of it, or do anything with it. The owner has been approached by people who want to have a horse on some affordable property. After several people approached him, the owner got serious about this. Jim stated that they worked with the planner and Gary early on to make sure everything was designed to meet the regulations for Laurel, Yellowstone County, and the State of Montana and that water and sewer services would be safe and meet every code. Jim stated that the development has two entries, both off of River Road, and has a double loop system and two small dead ends. A 30,000 - gallon fire tank would be located in the center, as well as the mail delivery service. There are 22 lots, with the smallest being five acres and the largest being 9.68 acres. The white boxes on the map were the locations where the homes would be built. That relates back to the engineering of the water and sewer systems to make sure they are safe and comply with all the state rules. There are two irrigation ditches that currently go through and will remain there. The water right on the land will remain and will be redirected through two ditches that parallel the two roads. The homeowners' association will own and manage the water rights, and each property owner will have access to the ditch for water to irrigate their land. There is nice farm ground down by the river, but a lot of it was substandard farm ground. Jim spoke regarding the 100 -year floodplain. In the planning, 8 they utilized the new proposed 100 -year floodplain rather than the existing floodplain line. The existing floodplain line actually follows the riverbank, comes up through a small slough, and cuts over. The new line dramatically changed and the building lots are completely out of the floodplain area. The road segment through the floodplain is part of Laurel's requirement not to have a cul -de -sac longer than 600 feet, so they were forced to add a little bend in the road. That will be built in compliance with the Corps of Engineers and will be at grade. It will not be elevated and will not affect the floodplain. Jim pointed out that there are three existing easements on the property down by the river. They are the Yellowstone Co -op, the Conoco Oil pipeline, and the NorthWestern Energy gas line. All the building envelopes are pluming off those easements, giving access to any of those utility companies for maintenance purposes. Jim spoke regarding other things done to keep the development nice. They have done a fairly detailed design manual and design guidelines for the architecture and the landscape. The covenants spell out how the homeowners' association manages the place, as far as how many critters are allowed and the required condition of the property. They have tried to plan this as well as possible to meet all the criteria and to make sure it is a safe place. Regarding traffic, a complete traffic analysis was conducted by a local engineer. The result is that the development is small enough it actually has very little impact on the overall traffic flows on River Road and subsequent intersections. They have reserved a private park on the river and an access easement to the park for the development. Dedicated city and county parks are required when the lots are under five acres and these are five acres and above, but they wanted to have a private park and a way to get to the river for the property owners. Jim introduced Dave Crawford, their civil engineer with TD &H. Dick asked if this would be a private park on the Yellowstone River. Jim stated that is correct, as it is all private property. There was discussion regarding current houses on the property, accesses to the properties, development on highway 212, and the road system. Jim stated that the whole road system is designed to the county's standard. The roads are all paved in asphalt. The turning radius and cul -de -sacs, backups, and the pullout through the fire fill tank all have to be built to that standard and approved by the County Road and Bridge Department by a stamped engineer. There was a question regarding replenishing the groundwater. There was discussion regarding groundwater and residential wells. Jim stated that each individual lot of five to ten acres will have its own well. There was a question regarding the sewer systems. Dave Crawford, TD &H Engineering, 108 West Babcock, Bozeman, Montana, is the civil engineer on the project. He stated that a tab in the binder specifically shows on -site water and wastewater treatment. He provided a basic overview of a drawing of the River Ranch Retreat Subdivision typical dose to on -site wastewater treatment disposal system. The system is essentially a higher tech drainfield than the normal standard drainfield. Most drainfields are just a series of perforated pipes in the ground, and the wastewater goes from the septic tank out into the drainfield by gravity. These are a pressure dose system, so the wastewater goes through a drainfield into a secondary tank that is a pumping tank. The wastewater has already been treated at that point and then it is pressurized out into the drainfield. The reason for that is there is better distribution of the effluent over the entire 9 drainfield. Instead of all the wastewater trickling into one little area, it is evenly distributed over the whole drainfield, which gives a better level of treatment than in a standard drainfield. More details on the second page showed the septic tank and the secondary dosing tank. The schematic drawings show a cross section at the bottom showing the house, the gravity sewer coming out to the septic tank, and then on into the drainfield. These are not final design drawings because, depending on the decisions of the Planning Board and the County Commissioners, the site specific designs will have to be done and submitted to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality for review. DEQ has a staff of engineers that look at every detail, how many gallons per day, and how many square feet of drainfield need to be provided. They check all the calculations and have a non - degradation review that has very tight criteria. Since the land is near a river, they will look closely to make sure there is no contamination of any surrounding water wells or the river water. That will be the next step after the preliminary plat review and is one of the requirements and conditions before anything could be built. Dave stated that these are individual systems, so each individual lot will have one of the pressure dose type drainfields on it. That is good because it disperses the wastewater out instead of concentrating it all in one tight little area. It disperses it and the non - degradation calculations have to show how each individual drainfield will treat the water, what direction the water will flow, and make sure that the cumulative effects are not negative to any of the surrounding users or the river. The State will impose additional conditions if they have any concerns about inspection or testing. Dave spoke regarding the wells. Just like the wastewater system, the water system will be reviewed by the DEQ. DEQ will be looking that there is no possibility that the wastewater from the systems would impact any wells. Placement of the wells and placement of the drainfields is done very carefully, understanding the direction of flow of the groundwater and making sure there are 100 -foot separations between the systems. As far as consumption of water, with the irrigation for the lawns being provided by the irrigation ditch, the amount of water that will be pulled out of these wells for domestic use is minimal. Looking at the amount of water that is typically used in a household for doing dishes, cooking and taking a shower, it is very small compared to the amount used to irrigate a lawn and for exterior use. So a huge amount of water will not be taken from the wells with the irrigation being provided from the ditches. The State will look at this project to determine if enough water is available. The engineers will provide the State with information about the aquifer, the well logs in the area, and the neighbors' wells. Dave stated that the roads will be paved to 24 -foot wide county standard roads with nice gentle slopes on the sides for safety reasons. The roads will be built basically down to the level of the ground so they do not influence the floodplain in any way. Dave stated that a full traffic study was provided in the packets. He stated that Bob Marvin from Billings is probably the most highly respected traffic in the State of Montana. Mr. Marvin has shown that, with the two accesses that come onto River Road, both of those intersections will operate at level of service A, which is the highest level possible. It is the best traffic operation, and that is at both the peak morning and the peak evening hour when there would be the most people going to work or coming home from work. Even in the highest peak traffic times, the intersections will operate at level service A. In terms of the floodplain, in addition to having all the building envelopes out of the floodplain, as required, each of the structures will be elevated an additional three feet above the floodplain elevation to be absolutely sure there is a margin of safety there. They feel good about the fact that the homes will be dry even in 100 -year flood. There was a question whether that changes with a basement. 10 Dave stated that in the floodplain area, additional things would be needed to flood proof a basement or crawl space. Because these are actually outside the floodplain area, there is really no regulation. Common sense would say that, if groundwater is down at six feet, one would not want to put in an eight -foot basement. They could elevate the floor of the basement up and the finished floor of the building up to provide more safety. That is a site -by -site building issue and would be a building permit type of review. Jim stated that the owner is going to put a designer review process in place and an architect /engineer will review all the home plans. This will be fully explained to the people before they do plans and he will also review the plans. That is the only thing they can put in place to have control over it because there is no governmental agency that will do it because it is in an unzoned area. There was discussion regarding traffic on Thiel Road, Duck Creek Road, River Road and Highway 212. Information is included in the sixth tab of the binder. There was further discussion regarding pick up and drop off locations for the Laurel school buses. Jim stated that they would like to put a shelter right in the center so the bus would actually drive into the subdivision and then drive out. If not, it will be put out on one of the roads closer to River Road, but off of River Road. The roads will be maintained by the County and there will actually be a maintenance district formed so the folks are taxed and money goes into a fund to maintain the roads. The County will not accept a subdivision that does not have dedicated county roads that they maintain because it has been a problem over and over. The County will not accept a gravel road anymore either. At this time, Chairman Siegrist asked three times if any proponents of the request wished to speak. There being none, Chairman Siegrist asked if any opponents would like to speak on the request. Ruth Terry, 4115 River Road, stated that she wrote a letter. Ruth asked when the traffic studies were done and how reflective they are of what actually goes on out there. If they were done this summer, it was not typical and she questioned whether the study is truly representative of the actual traffic patterns. Exxon was up and down the road all summer and Thiel Road was closed to local traffic. Ruth questioned the statement that water use in the house would be minimal. She doubts that many people will use the irrigation water to irrigate around their house. Unless they put in sprinkler systems, it will be flood irrigation and people will not want that right up against the house. She questioned those statements, in addition to everything else that was in her letter. Heidi stated that the questions would be written down and addressed by the applicant or his representatives at the end of the hearing. Ruth stated that she has already had people up and down her road looking at the proposed sites. She has put in new pavement and is currently spending over $20,000 to put in a gate to keep out traffic that has no business on her road. She has to put up a gate and the only thing she is comfortable with is one that only she can open. The road was not cheap either. There is a sign on her gate that says private road, but nobody pays attention to it. Chairman Siegrist asked if any more opponents would like to speak. Jeff Achten, 3542 River Road, stated that there is a lot of bicycle activity on that road. People from Laurel and Billings go out there and bicycle up and down the road. Young kids go out there with baseball bats and knock down mailboxes. Now there will be more young kids in the neighborhood. 11 He spoke about plowing the subdivision roads and the private park that other residents will not be able to use. Joanne Setzer has lived at 3750 River Road for 32 years. She has seen floods, fires and wind and has witnessed what can happen. She hauls water because wells run dry, and there is either too much water or not enough water. The saturation of the soil goes beyond the floodplain and affects foundations. Joanne had already submitted a letter about the road being dangerous. If there is increased traffic down that road, the County needs to totally rebuild the road and have a wide enough lane for bicycles. There have been quite a few accidents and three fatalities on the road since they moved out there, and there will be more if the road is not maintained. The road does not get plowed in the winter now, and she does not know how they are going to be able to plow in a subdivision where the wind blows. She worries about investment issues, people that start projects but do not finish them, and the lack of rules for developments. Fire protection is a big issue out there, as everyone lives in fear of their houses burning down. There were two fires on her road this summer, and this was a wet year. She is not sure that any amount of a tank of water would really help. She thinks a fire station might be needed out there, and fire protection will cost. Joanne is concerned about the possible loss of habitat. She has seen bobcats, beavers, mountain lions, bears, hawks, eagles, and osprey, and once this place is paved and everything is marked off into a park, those wildlife will go away and not come back. She suggested the need to think about future generations. People from Laurel can go down with their boats and stomp along now, but she wonders if they would be able to stomp along the private park that is being suggested. Joanne stated that, when they heard that Mr. Williams bought this land, they were told there was a 20 -year conservation easement and they did not need to worry. Barbara Hassett has lived at 5423 River Road for eleven years. She is concerned about the water and the ground source. It is a very high table there and people are going to want to keep horses on the land. Horses are beautiful, but their heads are down and their tail is up. She questioned how many horses would be allowed per person. They have proposed a wonderful septic system for the people but do not have a good septic system for the animals. She wants to know how that will affect the groundwater. Tom Reiter, 3827 River Road, has lived there since 1965. He has farmed and driven tractor on every square foot of the land and has dug fence post holes. When Jerry told him there would be a subdivision there, he was concerned about the septics. He knows that perk tests are being run right now, but those ditches have not had water in them for over a year, so he does not know how valid the perk tests could be. Tom spoke regarding issues with a so- called county approved road that is sliding in several places, concerns with developments that are not done right, the 20 -year conservation easement, the proposed subdivision of the home place, people that ask him about his water, irrigation issues, and concerns with the traffic study and the number of additional vehicles that will be in the area. He is concerned about the perk tests. He has not heard of this new kind of septic system. Tom mentioned that the Big Sky State Games run on that road. The number of motorcycles on the road is insane. The dip in front of Joann's driveway has caused several near misses on motorcycles. Tom stated that the traffic and the condition of the road are big issues. If it is done right, he is not one to impede progress. Hoyle Setzer, 3750 River Road, considers Jerry to be a friend but is concerned about his intentions. He was surprised when Dennis Reiter sold the property, but they were told that Jerry was going to farm and it was not going to be developed. He asked regarding Jerry's intentions for the rest of the property that he owns out there. He asked if this is the beginning and if everything he owns is going to wind up in development or if this is the end. If this is the end, Hoyle questioned if Jerry would be willing to 12 have the rest of his property zoned so it cannot be developed. Hoyle stated that he is concerned about the future. Heidi stated that there is no zoning in Laurel's jurisdiction in Yellowstone County and just one parcel could not be zoned. David Kissling, 851 North River Road, stated his concern about the traffic. The road is very dangerous and there is no bailout for it. If someone has to bail out of the road because of some problem, they are going to roll over in most places. He stated the need for consideration to add 22 cars, which he thinks would be more like 44 cars. David stated concern about the irrigation of the property. One of the ditches is initiated on his property, so they have an easement to maintain it. David does not want 22 people coming down his road to mess with the irrigation. He is lucky that Exxon built a new road there and he does not want it destroyed by a bunch of cars. Jerry Dawson, 3850 River Road, asked if the well water would be used for drinking water. Jerry lives across the road and has a well that generally runs dry, but now it is full of alkali. He does not know if they are going to go through a treatment system to prevent that or how that will work. Chairman Siegrist asked three times if any more opponents wanted to speak. Seeing none, she closed the public part of the hearing. Chairman Siegrist stated that it was time to address the questions. Jim stated that he would try to address all the questions. In regard to the traffic study, all of the data and accounting was done during the month of June before the pipeline break in July. Regarding irrigation, he explained that the ditch will run through there, but the covenants will actually allow people to pump from that ditch and spray the water through their small systems. In regard to people coming up and down private roads, Jim stated that is bad. With the new paved road system, he would hope most of the people would identify the entry feature and go in there. People surrounding the property are welcome to put in their own private gates on the roads. In regard to there not being a public park on the property, the private park just follows the regulations. There is not supposed to be a public park in a development with parcels that are over five acres. In regard to wells running dry and the whole groundwater issue, Jim stated that a lot of different types of wells go in. People will hire a well digger, put a well in, and get water, only to have it go bad later. Dave stated that there are a couple of well issues. All of the domestic drinking water for the subdivision would come from well water. As part of the application to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, they have to show that there is adequate water by looking at existing well logs. There are several monitoring wells on the site that keep track of the elevation of the surface of the water table there. They have to provide that information and the information about the soils on the site. They have to take samples of existing wells in the area to show that the quality of the water is suitable for drinking. DEQ will not approve anything until they see that the water is acceptable for drinking. As far as the water table there, Dave stated that monitoring pipes have been installed throughout the site. They were monitored throughout the spring and the summer, during the wet and dry periods, to see how high the water table actually gets when the river is up. This was a very wet year. They will present the data to the DEQ, and the DEQ will determine if the drainfields are high enough above the water table that it will give good treatment of the wastewater and will not contaminate the water table. Dave stated that all the perk tests, the soil profiles and the design 13 calculations will be combined into a notebook for DEQ to review. Today's standards are much tougher than they were when a lot of the existing houses in the area were built. Dave stated that everyone wants to ensure that there is clean drinking water. Jim responded to the concern about people's investment of living out there if the project turned into a junk yard or was not built. Jim explained that, when the project goes to final plat, the owner has to bond all the improvements. So if the owner defaults on it, there would be money available to completely build it, which means there would be no possibility of the development going bad and not being built after it was approved. In regard to loss of habitat, they spoke with the Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks to find out if there are any endangered species in the property or any species of concern. FWP thought that, with the development being low in density, a few animals might be spooked, but there would probably be more habitat there via trees and shrubs and grass that are planted long -term than the fields that are plowed under and turned into dirt each year. The actual habitat will remain totally untouched and intact. FWP did not have any concerns about loss of habitat. It would probably be a change of habitat and a slight change of use, but not a loss. Jim spoke regarding the twenty -year conservation easement mentioned by a resident. He explained that conservation easements are never done for a time period, as they are forever. It is a long process that people may or may not go through. There has never been an easement on this property. Jim spoke regarding the question about weeds. In the final plat stage, they will submit a weed plan to the county board to tell them how and when spraying will be done. The homeowners' association will be responsible to follow through with that. In regard to this being developed and not remaining as farmland, Jim thinks that is a reflection of the current economy. People have bad times, and farmers have good years and bad years. This farmer has had some bad years, due to the economy, and one way to help him get out of that is to sell these lots. He did not want to do that, as it was the family's intention to keep it as a farm. They had offered to sell the whole thing before and it did not sell. When people started wanting to buy smaller parcels, the owners felt that was something they needed to do. Dave spoke regarding the question about the fire situation, which is a public safety issue he wanted to address. The City of Laurel will provide the fire protection for this development. If an existing home in the area caught on fire or if there were a grass fire, the Laurel Fire Department would respond with their equipment and water trucks and do the best they can. The situation would actually improve by having a 30,000 - gallon tank of water at their disposal right in the center of the property. The fire department will be able to fill their water tenders right in the middle of this project, which will actually be a benefit to anybody living in the area. If there was a fire across the road, the firemen could take water from the subdivision to put the fire out. Dave stated that it would improve the fire protection in the area. Jerry Williams, 5285 River Road, stated that he felt compelled to address some of the questions and comments. He thinks that he and his family generally share the exact same concerns with the folks that spoke tonight. He is very concerned about wildlife. They bought a ranch from the Studer family twenty years ago that was nothing but a weed patch, and they have enhanced it. There is a shooting preserve for pheasants, and there were wild turkeys before the oil spill. They have managed the whole property with cows, some farming, and largely wildlife. As far as the conservation easement, he put a conservation easement on the 500 acres. Jerry thinks it is the only conservation easement between Billings and Laurel and a lot of people enjoy the wildlife on that property. Regarding the wildlife and the aesthetics, he stated that is specifically why he went with large lots instead of one and two -acre lots and he designed it around a rural type setting. It will not be a bunch of urban type houses on half acre lots. This would provide the opportunity for normal people to be able to live in a beautiful setting with 14 a horse for their child or a cow for a 4 -H project. He wanted to do it right, so that is why he hired Jim Foley as a planner. Jerry is very concerned about the water, the septic, and the roads, and that is why he hired a good engineer on the project. Jerry apologized to Ruth for the people that are driving down her road, as that is not acceptable. People in Montana typically think that if there is a road there, they can drive down it. Jerry stated that they will do their best to mitigate that problem. As far as the irrigation on Dave's place, they have it set up in the covenants to have a board and there will not be 22 people going to his house. A designated person will be in charge, and it will likely be Jerry as long as he can still do it. Jerry stated that the floodplain issue really cut out a lot of opportunity for development. When he bought the place, he told Dennis that he would not guarantee that it would not be developed at some point. From putting a conservation easement on his own home place, he knows it is forever. It is not for ten or twenty years; it is into perpetuity. If his children want to leave there at some point, they need options available. Jerry stated that this is a wonderful rural plan. As far as the wells, he knows there is a lot of concern. Below the ditch, there is sufficient water and good water. American Drilling has drilled all the wells out there. American Drilling is confident that, from all the well drilling he has done there, the water will not be a problem for the homeowners. The wells have to be 24 feet or 25 feet to be legal, and he feels that he will have sufficient water and good water at that depth. Heidi explained that the Planning Board needed to send a recommendation to the County Commission. The recommendation could be a recommendation of approval, a recommendation of approval with conditions, or a recommendation of denial. Chairman Siegrist stated that the board is not supposed to be the technical experts, but it feels like that is what they have to be. There was discussion regarding Little Dudes, adding more conditions to the development, and enforcement of covenants. Chairman Siegrist stated that the long list of proposed conditions of approval and proposed finding of fact done by staff that could be incorporated into the recommendation. Heidi stated that the Planning Board could add more conditions. She explained that the preliminary plat is only good for three years, if it is approved, and the applicant could file for an extension at that time. Jim stated that the development agreement proposed three phases of buildout, in accordance with the market and what folks will buy. Jerry hopes that will happen in a year or two. If it does not, as Heidi said, they would have to come back in three years and go through the renewal process again. It is the intent that it will get built as quickly as folks will buy the lots. Motion by Dick Fritzler to approve River Ranch Retreat Major Subdivision based on the conditions in the staff report and the findings of fact that the Board adopts as its own. Heidi asked if there were any additional conditions besides the eight conditions presented that the Board would like to recommend to the County Commissioners. Dick stated that the environmental conditions should be recommended. 15 Heidi stated that the Planning Board cannot do anything about those. The motion was seconded by Dan Koch. Chairman Siegrist asked if as far as the board could tell, the due diligence has been done to put this in a position where it should be moved forward and there should be no reason to deny moving it forward at this time. Dick asked if that should be an amendment to the motion. Chairman Siegrist stated that this was only discussion at this point because the conclusion of finding of facts for the preliminary plat of River Ranch Retreat Subdivision does not create any adverse impacts that warrant the denial of the subdivision. They have put forth the information required to meet the criteria for the proposal of the subdivision, so she cannot see any reason to deny it. The County Commissioners will make the final decision. Heidi stated that the County Commissioners will hold a public hearing in two or three weeks. The Planning Board cannot stop it from going to that public hearing, but it could send an unfavorable recommendation. Chairman Siegrist stated that any number of conditions could be included in the recommendation. John stated that the trouble is that the Planning Board cannot put a condition on it that somebody is going to be the judge and jury over it. Chairman Siegrist stated that the County Commissioners will see the Planning Board's minutes and will understand the concerns that have been brought forward. At that point, the decision will be made. Based on that, Chairman Siegrist stated the need to move it forward for a conclusion. The question was called to vote on the motion to move forward with all the proposed conditions of approval and proposed finding of fact adopted as stated. Motion carried, -1, with John Van Aken voting nay. Miscellaneous Tentative Meeting scheduled for November 3, 2011 Chairman Siegrist state that the next meeting is scheduled on November 3' at 6:00 p.m. Heidi stated that she currently has no items for the agenda. If an agenda item comes in or if she hears from Jerry Gerbanc, she will inform the Planning Board members. Jerry Gerbanc is willing to help rewrite the growth policy, which is in desperate need of attention. Chairman Siegrist asked Heidi if the board needed to address updating some of the zoning laws. Heidi agreed and stated that the 2011 legislature changed some zoning laws. She wants to put it all into the growth policy. If Jerry cannot assist the board, they will just have to adopt them. 16 There was discussion regarding the County Commissioner's decision on the River Ranch Retreat Major Subdivision. Heidi will inform the Planning Board about the decision. Adiournment There was a motion and second to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cindy Allen Council Secretary 17 4 Is \ f .rto. LAUREL CITY - COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Laurel City - County Planning Board FROM: Heidi Jensen, Laurel Planner RE: River Ranch Retreat Subdivision HEARING DATE: October 6, 2011 INTRODUCTION: In August 2011, owners River Ranch Retreat, LLC, applied for major preliminary plat approval for River Ranch Retreat Subdivision which contains 22 lots on approximately 160.94 acres of land for residential development. The subject property is located east of Laurel on River Road between Clark Fork Bridge and Duck Creek Road in Yellowstone County. The property is not within the City of Laurel but the Laurel Planning Jurisdiction. The Laurel City - County Planning Board needs to make a recommendation to the Yellowstone County Commission for approval, conditional approval or denial. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff recommends that the City- County Planning Board adopt the staff report and Findings of Fact as presented in this staff report. VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. PROPOSED ON ITtONS OF APPROVAL: : Pursuant to Section 76 -3- 608(4), MCA, the following conditions are recommended to reasonably minimize potential adverse impacts identified within the Findings of Fact: 1. To minimize effects on local services, approval for all water and wastewater facilities shall be obtained through the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) prior to final plat approval. Easements for any shared sanitary sewer systems shall be shown on the final plat, and recordable easement document(s), including a maintenance agreement plan shall be provided with the final documents. Page 1 of 6 2. To minimize effects on local services, utility easements shall be provided on the final plat as requested by NorthWestern Energy and Montana Dakota Utilities. 3. To minimize effects on local services, specifications and drawings for a 30,000 gallon dry hydrant system including access to the tank and pullout area shall be submitted to the Laurel Fire Department for review. The system shall also be approved. Installed, inspected, and tested prior to final plat approval. An easement for the dry hydrant system and pull out area shall be shown on the final plat, and a recordable easement document for the system shall be provided with the final documents. 4. To minimized the effects on local services, a centralized mailbox unit shall be provide as coordinated by the U.S. Postal Service. Written approval of the unit placement shall be provided prior to final plat approval. 5. To minimize the effects on local services, the Rural Special Improvements District (RSID) for maintenance of the dry hydrant system shall be created prior final plat approval. 6. To minimize the effects on the natural environment, a weed management plan and property inspection shall be approved by the County Weed Department, prior to final plat approval. 7. Minor changes may be made in the SIA and final documents, as requested by the Planning, Legal or Public Works Department to clarify the documents and bring them into the standard acceptable format. 8. The final plat shall comply with all requirements of the County Subdivision Regulations, rules, regulations, policies, and resolutions of Yellowstone County, and the law and Administrative Rules of the State of Montana. PROCEDURAL HISTORY: • A pre- application meeting was conducted with Planning Staff for the proposed subdivision • The preliminary plat pre- application sufficiency and completeness review was done and submitted to the owners agent • The preliminary plat application was submitted to the concerned/interested agencies and comments were received back. Page 2 of 6 PLAT INFORMATION: In August, owners River Ranch Retreat, LLC, applied for major subdivision preliminary plat approval for River Ranch Retreat Subdivision. The proposed subdivision contains 22 -lots on 160.4 acres of land for residential development. The subject property is located east of the City of Laurel in the Planning Jurisdiction on River Road. General location: East of Laurel on River Road Legal Description: A parcel of land being tract 2B of Certificate of Survey No. 1578 Amended Amending Tract B located in the West 1/2 of Section 7 & the West 1/2 of Section 18, Township 2 South, Range 25 East, P.M.M., Yellowstone County, Montana Subdivider and Owner: River Ranch Retreat LLC, Jerry Williams Engineering and Surveyor: Owner has dismissed and is using Jim Foley as a representative Existing Zoning: None Existing Land Use: Irrigated Agricultural Land Proposed Land Use: Residential Gross Area: 160 -acres Proposed # of Lots: 22 Lot Sizes: Approximately 7 -acres Parkland Requirements: Park land is dedicated on the plat next to the Yellowstone River PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACTS The Findings of Fact for the preliminary plat of River Ranch Retreat LLC have been prepared by the Laurel City- County Planning Department staff for review and recommendation by the Laurel City - County Planning Board to the Yellowstone County Commissioners. These findings are based on the preliminary plat application and address the review criteria required by the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act (76 -3 -608, MCA) and the Laurel - Yellowstone City - County Planning Area Subdivision Regulations. A. What are the effects on agriculture and agricultural water user facilities, local services, the natural environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat and public health and safety? (76- 3- 608(3)(a), MCA) (Section 3 (C)(3)(a), LYCCPASR) Page 3 of 6 1. Effect on agriculture and agricultural water user facilities. The Terry Ditch runs through the subject property and is owned by Jerry Williams the property owner of River Ranch Retreat Proposed Subdivision. The Ditch is shown on the plat and the water rights associated with it will be transferred to the Homeowners Association created with the subdivision. The property has historically been used for agricultural production that will be halted as a result of the proposed development, according to the application. 2. Effect on local services a. Utilities- The application states "...domestic and culinary will be provided by small flow groundwater supply wells, sited on each lot." "...conventional (pressure- dosed) or modified (elevated sand mounds or raised disposal beds) on -site septic tanks and drain fields will be utilized to treat and dispose of household wastewater." Condition #1 requires any proposed onsite water and septic systems to comply with the Ste of Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Preliminary water and sanitation information was submitted with the preliminary plat application and has been submitted for review by RiverStone Heath. MDU and North Western Energy will provide gas and electrical utilities as necessary. According to the application, "...the owner /applicant is in the process of investigating utility contracts for availability and costs associated with their perspective services. Their responses were not available for the plan submittal." It is recommended as a condition of approval that the easements be provided on the final plat as requested by the utility companies (Condition #2). b. Stormwater- Stormwater will be retained onsite and will be in compliance with the Laurel - Yellowstone City - County Planning Area Subdivision Regulations (LYCCPASR)Section 16.4.7. A stormwater management plan shall be submitted and approved by MDEQ prior to final plat approval. c. Solid Waste- Solid waste disposal will be provide through ha private hauler. d. Streets- According to the application, "...representatives are working with the Yellowstone County Road and Bridge and Public Works Department with regard to roadway design. The owner's request that any internal project roads will be built to a subdivision road standard, which includes a 24 -foot wide hot -mix asphalt paved roadway with 4:1 slopes." e. Emergency Services- The subject property is within the jurisdiction of the Laurel Rural Fire District and the Yellowstone County Sheriff's Department. In accordance with compliance with the Fire Department and the LYCCPASR, which describes requirements for fire suppression facilities, the subdivider has proposed to provide a 30,000 gallon underground storage tank and dry hydrant system. Enclosed in the application is a letter approving the proposed system from Gary Colley, Laurel Rural Page 4 of 6 Fire Department, Fire Marshall. Additional approval must be obtained prior to final plat approval (Condition #3). Also a recordable easement document for the fire suppression system shall be provided with the final documents and the necessary easement shall be shown on the final plat (Condition #3). A RSID will be established prior to final plat approval to maintain the dry hydrant system (Condition #5). The Sheriff's Department will provide law enforcement services for the subdivision and does not have any concerns. f. Mail Delivery- The United States Postal Service will service the new lots. A centralized mailbox units shall be installed, and will require approval prior to installation. It is recommended as a condition of approval that language to this effect be added to the final Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA) (Condition #4). 3. Effects on the natural environment No alteration of any stream, lake or reservoir will occur with this subdivision. The development will use noxious weed control measures to prevent the spread of noxious weeds to adjacent developed or agricultural land. In accordance with state law, the developer is required to submit a weed management plan and undergo a site inspection by the County Weed Department prior to final plat approval (Condition #6). The Yellowstone River borders the Northern section of the property and should be considered hazardous. 4. Effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat There are no known endangered or threatened species on the property. Montana Fish Wildlife and Park (FWP) was provided information about the proposed subdivision, however no comments were supplied in the application. 5. Effects on public health and safety There are several main made public safety hazards located on the property. There are overhead power lines, a high pressure gas main and an oil pipeline that run through the property. The easements for these utilities will be maintained and all regulatory setbacks will be strictly enforced. Plans and designs for wells and septic systems will be reviewed and approved by MDEQ prior to final plat approval (Condition #1). Fire and emergency services are provided for this proposed subdivision, including a water supply for firefighting purposes (Condition #3). B. Was an Environmental Assessment Required? (76- 3-603, MCA)(Section 16.9 LYCCPASR) Page 5 of 6 An environmental assessment was required and submitted with the application. C. Does the subdivision conform to the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and to local subdivision regulations? (76-3 -608 (3)(b), MCA) The subdivision, with proposed conditions, satisfies the requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and conforms to the design standards specified in the LYCCPASR. The subdivider and the local government have complied with the subdivision review and approval procedures set forth in the local and state subdivision regulations. D. Does the subdivision conform to sanitary requirements? (Section 3(C)(3)(e), LYCCPASR) As required by Condition #1, any proposed septic system and wells for the site shall be reviewed and approved by the MDEQ prior to final plat approval. E. Does the proposed plat provide easements for the location and installation of any utilities? (76- 3- 608(3)(C), MCA Utility easements shall be provide on the face of the final plat for both electric and natural gas, as requested by MDU and NEW (Condition #2) F. Does the proposed plat provide legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and notation of that access on the plat? (76-3 -608 (3)(d), MCA) Access to the subdivision lots will be from River Road a County Road. CONCULSIONS OF FINDINGS OF FACT • The preliminary plat of River Ranch Retreat Subdivision does not create any adverse impacts that warrant denial of the subdivision. • With the proposed conditions, River Ranch Retreat is in compliance with the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and the LYCCPASR. • New water and wastewater facilities will be approved through the MDEQ. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends that the Planning Board make findings and should they recommend approval include the staff report and adopt the Findings of Fact as presented. Page 6 of 6