HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 11.03.2020MINUTES
CITY OF LAUREL
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 03, 2020
A Council Workshop was held in Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Tom Nelson at
6:35 p.m. on November 3, 2020.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
—x Emelie Eaton —x— Heidi Sparks
x Bruce McGee x Richard Herr
Scot Stokes x Iry Wilke
x Richard Klose Don Nelson
OTHERS PRESENT:
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director
KC Williams, County DES Director
Public Input:
There was none.
General Items:
Executive Review:
Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Adopting The Updated 2020
Yellowstone County Hazard Materials Response Plan.
KC Williams, County DES Director, briefly reviewed the updated Yellowstone County Hazard
Materials Response Plan. This plan does not override local jurisdiction but is a Countywide plan.
The final approved version will be available on Yellowstone County's website.
2. Resolution — A Resolution To Approve The Conditional Use Of The Property Located
At 1009 East 6th Street In Laurel For The Construction And Operation Of A Union
Meeting Hall At Such Address Within The City Of Laurel. (Public Hearing
11.10.2020)
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, briefly reviewed the attached Staff report.
A Council Member noted that they live half a block from that property and have never heard any
loud noises coming from it. It was questioned if they will tear down the existing building before
building the new structure. Secondly, will the public hearing be held in person? It was clarified
that the building would be torn down before the new building is built. The public hearing will be
held via Zoom.
3. Resolution – Variance for Street Continuity for the Proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates
Subdivision (Public Hearing 11. 10.2020)
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, briefly reviewed the attached Staff report.
It was questioned if the Council agrees with the recommendation to deny this, what will happen.
It was clarified that if the Council votes to deny the request, then the developer will need to
redesign the plat. In this case, they would need to align the roadway. Once redesigned, they
would resubmit the plat to the Planning Department. After the variances are settled, then this will
move to preliminary plat stage.
Craig Dalton, Performance Engineering, stated they had considered the alignment with Mulberry
Avenue and the higher volume commercial property. They made a judgment call on safety and
traffic to align with the commercial property driveway. They are also doubling the required
offset for the road. They ask that Council consider this as they vote on this item next week.
4. Resolution – Variances for Roadway widths and Right -of -Way dedication for the
Proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision (Public Hearing 11. 10.2020)
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, briefly reviewed the attached Staff report. He stated that Staff
does feel this project is good for Laurel due to its scale and location. There are just some issues
with the designs of the subdivision.
Craig Dalton, Performance Engineering, stated that the only thing that consultants and
developers can work off of is published documents—sighting the Long -Range Transportation
Plan—looking at the right of way on a collector status road. The Planning Department is looking
at this being a major corridor in the future; however, the Long -Range Traffic Study is what we
have published and utilized right now. Proposed the 30 -foot dedication because it takes the Yard
Office right of way up to 110 feet. They feel this is sufficient space to build a collector road, as
indicated in the Long -Range Traffic Study.
Council thanked the Planning Director for thinking ahead while working off an outdated Growth
Management Plan.
Council Issues:
5. Growth Management Plan
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, briefly reviewed the proposed changes to the Growth
Management Plan. This item will come before Council at the end of the month. Please provide
any feedback to the Planning Director before the next Workshop.
Other Items:
Review of Draft Council Agendas:
6. Review Draft Council Agenda of November 3, 2020.
There were no changes.
Attendance at Upcoming Council Meeting
Council Member Wilke will not be at next week's Council meeting.
Announcements
Council thanked Planning Director Altonaga for this work on this week's agenda items.
The council workshop adjourned at 7:33 p.m.
Respectfully sub ' ed,
Brittney Moor
Administrative Assistant
NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for
the listed workshop agenda items.
LAUREL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT I
TO: Laurel City -County Planning Board / Zoning Commission
FROM: Nicholas Altonaga, Planning Director
RE: Conditional Use Permit — USW Local 11-443
DATE: October 28, 2020
A Conditional Land Use application was submitted by Steve lansma on behalf of the United
Steelworkers Local 11-443. USW Local 11-443 proposes to demolish the existing union meeting
hall and construct a newly designed and updated structure in its place. An approval of a
conditional land use is required to rebuild and continue the use of the site as a union meeting
hall because this use is not described or defined within the zoning district it resides in.
Owner: Pace Pioneer Local 8-443
Legal Description: NUTTING SUBD, S10, T02 S, R24 E, BLOCK 6, Lot 13 - 24
Address: 1009 East 6t" Street
Parcel Size: 42,000 sqft.
Existing Land Use: Union Meeting Hall
Proposed Land Use: Union Meeting Hall
Existing Zoning: Residential Limited Multi -Family
• Resolution 13-50 was approved on August 6, 2013 which granted a three-year window
for the Union to enlarge, update, and reconstruct the existing Union Hall which was
then classified as a nonconforming use within the RLMF zoning district.
• Planning Director met with the Applicant on September 9, 2020 to review the
application form and required documentation.
• Planning Director met with the Applicant on September 23, 2020 to receive the
Application Fee and conceptual design images of the proposed conditional use.
• A public hearing for the Conditional Land Use took place at the October 21, 2020
Planning Board meeting.
The Planning Board voted on October 21, 2020 to approve the Conditional Land Use
application with the suggested staff conditions.
A public hearing for the Conditional Land Use has been placed on the November 10,
2020 City Council meeting agenda.
The public hearing requirements of 1762.030 have been met.
The Applicant is requesting approval of a conditional land use to reconstruct and operate a
union meeting hall on the property of 1009 East 6th Street in Laurel. This use is not specifically
delineated or defined within Chapter 17 of the Laurel Municipal Code. As such, a Conditional
Land Use Application was required to conduct the proposed rebuild of the site and continue to
operate the property as its existing use as a union meeting hall. The following findings have
been noted by the Planning Department after reviewing the Conditional Land Use application
and supplementary documents.
® USW Local 11-443 has operated a union hall at 1009 E 6th Street for many years without
an interruption in its use.
® The long-term operation of the union meeting hall at 1009 East 6th Street has had little
to no known impact on the quality of life of surrounding residents.
e The reconstruction of the union meeting hall will include improved paved parking areas
and landscaping.
o The current meeting hall building dates back to the 1920s and is in dire need of repairs.
• The current Union Hall building would require significant repairs and revitalization to
continue functioning as it stands.
o The current Union Hall building and associated parking areas and landscaping are not
aesthetically pleasing.
® The current use of the building and its lack of definition under the LMC as a union hall
does not allow the Union to perform improvements or upgrades to the site.
® The Applicant has prepared conceptual plans to include adequate access and off-street
parking.
m The demolition of the current structure and proposed new union meeting hall will
include updated landscaping and parking on site.
"17.62.020 — Requirements" contains the review criteria for the Zoning Commission to discuss and
recommend actions on conditional land uses. Tile text of this subchapter is included below.
No structure or land use may be used for any purpose other than those allowed within a zoning district
as specified in the zoning ordinance unless either a variance has been granted (under Chapter 17.60 or
17.64 of this code) or a conditional land use permit therefor has been provided. The zoning commission
may recommend and the city can require any information that will allow the decision makers to
comprehensively evaluate and decide on applications for conditional uses brought before them. The
zoning commission may recommend and the city can require, after consideration of the application for
La
Co5lditiotial Use, h("Qe Conf':itlons and "-which lai -) land USe nnay bMotive' to ii'tciud _' but not-
nec essaMv limited to the following:
A. Adequate: int r� .- s and errE:55 with concern foi Vehicular and pedestrian .Saf '.C'S/ and convenience,
traffic flow a-'nd Cointrol, rin l arnergerscv tccesS aS evie-% e%! and Jp1'}roVeCi I)%i 'he City 'public
LVori;'i director;
B7 Adequate ;o i'-stree Parklino and lo=actin-! :jith attention to VehiCUlar and pedestrian s iety chit'
trafFic
. Conditions 'hat Control, Specif'-J;, or plain Ior Lhe gi)C'teratioi i or.?dors, noise, Il'JE`rs of Operation
$i-na-e. or !f1wp t on tiie 'nei-i'tiaor !loot; of, atural S-
D. Adequate la ndsc4t ping, screening' fi itig Cii`.on of is ipact- on Eldjl ]C -2n ;.'M.Derty An'd I)Ufle ing.: and
E. (om.patibility with ad acen" and n ig !?'or?'Sood 1Fnd uSFS and I_:?lff el? {:ri°ri z.
The Planning Director recommends the approval of the Conditional Land Use application to operate a
union meeting hall at 1009 East 6`h Street in Laurel. The Planning Director suggests the Planning
Board/Zoning Commission and City Council consider the following conditions of approval.
Condition seven (7) was added by request of Planning Board members and the applicant was notified of
this new condition.
1. No land uses shall be established on site that are not specifically included in this approval.
2. Any land use not specifically included in this approval shall be considered a violation of the City
of Laurel zoning ordinance.
3. New construction regarding the approved conditional use shall apply for building permits when
applicable.
4. The approved land use shall comply with the zoning requirements of the district the property
falls within.
5. The approved land use shall comply to the City of Laurel Sign Code
6. The approved land use shall comply with the City of Laurel off-street parking requirements
7. Landowner will work with the city if noise abatement becomes an issue for the surrounding
neighborhood
1. Conditional Land Use Application
2. Map of 1009 E 61' Street with 150ft buffer
3. List of property Owners within 150ft of 1009 East 61h Street
4. Public Hearing Notice
5. USW Union Hall Concept Plan
6. USW Union Hall Concept Image
7. LMC 17.16 — Residential Districts
8. LMC 17.62 — Conditional Land Uses
9. Resolution R13-50
LAUREL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTITTIERT
STAFF • f
TO: Laurel City -County Planning Board
FROM: Nicholas Altonaga, Planning Director
RE: Variance 1— Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision
DATE: October 27, 2020
Three variances to the Laurel Municipal Code are being requested supporting the proposed
Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision. Performance Engineering is acting as the representative
of Tony Golden and Goldberg Investments LLP. Justification letters for the variance requests
were submitted on July 31, 2020.
The Applicant has applied for a variance (Variance 1) to Laurel Municipal Code regarding
roadway alignment and continuity in order to keep the proposed roadway for Krieghoff Loop as
it is currently designed on the proposed subdivision plat. The current design does not conform
to Laurel Municipal Code due to a lack of connection and continuation of the existing adjacent
roadway. The Applicant would need to redesign the subdivision plat in order to conform to the
Laurel Municipal Code unless a variance is approved.
Owner: Goldberg Investments LLP
Legal Description: S10, T02 S, R24 E, Nutting Bros 2"d Filing Lot 18, Nutting Bros 3`d Filing
Lots 19-25
Address: Approximately 1850 East 8th Street
Parcel Size: 38.73 Acres
Existing Land Use: Agricultural, single dwelling unit.
Proposed Land Use: Residential and Commercial Subdivision
Existing Zoning: Residential Tracts
Subdivision Preapplication Meeting took place on February 2, 2019.
Pre -Application Meeting Summary letter provided to Performance Engineering on
February 7, 2019
13
• Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent tnPerformance Engineering on
February 15,2U19.
* Annexation nfLot 18,Nutting Bros Znu Filing
Filing
approved byResolution ofLaurel City Council onAugust 2[l2O19
= The Zoning requested during the annexation process will beupdated toResidential
Limited Multi -Family (RLMF) and Community Commercial (CC) upon filing of the final
annexation agreement.
w Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on
October 3CL2O19.
* Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.O8.19comments follow-up email provided to
Performance Engineering nnNovember 21,2O19.
m Preliminary Plat application document Packet submitted to the Planning Department on
December 17,2O19.
w Element Review Letter provided to Performance Engineering on December 24, 2019
• Sufficiency Review Letter provided tothe Applicant onJanuary I6'IU2O.
p The Applicant and City Staff and City Engineers met to discuss the details of the
sufficiency review letter onJanuary 31,2U2U.
• Submittal ofupdated documents byApplicant onJuly 3l,I82O.
• Planning Board received public comment, discussed the variances, and made
recommendations atthe Public Hearing onOctober 21,2OlO.
* Planning Board voted to recommend denial of the variances after the Public Hearings on
October 21,2O2U.
m A Public Hearing is scheduled at the City Council meeting on November 10, 2020 to
receive public comment and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the variance
requests.
Pre—Application Meeting Summary letter provided toPerformance Engineering on February 7,
2019. This letter included:
�
Project summary
�
Current and proposed zoning
~
Public review process overview
�
Discussion points including:
o Fire coverage
o Lot layout
o Water and sewer systems
o Right-of-way requirements
o Solid waste provision
o Parking
o Parkland dedication
o Off-site improvements
14]
Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent to Performance Engineering on
February 15, 2019. This email contained further information regarding:
• Roadway dedication requirements
• Engineering estimates for public infrastructure improvements
• Annexation and plat approval process
• Water rights
• Zoning changes
Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on October
30, 2019. Items identified in pre -submittal review included:
• Street connectivity within the Subdivision
• Street and intersection design
• Road continuity with the adjacent Laurel street system
• Parkland Dedication/Cash-in-Lieu
• Road Dedication
• Phased development
Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.08.19 comments follow-up email provided to Performance
Engineering on November 21, 2019. Items identified in this correspondence included:
• Utility and access easements
• Roadway connectivity
• Parkland dedication
• Review and submittal of previously discussed documents (Annexation and Waiver)
The Applicant is requesting a variance to LMC 16.04.060.6.8 which states: "Street Continuity.
Streets that are a continuation of streets in contiguous territory shall be so aligned as to assure
that their centerlines shall coincide and shall have matching names. In cases where straight
continuations are not physically possible, such centerline shall be continued by a centerline
offset of not less than one hundred twenty-five feet."
A denial of this variance request will require the applicant to redesign the subdivision plat to
meet the requirements of the Laurel Municipal Code.
The Applicant has provided a letter with details justifying the Variance request addressing the
five (5) findings noted in LMC 16.11.010. These responses, as well as planning department
findings are presented below:
1) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health safety, or
general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties
o Applicant Response: Granting of this requested variance will have no detrimental
effects to the public health, safety, or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining
properties. Granting this variance will benefit the public health, safety, and general
10
welfare of the surrounding area by aligning higher volume traffic entrances across
from each other. The proposed alignment will minimize traffic conflicts during
turning movements along East 8th at both the subdivision and the commercial
property located south of the proposed project.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department accepts the stated
reasoning that it will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general
welfare or injurious to adjoining property owners.
o Planning Department Finding: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.1 has been met.
2) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of
the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if the
strict letter of the regulations was enforced.
o Applicant Response: The proposed development is designed to keep the
entrance across from a higher traffic commercial entrance and preserve the
existing lot and infrastructure across from the dead-end Mulberry Avenue. This
design prevents the offset of the subdivision alignment from conflicting with the
higher volume of commercial traffic across the street. Should the road be aligned
with Mulberry Avenue it would require modification of the existing property,
access, and personal property intended to stay intact throughout the
development of the property. This does create an undue and unnecessary
hardship on the developer and the resident within the existing residence.
Additionally, Mulberry Avenue cannot be developed further to change its status
as a dead-end road due to location of commercial businesses along East Main
Street at the end of Mulberry Avenue.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept the
stated reasoning of the applicant's response to the second point.
o Planning Department Finding: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.2 have not been met. The following information supports this
claim.
• Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 4 of Goldberg Sporting Estates do not currently
exist.
The existing residential structure is located on the Western portion of the
currently platted Lot 18, Nutting Brothers Subdivision 2nd Filing.
The existing residential structure and its accessory buildings located on
the current Lot 18 Nutting Bros Subdivision 2nd Filing and would be
unaffected by the realignment of Mulberry and Krieghoff Loop.
4
n
• The existing residential structure on the current Lot 18 Nutting Bros 2nd
Filing has multiple points of access to the site which would be unaffected
by the roadway alignment.
• The existing access to this parcel that partially aligns with Mulberry
Avenue is used to access an undeveloped farm field which includes Lot 18
of Nutting Bros 2"d Filing and Lot 19 of Nutting Bros Subdivision 3rd Filing.
• There is no known access and/or encroachment permit for the lot access
located immediately across from Mulberry Avenue filed with Yellowstone
County Public Works Department.
• The proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision will be changing the
use of the current land from agricultural use to residential use.
® There are no permanent structures, infrastructure, or personal property
erected on the proposed Lot 2, Block 4 that could not be relocated in
case of roadway alignment.
a The alignment of Mulberry Ave and Krieghoff Loop would only require
the owner and/or resident of the residential structure on the current Lot
18, Nutting Bros Subdivision 2"d Filing to remove any fencing and stored
personal items from the proposed right-of-way.
• Mulberry Avenue is physically a dead-end roadway. Despite this current
condition, Mulberry Avenue connects to the currently undeveloped but
fully platted East 7th Street at its southern terminus.
The currently undeveloped but fully platted East 7th Street could be a
major east -west connector within the city limits which covers
approximately nine (9) blocks of residential -zoned property.
R Conversations have begun between the Planning Department and Public
Works Department about this undeveloped roadway and the possibility
of development in order to complete a major east -west travel corridor.
3) The variance will not result in an increase in taxpayer burden;
o Response: The result of granting the variance for alignment of the proposed
western entrance of the subdivision with Mulberry Avenue will have no effect on
the taxes of the proposed development, adjoining land or the taxpayers of the
town of Laurel and Yellowstone County.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department accepts the
reasoning that the granting of the variance would not increase the tax burden of
the adjoining taxpayers and landowners.
o Planning Department Finding: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.3 has been met.
4) The variance will not in any manner place the subdivision in nonconformance with any
adopted zoning regulations or growth policy; and
o Applicant Response: This requested variance will not in any manner place the
subdivision in nonconformance with the adopted zoning regulations.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department accepts the
reasoning that the granting of a variance would not place the rest of the
Subdivision in nonconformance with the adopted zoning regulations and growth
policies.
o Planning Department Finding: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.4 has been met.
5) The subdivider must prove that the alternative design is equally effective and the
objectives of the improvement are satisfied.
o Applicant Response: The proposed design still aligns with an ingress/egress
directly across the street that experiences higher traffic volumes than the dead-
end Mulberry Avenue which only provides access for four (4) residential lots. In
addition, the proposed entrance maintains street continuity with the commercial
access across the street, preserves the existing Lot 1, Block 4 of the subdivision,
and mitigates against potential traffic alignment issues between the subdivision
entrance and the commercial access across the street while maintaining more
than 125 -feet of centerline alignment separation from Mulberry Avenue as set
forth in Section 16.04.060.6.8 of the City of Laurel Subdivision Regulations.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept the
reasoning to the 5th point that the alternative design is equally effective.
o Planning Department Finding: The standards of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010 have not been met. The following information supports this
claim.
■ The proposed Lot 1, Block 4 is currently Lot 18, Nutting Bros 2"d Filing
would not be impacted by a roadway alignment of Mulberry Avenue and
Krieghoff Loop.
■ The Proposed Lot 2, Block 4 does not currently exist.
■ There are no permanent structures, infrastructure, or affixed personal
property present within the proposed aligned right-of-way besides
fencing.
■ The code states that "in cases where straight continuations are not
physically possible, such centerline shall be continued by a centerline
offset of not less than one hundred twenty-five feet."
■ The Planning Department does not find any physical obstruction
to connecting Krieghoff Loop to Mulberry Avenue.
11
m
The terrain and topography is flat and open creating no
impediments to the alignment of Krieghoff Loop and Mulberry
Avenue
• The existing access to Lot 18 Nutting Bros 2"d Filing and lot 19
Nutting Bros 31d Filing is to an undeveloped farm field.
• There is no known access and/or encroachment permit for the
existing field access immediately north of Mulberry Avenue.
Mulberry Avenue is connected to the currently undeveloped but fully
platted East 7th Street. This undeveloped route traverses up to nine (9)
blocks of Laurel.
East 7th Street would provide a major east -west travel corridor if
constructed.
The alignment of Krieghoff Loop and Mulberry Avenue would provide
additional road continuity to the wider road network once East 7th Street
is constructed.
The Applicant also provided four (4) reasonings for the Variance request in addition to the
specific justifications to the Laurel Municipal Code.
1. Mulberry Avenue is a dead-end road with access for only four (4) residential Lots
2. There is approximately 225 feet of separation between centerline alignments for
Mulberry Avenue and the proposed western entrance of Goldberg Sporting Estates
Subdivision (minimum required offset is 125 feet).
3. The Proposed subdivision entrance is aligned instead with a commercial lot entrance
having more traffic volume than the dead-end road along Mulberry Avenue.
4. In addition, Lot 1, Block 4 of Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision is an existing lot that
physically prevents the alignment of the western entrance (Krieghoff Loop) from
aligning across from Mulberry.
Planning Department Response to Point #1.
• Mulberry Avenue is currently a dead-end roadway but is connected to the currently
undeveloped but fully platted East 7th Street.
• East 7th Street is a fully platted right-of-way for nine (9) blocks.
• East 7th Street could provide a major improvement to East-West travel within Laurel as
well as development opportunities.
• The City is in the process of finalizing the Growth Management Policy which contains
goals regarding the installation and improvement of current roadways and important
possible roadways adjacent to the city.
• The Planning Department and Public Works Departments have held discussions about
how future build -out of East 7th Street could enhance and improve transportation on the
East side of Laurel.
u
Planning Department Response to Point #2.
® The requirements for non -alignment are partially met, but there is no physical,
topographic, or geographic reason for the lack of alignment with the existing road
network.
Planning Department Response to Point #3.
® The Planning Department agrees that the alignment of a public -right-of-way to a private
commercial entrance with higher traffic will reduce traffic conflicts.
• The Planning Department would also like to note that this ignores the need for public
right-of-way to connect to existing public right-of-way to ensure road continuation and
connectivity.
Planning Department Response to Point #4.
• The Planning Department does not agree that there is a physical obstruction to
connecting the proposed Krieghoff Loop to the existing Mulberry Avenue.
m The proposed Lot 2, Block 4 of the Goldberg Sporting Estates is the area in question.
e The proposed Lot 2, Block 4 is not an existing lot.
« The proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 4 is currently made up of a portion of Lot 18,
Nutting Bros 2"d Filing, and Lot 19, Nutting Bros 3`d Filing.
® The stated area is part of an undeveloped farm field.
d The existing residential structure on the current Lot 18, Nutting Bros Subdivision 2"d
Filing has an existing driveway access.
® The existing residential structure currently on Lot 18, Nutting Bros 2nd Filing is not
located within the area where any proposed right-of-way would be located.
® The existing access to the proposed Lot 2, Block 4 is for field access to the undeveloped
parcel.
o There are no physical structures or obstructions which would preclude alignment of the
proposed Krieghoff Loop to the existing Mulberry Avenue.
LMC 16.11.010 —Variances provides the review criteria for the Planning Board and Governing
Body to review, consider, and decide on variances. The text of this subchapter is provided
below:
The AGB may grant reasonable variances from only the design and improvement standards of
these regulations when strict compliance would result in undue hardship and the result would
not negatively affect public health and safety. The granting of a variance shall not have the
effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of these regulations. The AGB may not approve a
variance that would permit structures within the one hundred -year floodplain, as defined in
MCA § 76-5-101.
The planning board shall conduct a public hearing on any variance requested for all subdivisions
prior to taking action on the preliminary plat application.
A. Requesting a Variance. The subdivider shall include with the submission of the
preliminary plat a written statement describing the facts of hardship upon which the
request for the variance is based. Each requested variance shall be deemed a separate
application, for which a fee shall be required, to be processed concurrently with the
preliminary plat. Information addressing each of the following findings shall accompany
the application to be approved by the AGB. The latter shall not approve variances unless
the subdivider has demonstrated that the request satisfies the following findings:
1. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties;
2. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner
would result if the strict letter of the regulation was enforced;
3. The variance will not result in an increase in taxpayer burden;
4. The variance will not in any manner place the subdivision in nonconformance
with any adopted zoning regulations or growth policy; and
5. The subdivider must prove that the alternative design is equally effective and the
objectives of the improvements are satisfied.
B. In granting variances, the AGB may require conditions of approval that will, in their
judgment, secure the objectives of these regulations.
C. When any such variance is granted, the motion of approval of the proposed subdivision
shall contain a statement describing the variance and the facts and conditions upon
which the issuance of the variance is based.
D. An application for a variance is not necessary where planned neighborhood
developments are proposed, as modifications to the standards and requirements of
these Regulations may be approved by the AGB.
The Planning Director recommends that the Planning Board deny the variance request. The
Planning Director has prepared drafted conditions of denial which are presented below.
1. Waive Chapter 16 variance review fee.
2. Waive Chapter 16 requirement to rename any aligned/continued roadways through
subdivisions
3. Set the waiting period for Preliminary Plat resubmittal to three (3) months.
4. Applicant submittal of updated subdivision design to Planning Department prior to
official resubmittal
1. Variance Request Letter 1
2. List of Adjacent Property Owners from Parcels Requesting Variance
3. Preliminary Plat for Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision
4. Pre -application meeting summary letter dated February 7, 2019
5. Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent to Performance Engineering on
February 15, 2019.
6. Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on
October 30, 2019.
7. Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.08.19 comments follow-up email provided to
Performance Engineering on November 21, 2019.
10
F22]
LAURELCITY-COUNTY DEPARTMENT
STAFF > * >
TO: Laurel City -County Planning Board
FROM: Nicholas Altonaga, Planning Director
RE: Variance 2 & 3 —Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision
DATE: October 27, 2020
Three variances to the Laurel Municipal Code are being requested supporting the proposed
Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision. Performance Engineering is acting as the representative
of Tony Golden and Goldberg Investments LLP. Justification letters for the variance requests
were submitted on July 31, 2020,
The Applicant has applied for a variance (Variance 2) to the Laurel Municipal Code regarding the
dedication of right-of-way. The Applicant is applying for this variance in order to retain an
additional ten (10) foot portion of property along Yard Office Road within the proposed lots and
not dedicated to the public as right-of-way as city staff had previously discussed with the
Applicant. The Applicant would need to update the subdivision plat in order to conform with
the requirements of Laurel Municipal Code and the many requirements discussed by Laurel
staff through meetings and correspondence.
The Applicant is requesting a variance (Variance 3) to the Laurel Municipal Code regarding
roadway and right-of-way widths. The design of the proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates
subdivision contains a fifty-six (56) foot wide private road which does not meet the right-of-way
requirements of the Laurel Subdivision Code. The Applicant would need to redesign the
subdivision plat in order to conform to the Laurel Municipal Code
Owner: Goldberg Investments LLP
Legal Description: 510, T02 S, R24 E, Nutting Bros 2nd Filing Lot 18, Nutting Bros 3rd Filing
Lots 19-25
Address: Approximately 1850 East 8th Street
Parcel Size: 38.73 Acres
Existing Land Use: Agricultural, single dwelling unit.
Proposed Land Use: Residential and Commercial Subdivision
23
Existing Zoning: Residential Tracts
NEW
• Subdivision Preapplication Meeting took place on February 2, 2019.
• Pre -Application Meeting Summary letter provided to Performance Engineering on
February 7, 2019
• Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent to Performance Engineering on
February 15, 2019.
• Annexation of Lot 18, Nutting Bros 2nd Filing and Lot 19-25 Nutting Bros 3rd Filing
approved by Laurel City Council on August 20, 2019
• The Zoning requested during the annexation process will be updated to Residential
Limited Multi -Family (RLMF) and Community Commercial (CC) upon filing of the final
annexation agreement.
• Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on
October 30, 2019.
• Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.08.19 comments follow-up email provided to
Performance Engineering on November 21, 2019.
• Preliminary Plat application document Packet submitted to the Planning Department on
December 17, 2019.
• Element Review Letter provided to Performance Engineering on December 24, 2019
• Sufficiency Review Letter provided to the Applicant on January 16, 2020
• The Applicant and City Staff and City Engineers met to discuss the details of the
sufficiency review letter on January 31, 2020
• Submittal of updated documents by Applicant on July 31, 2020
• Planning Board received public comment, discussed the variances, and made
recommendations at the Public Hearing on October 21, 2020.
• Planning Board voted to recommend denial of the variances after the Public Hearings on
October 21, 2020.
• A Public Hearing is scheduled at the City Council meeting on November 10, 2020 to
receive public comment and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the variance
requests.
Pre -Application Meeting Summary letter provided to Performance Engineering on February 7,
2019. This letter included:
• Project summary
• Current and proposed zoning
• Public review process overview
• Discussion points including:
o Fire coverage
o Lot layout
24
o Water and sewer systems
o Right-of-way requirements
o Solid waste provision
o Parking
o Parkland dedication
o Off-site improvements
Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent to Performance Engineering on
February 15, 2019. This email contained further information regarding:
• Roadway dedication requirements
• Engineering estimates for public infrastructure improvements
• Annexation and plat approval process
• Water rights
• Zoning changes
Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on October
30, 2019. Items identified in pre -submittal review included:
• Street connectivity within the Subdivision
• Street and intersection design
• Road continuity with the adjacent Laurel street system
• Parkland Dedication/Cash-in-Lieu
• Road Dedication
• Phased development
Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.08.19 comments follow-up email provided to Performance
Engineering on November 21, 2019. Items identified in this correspondence included:
• Utility and access easements
• Roadway connectivity
• Parkland dedication
• Review and submittal of previously discussed documents (Annexation and Waiver)
The Applicant is requesting a variance to LMC 16.04.060.B.7 which states: "Right -of -Way and
Street and Road Developments. In all cases, the right-of-way must be provided when
developing the property. If the property is being developed on only one side of an existing or
proposed road or street and dedicated right-of-way or a road easement is required, the
property owner developing must secure the additional right-of-way or easement from the
adjacent property owner. If the additional required right-of-way or easements cannot be
secured, the developer must provide the full width of right-of-way on the subject property."
The Applicant is also requesting a variance to LMC 16.04.060.C.8 which states: "Right -of -Way
and Street Widths. Street right-of-way and surface widths for all roads, public or private,
including those located in the Laurel zoning jurisdiction with the exception of those zoned
Agricultural Open and Residential Suburban shall be provided as shown in Table 16.4.C.1
below."
F25]
The Applicant has provided a letter with details justifying the Variance requests addressing the
five (5) findings noted in LMC 16.11.010. These responses, as well as planning department
findings are presented below:
1) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health safety, or
general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties
o Applicant Response: Granting of the variance will have no detrimental effects to
the public health, safety, or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining
properties. Granting this variance will still provide more than the minimum
required ROW width for the projected road use along yard Office Road as
classified by the City of Laurel Long Range Transportation Plan.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept that
the roadway widths will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the City of
Laurel.
o Planning Department Findings: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.1 has not been met. The proposed width of Yard Office Road
and Perazzi Way will not provide adequate services or provide for the general
welfare of the city.
® The current Yard Office Road right-of-way is made up of approximately
fifty (50) feet of area dedicated to a drainage ditch. This area should not
be considered as viable for vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
® The eighty (80) feet of the Yard Office Road west of the Section line was
dedicated on Village Subdivision 15t Filing.
® Village Subdivision First Filing identifies these eighty (80) feet of right-of-
way as containing a drain ditch.
• if the area currently containing a drainage ditch is planned as part of a
roadway, the applicant must prepare engineering and construction costs
as well as funding to cover the build out of this portion of right-of-way.
■ City staff specified during the Pre -application period that a connection
between East 8th Street and Yard Office Road was necessary for the
cohesive growth of Laurel.
• The proposed subdivision contains 88 buildable lots. It is important to
ensure traffic coverage with an adequate ingress and egress point to Yard
Office Road.
■ The proposed fifty-six (56) foot private road Perazzi Way is not sufficient
at meeting the needs of Laurel residents.
■ Adequate traffic connection between East 8th Street and Yard Office Road
was specifically mentioned in the Subdivision pre -application meeting on
February 2, 2019 and the following email correspondence.
4
07
2) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of
the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if the
strict letter of the regulations was enforced.
o Applicant Response: The 30 Feet of proposed ROW aligns with surrounding
property and satisfies the required ROW width outlined by City of Laurel
Subdivision Regulations while allowing for future development of Yard Office
Road that is consistent with long-range planning.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept this
reasoning for hardship due to topographic conditions.
o Planning Department Findings: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.2 has not been met. There are no topographic or physical
conditions present that create an undue hardship to meet roadway standards.
The following information supports this claim.
• There are no physical or topographic conditions which create an undue
burden on the applicant to dedicate the additional ten (10) feet of right-
of-way to meet the requirements stated by the city.
• The right of way directly north of the area designated as Yellowstone
County parkland makes up approximately 123 feet of right-of-way.
® This one -hundred -twenty-three (123) foot width was established when
High Point Subdivision provided forty (40) feet of dedicated right-of-way
west of the section line on its subdivision plat in 1970.
• The Planning Department and Public Works Department anticipate Yard
Office Road to act as a major transportation route for future
development on the East side of Laurel as the immediate area develops.
• It is important that the city obtain a consistent right-of-way width to
ensure that future roadway development and improvements have
uniform dimensions.
• The proposed thirty (30) feet of right-of-way is insufficient to align the
area of Yard Office Road along the proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates
with the right-of-way along High Point Subdivision to the north.
3) The variance will not result in an increase in taxpayer burden;
o Response: The result of granting the variance for providing 30 feet of ROW to
the west of the section line along Yard Office Road will have no effect on the
taxes of the proposed development or adjoining undeveloped land. Keeping the
30 -feet under private ownership will increase the tax base for the City and the
County providing benefit the taxpayer base.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept that
the variance would not result in an increase in taxpayer burden.
LN
o Planning Department Findings: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.3 has not been met. The following information supports this
claim.
• Yard Office Road is expected to become a major transportation corridor
as properties on the East side of Laurel develop and annex into the city.
• The dedication of the additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way at the time
of subdivision is advantageous for the city of Laurel and its citizens.
® The purchase of this right-of-way at a later date would represent an
astronomically high price for the city and its residents if additional right
of way were needed to accommodate an increase in traffic in the future.
• It was stated in correspondence between the contract planner and
engineer that this dedication of right-of-way would be taken care of at
the time of SIA and Subdivision. This correspondence is attached.
4) The variance will not in any manner place the subdivision in nonconformance with any
adopted zoning regulations or growth policy; and
o Response: The requested variance will not in any manner place the subdivision
in nonconformance with the adopted zoning regulations.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept the
stated reasoning that this variance will not place the subdivision in
nonconformance with the adopted zoning regulations or growth policy.
o Planning Department Findings: The standard of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.4 has not been met. The following information supports this
claim.
The updated 2020 Laurel Growth Management Policy which will be
officially approved in November 2020 highlights the need for consistent
roadway widths as a transportation system goal.
The current proposed thirty (30) feet of right-of-way dedication does not
align with the right-of-way directly north of the Yellowstone County Park.
Inclusion of the additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way will align with the
roadway adjacent to High Points Subdivision which was established in
1970.
5) The subdivider must prove that the alternative design is equally effective and the
objectives of the improvement are satisfied.
o Response: The proposed ROW dedication width not only aligns with the
surrounding ROW widths, but also provides more total width along Yard Office
Road than is necessary for the projected road classification of a collector road as
outlined in the City of Laurel Long Range Transportation Plan — 2014 and the
28
Required ROW as outlined in Table 16.4.C1 within section 16.04.060.C.8 of the
City of Laurel municipal code.
o Planning Department Response: The Planning Department does not accept that
the proposed design is equally effective as the requirements of the Laurel
Municipal Code.
o Planning Department Findings: The standards of the Laurel Municipal Code for
Chapter 16.11.010.5 have not been met. The following information supports this
claim.
® The email dated February 15, 2019 from Interim Planner Forrest
Sanderson to Scott Aspenlieder outlined requirements for platting and
design that followed from the Pre -Application meeting.
This includes "Dedicate additional ROW for Yard Office (Where you can)
to the City of Laurel as Commercial Collector (80') ROW."
• The existing right-of-way East of the Section Line is made up of at least
forty (40) feet of area dedicated to a drainage ditch identified on the plat
for the Village Subdivision First Filing.
® This portion of right-of-way should only be considered as useable if the
developer is willing to prepare and execute the engineering and
construction of this portion of right of way.
The Applicant also provided Two (2) reasonings for the Variance request in addition to the
specific justifications to the Laurel Municipal Code.
The Developer is requesting to dedicate 30 feet of ROW from the section line along Yard Office
Road west toward the proposed subdivision in -lieu of a 40 -foot -wide ROW width. The variance
is requested for the following reasons:
1. A 30 -foot ROW dedication on the west side of the section line along Yard Office Road
aligns and is consistent with the existing ROW directly to the north of the proposed
subdivision.
2. The City of Laurel Long Range Transportation Plan — 2014 classifies Yard Office Road as a
collector, which by section 16.04.060.C.8. Table 16.4.C.1 "required Dedications and
Street Improvements for Subdivision" only requires an 80 -foot ROW. There is already 80
feet of ROW dedicated on the east side of the section line along Yard Office Road and
the additional 30 feet of ROW dedicated on the west side would give a total of 110 feet
of ROW which is more than required ROW for a collector road, it would even provide
more than Is necessary for a minor arterial road (100 ft) per Table 16.4.C.1 within
section 16.04.060.C.8
Planning Department Response to Point #1:
29
High Point Subdivision, which is directly north of the Yellowstone County Park, provided a total
of forty (40) feet of right-of-way west of the section line to Yard Office Road on its subdivision
plat which was created in March 1970. Consistent right-of-way widths are key to ensuring
traffic management. Providing this additional road dedication at this time is proper and
financially responsible for the City of Laurel. The cost to acquire these ten (10) feet of right-of-
way due to increased traffic flow at a later date would be a major financial burden for the city
and its taxpayers.
Planning Department Response to Point #2:
It is anticipated that Yard Office Road will be a major transportation route for future
development on the east side of Laurel. Approximately fifty (50) feet of the existing right-of-
way for Yard Office Road east of the section line is made up of a drainage ditch. This ditch and
right-of-way was identified on the plat of Village Subdivision First Filing. This portion of right-of-
way should not be considered viable for roadway development unless the developer is
prepared to finance and construct adequate infrastructure above the Ditch along its length of
the subdivision.
The property directly to the south of the proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates subdivision is
unplatted and outside of Laurel city limits. If this situation were to change, either through
subdivision or annexation, the City of Laurel would require the dedication of forty (40) feet of
right-of-way west of the Section line to provide consistent road widths from East Main Street to
the culvert of the Nutting Drain Ditch north of East Maryland Lane.
LMC 16.11.010 — Variances provides the review criteria for the Planning Board and Governing
Body to review, consider, and decide on variances. The text of this subchapter is provided
below:
The AGB may grant reasonable variances from only the design and improvement standards of
these regulations when strict compliance would result in undue hardship and the result would
not negatively affect public health and safety. The granting of a variance shall not have the
effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of these regulations. The AGB may not approve a
variance that would permit structures within the one hundred -year floodplain, as defined in
MCA § 76-5-101.
The planning board shall conduct a public hearing on any variance requested for all subdivisions
prior to taking action on the preliminary plat application.
A. Requesting a Variance. The subdivider shall include with the submission of the
preliminary plat a written statement describing the facts of hardship upon which the
request for the variance is based. Each requested variance shall be deemed a separate
application, for which a fee shall be required, to be processed concurrently with the
al
preliminary plat. Information addressing each of the following findings shall accompany
the application to be approved by the AGB. The latter shall not approve variances unless
the subdivider has demonstrated that the request satisfies the following findings:
1. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties;
2. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner
would result if the strict letter of the regulation was enforced;
3. The variance will not result in an increase in taxpayer burden;
4. The variance will not in any manner place the subdivision in nonconformance
with any adopted zoning regulations or growth policy; and
5. The subdivider must prove that the alternative design is equally effective and the
objectives of the improvements are satisfied.
B. In granting variances, the AGB may require conditions of approval that will, in their
judgment, secure the objectives of these regulations.
C. When any such variance is granted, the motion of approval of the proposed subdivision
shall contain a statement describing the variance and the facts and conditions upon
which the issuance of the variance is based.
D. An application for a variance is not necessary where planned neighborhood
developments are proposed, as modifications to the standards and requirements of
these Regulations may be approved by the AGB.
The Planning Director recommends the Planning Board deny variance request 2 and 3 with the
following conditions.
1. Set the waiting period for Preliminary Plat resubmittal to 3 months
2. The applicant provide an updated redesign of the subdivision to the City prior to
resubmittal
3. Provide for curb, gutter, sidewalk, and stormwater drainage on designs
1. Variance Request Letter 2 and 3
2. List of Adjacent Property Owners from Parcels Requesting Variance
3. Preliminary Plat for Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision
4. Pre -application meeting summary letter dated February 7, 2019
5. Annexation Agreement — Major Components email sent to Performance Engineering on
February 15, 2019.
6. Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal comments email sent to Performance Engineering on
October 30, 2019.
7. Preliminary Plat Meeting Notes 11.08.19 comments follow-up email provided to
Performance Engineering on November 21, 2019.
39
PERFORMANCF�.,
1 j i I ,--.
608 North 29°1 Street ^ BiIlin,s. MT 69101 ^ 406-384-0080
July 21, 2020
City of Laurel Planning Department
P.O. Box 10
Laurel, MT 59044
To Whom it May Concern:
The Developer of Goldberg Sporting Estates, First Filing, a 73 -lot proposed residential
development and 15 lot proposed commercial development, is submitting this written
petition respectfully requesting a variance from Sections 16.04.060.B.7 and 16.04.060.C.8
and Table 16.4.C.1 in the City of Laurel Subdivision Regulations which states:
"Right -of -Way and Street and Road Developments: In all cases, the right-of-way must be
provided when developing the property. If the property is being developed on only one side
of an existing or proposed road or street and dedicated right-of-way or a road easement is
required, the property owner developing must secure the additional right-of-way or
easement from the adjacent property owner. If the additional required right-of-way or
easements cannot be secured, the developer must provide the full width of right-of-way on
the subject property."
"Right -of -Way and Street Widths: Street right-of-way and surface widths for all roads,
public or private, including those located in the Laurel zoning jurisdiction with the exception
of those zoned Agricultural Open and Residential Suburban shall be provided as shown in
Table 76.4. C.7 below."
The Developer is requesting to dedicate 30 feet of ROW from the section line along Yard
Office Road west toward the proposed subdivision in -lieu of a 40 -foot -wide ROW width.
The variance is requested for the following reasons:
A 30 -foot ROW dedication on the west side of the section line along Yard Office
Road aligns and is consistent with the existing ROW directly to the north of the
proposed subdivision.
may'
�lilr 1
The City of Laurel Long Range Transportation Plan - 2014 classifies Yard Office Rd
as a collector, which by section 16.04.060.C.8, Table 16.4.C.1 "Required Dedications
and Street Improvements for Subdivision" only requires an 80 -foot ROW. There is
already 80 feet of ROW dedicated on the east side of the section line along Yard
Office Road and the additional 30 feet of ROW dedicated on the west side would
give a total of 110 feet of ROW which is more than the required ROW for a collector
road, it would even provide more than is necessary for a minor arterial road (100
ft) per Table 16.4.C.1 within section 16.04.060.C.8.
City of Laurel Subdivision Regulations Section 16.11.1.A the following are addressed:
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties;
Response: Granting of this requested variance will have no detrimental
effects to the public health, safety, or general welfare or injurious to other
adjoining properties. Granting this variance will still provide more than the
minimum required ROW width for the projected road use along Yard Office
Road as classified by the City of Laurel Long Range Transportation Elan.
2. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions
of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if the
strict letter of the regulation was enforced;
Response: The 30 feet of proposed ROW aligns with surrounding property
and satisfies the required ROW width outlined by City of Laurel Subdivision
Regulations while allowing for future development of Yard Office Road that
is consistent with long-range planning.
3. The variance will not result in an increase in taxpayer burden;
Response: The result of granting the variance for providing 30 feet of ROW
to the west of the section line along Yard Office Road will have no effect on
the taxes of the proposed development or adjoining undeveloped land.
Keeping the 30 -feet under private ownership will increase the tax base for
the City and County providing benefit to the taxpayer base.
4. The variance will not in any manner place the subdivision in nonconformance with
any adopted zoning regulations; and
Response: This requested variance will not in any manner place the
subdivision in nonconformance with the adopted zoning regulations.
_� 1
50
5. The subdivider must prove that the alternative design is equafiy effective and the
objectives of the improvements are satisfied.
Response: The proposed ROW dedication width not only aligns with
surrounding ROW widths, but also provides more total width along Yard
Office Road than is necessary for the projected road classification of a
collector road as outlined in the City of Laurel Long Range Transportation
Plan — 2014 and the required ROW as outlined in Table 16.4.C.1 within section
16.04.060.C.8 of the City of Laurel municipal code.
Feel free to contact PE Project Manager Scott Aspenlieder with any questions or
concerns at (406) 384-0080 or scott@performance-ec.com.
Sincerely,
Scott Aspenlieder, PE
Project Manager
\� r
�I I F151]
Z
m
r
G)
C
Z
m
p
-I D r m O
a m � >
_ M
S90
. C -moi �a ZO m J> 2> C i A
i �' Z p vs 0 r- W m Z z p n v
� n� z r= -0 M ]> p O C g p
() Z< n p D ;:o m m W m m 5' rn QJ
A p A n= p m m Z N R° � y n p �_ Lj Z �u
= in r n m Z -n -r > Cy �. O -i n m r tv
3> rn m r G) _i r O y D -j C m fie^ )> y m> v
-{ Oz Z O r r tmr n X m-< O to D O D M�
O C fi n r �" m m r m Z
N G) p m Ln p
� = n rn
O to Z
r-
0
O Q�m- g O O ci m m ter, 0u, wi o p o n�.r o a 0
N N N' O Qt A co 0) O 61 N N W
rn m 0 0 -i m n N m � m m m rn m m d
X m X X Z D `� 'S p �' S' X
A = _ > tD to D M > 3> D D > T> J> N
to z m U C O= S m m;o m:�o m m N
Ln Lr) -Vi O .1 a! m
D D D D D D m
Op p m C7 p 0 0 0 0
O � r r r r- r- r- r-
"' z z z z z z z
m 0
C
rn
C7
7> 3> 3> 3> > > 1> r
— D — 2> — > 1> D D 1> D 3> —
C C C C C C C � C rrrr-
m m m m m m m z m z m z m m m m m m m z
G1 r G) r G) r r r- r r r G1
to to to to to to to Ln to to to to to to to to
� to tD t.0 t0 to tD In tD to c0 Ln CD 1,0 LD c.0 t0 tO tD In
O O O O 0 0 0 t0 O tD O tD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LD
A A A A A A A t- A A t-+ A A A A A A A N
A A A A A A A O A0 A 00 -P A A A A A A0
A
0
r
r
M
152
w COJ
LL
N
Z ix
m
5 w
_t Z a
o
LL F w
i
1L�
Zzo N � Z
VJ O�Z
ro
o o
+F TF- Td
O
z z
U N K C
4
-
�ZZ
C 10Oo
"+ � rj
o W �'' U
U
o Z
z z J o
'^
g Z co z
< J LL O
5 ° ° o
0 T
a
tLLOg.O
�
W
O
.
U)O
U,)N W-
QW zW
stn O=>
QZ >Zw
D — cr
�ti
NQLL
s
ss
a o
wF>
O Z U
C//()� Z
�/J
1
az z
y W
0 o U' W,
2 w o h
E ZEE-
U
:E ?
W �Zo
m ZO
v a
2
-0to
O—
w O
J mo
m
g o Q
O
i o�
O
a g w
0
o
oZ
Ww
m
i
w z
a Z
w w w O
¢ C ¢ K
a a n n
T
lit
u
/W
�ti
s
ss
s Y
.
k�
f1�
i
�p
c
j �I-
"�,
777 _F
r
t
v
n
1Ir
k r-
_
t
x
't� h
`Zz
3
%1
I
�•
kms'
)l
.�'
}
�$
i
F
li
lit
u
�ti
s
ss
s Y
.
k�
�p
c
j �I-
"�,
v
n
CITY HALL
115 W. 1ST ST.
PUB. WORKS: 628-4796
WATER OFC.: 628-7431
COURT: 628-1964
FAX 628-2241
Department of Phoning
February 7, 2019
Performance Engineering
Craig Dalton
7100 Commercial Ave 44
Billings MT 59101
P.O. Box 10
I.atirei, Montana 59044
Office of the Director of Public
Works
Re: Yard Office Major Subdivision Pre -Application -Meeting Summary/Required Information
Dear Mr. Dalton:
The following is a Summary of the Pre -Application meeting conducted with City Staff on the above
described Subdivision within the City of Laurel Subdivision Jurisdiction conducted on Monday, February
4, 2019.
Meeting; Attendees:
City of Laurel
Kurt Markegard, Jamie Sweeker, Tim Reiter, Matt Wheeler, Stan Langve, Forrest Sanderson
Developer
Craig Dalton, Katrina Svingen, Tony Golden
General Information:
Le I:
Lot 18 Nutting Brothers 2nd Filing and Lots 19 — 25 Nutting Brothers 3rd Filing in Section 10, Township 2
South, Range 24 East
Summary:
The project submitted for consideration includes 77 Residential Lots ranging in size from approximately
8,000 square feet to 22,500 square feet in size and 5 Commercial Lots approximately 1.3 to 2.9 acres in
size.
Zoning:
The property is currently under consideration for Annexation and Initial Zoning by the City of Laurel. The
requested zoning is Residential Light Multi -Family (RLMF) and Community Commercial (CC). It is
important to note that should the annexation or requested zoning be denied or modified by the City
Council you may be required to reconsider or abandon this subdivision proposal.
Public Review Process:
The proposal is a Major Subdivision as defined in the Laurel Subdivision Regulations. As such, the following
steps and timelines are applicable:
1. Complete Application submitted to City; §16.12.030 B, LMC
2. The Planner shall complete an Element Review within five (5) working days after submittal notice
of findings shall be sent to the Developer and/or the Agent§16.16.030 C 1, LMC
3. If all Elements are included, the Planner shall complete a Sufficiency Review of the application
within fifteen (15) working days after completion of the Element Review. Notice of findings shall
be sent to the Developer and/or Agent. §16.16 C 2 and 3 LMC
4. Once the Application contains all the Elements and is deemed Sufficient a 60 -working day public
review timeline shall commence. During this timeline, a public hearing will be noticed and
scheduled before the Laurel — Yellowstone Planning Board. Prior to a decision being rendered by
the Laurel City Council. §16.16 C 3 LMC
Discussion Points:
Fire has concerns that there will be sufficient water within the development for fire protection.
% Lot layout (Planning, Required Setbacks Water, Sewer, Streets, Parking, and Traffic).
Follow the Design Standards in the Regulations §16.16 LMC
Y The water system must be looped with isolation valves both internal and external.
�- Traffic. A TIS will be required that looks at intersections with Highway 10, East 8th, Yard Office as
well as the intersection of Alder near the school.
Connectivity of this subdivision to surrounding properties is important to future development in
the neighborhood. East 81h should be extended to Yard Office Road.
i� Rights-of-way need to meet minimum standards. The ROW for Yard Office may need to meet
Arterial Road standards.
Sanitary Sewer. Sewer in the area is shallow and a lift station may be necessary. Concerns were
expressed about surcharging the system as well as timing of lift station operation with the existing
lift station.
`r Solid Waste. The Developer may use the Laurel service with roll outs. The choice of service
provider is governed by Montana Law and decision is up to the developer.
Storm Water. Follow the rules and regulations for Utilities.
Parkland. 11% of net area in residential lots. Parkland does not include areas for storm water
detention/retention or for other facilities such as the lift station.
F Parking. Design must reflect if on -street parking will be allowed. Concern with multi -family and
provision of adequate area for parking. Inadequate parking reservation is a major problem for
Law Enforcement.
➢ Street Lighting. Strongly recommend that the lighting be incorporated into design rather than
after the fact.
A Off site improvements to existing public improvements will be required with the First Filing in
anticipation of total build out.
)� Stainless steel bolts and shafts will be required for all fixtures because of corrosive nature of soils
and groundwater inthe area.
)> Be sure to address items identified in either the Environmental Assessment orSummary of
Probable Impacts and propose mitigations.
Provide a comprehensive Subdivision Improvements Agreement. (Appendix K)
You may want toprovide the Montana Department ofTransportation acopyofyoup|anaathe
project is anticipated to have measurable impacts on the intersections of Highway 10 with Yard
Office Road and Eleanor Roosevelt Drive.
/n addition to addressing the Discussion Points listed above you will need to submit the information
identified Appendix D of the Laurel Subdivision Regulations along with the required review fees.
1. Submit four (4)24"x36"plat and supplements;
2. Submit nine (9) 11"x17" plats and supplements.
My hand-written notes and the Pre -Application Meeting Checklist are attached and are hereby
incorporated into this summary by reference and are made a portion of this summary.
Should you have any questions concerning the Laurel Subdivision Regulations, the Review Process orthe
information required for Public Review, please contact me.
Forrest Sanderson, AICPCFM
Contracted City Planner
Enclosures: Fee Schedule, Preliminary Plat Application, Meeting Checklist (dated 3/28/18), Meeting Notes
(dated 3/28/18)
Imi
Forrest Sanderson
From: Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 1:08 PM
To: Forrest Sanderson
Cc: Kurt Markegard; Sam Painter - Thompson Painter Law; Craig Dalton
Subject: RE: Annexation Agreement - Major Components
Forrest
Thanks for your clarification. We'll wait to hear from Sam and Kurt for further clarification on Questions 2 and 4 as
they're important to have clear expectations set going in. Thanks for your help.
Thanks,
Scott Aspenlieder, P.E.
scott@Performance-ec.com
Office: (406) 384-0080
Mobile: (406) 461-8392
PERFORMANCE
608 North 29"' Street • Billings. NIT 59101
w ✓ww. oerforma nce-ec.com
From: Forrest Sanderson[mailto:Forrest.Sanderson@kljeng.com]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 12:01 PM
To: Scott Aspenlieder <scott@ perform ance-ec.co m >
Cc: Kurt Markegard <kmarkegard@laurel.mt.gov>; Sam Painter -Thompson Painter Law
<sam@thompsonpainterlaw.com>
Subject: RE: Annexation Agreement - Major Components
Scott:
1. 1 don't really have an issue with the future dedication of the extension of Eleanor Roosevelt/East 8" to Yard
Office as the development plan progresses but the connectivity issue was discussed as part of the pre -
application both to Yard Office and from this development to the lands adjacent to. By taking this approach it
will give you and the design team a chance to work the extension into the plan in a manner that is most
advantageous to both the Developer and City of Laurel.
2. As I read Resolution R-08-22 (Attached) Annexation Criteria and Requirements Section A 3`d bullet, it appears
that the intent of the City is that you will be required to install all of the existing or proposed public
improvements but I have included Kurt and the City Attorney on this response for clarification on the matter and
will defer the Decision to the Employees/Counsel of the City for the Final Answer.
3. You are correct, the internal subdivision infrastructure will be addressed via the SIA for each subdivision filing as
the development progresses and it will be at this point the extension of Eleanor Roosevelt/East 81" along with
infrastructure will be addressed.
4. The house on Lot -18 really complicates the annexation issue. There are resolutions and ordinances of the City
that prohibit septic and drainfields within the City and from what I understand the structure is on a private
2"water line that does not meet with City regulations post annexation. It also has the potential to bring Section
157
B (2"' and 3" paragraphs) in to play with respect to external improvements, The advantage is the two-year
window for completion and a legitimate argument could be raised that you would have 2 -years post Filal
Annexation to connect the house to water and sewer in accordance with the Laurel Standards for Public Works
Improvements, the MPWSS, and the Laurel Rules and Regulations Governing Utility Services and Streets. Again',
I will defer final determination on this issue to the City Employees/Attorney for the final answer on the
interpretation possible timelines and application of the requirements of R-08-22,
At this point my suggestion is work the easy sections forward and we will get clarifications on these outstanding points!
P, ond C.F,,,,_
K L)
4,06- 373,
4016.794-1,160
f T 59f02 7329
From: Scott Aspenlieder <_soc, Ut per lof onai ice-ec.corn>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 11:06 AM
To: Forrest Sanderson <Forri Sar, soni
k I e6 o in, >
Cc: Craig Dalton <ci, 21
Subject: RE: Annexation Agreement - Major Components
Forrest
Couple things jurnp out, to me at fl-iis point thkat need direct attention/clarification,
1. Dec icatina the ROW for a, connection, frorn 8"" through to Yard Office seenns prprna"Ure, at this point, i'nn
COE)cerfied that we're on1v at the pianning stages and not ready to con-imit what that connection WOUld be.
Seerlis like we can easily address that as part of the SIA when we go throughl subdivision. I just don't think 'o"e're
ready for it right now add I dont want to do it based on a prelinninary layout only to be asking the. City to work.
with us to adiust it if the plan changes.
I assume we're only paying for in-iprovennents to our side of the roads adjacent to the development (8`/Elearlor
Roosevel' and Yard Office) as is done in Billings. If the City has a different idea or thought on that we need to
talk about it. Other coEYiniuiiitiE's/ci�Ljt)tirs have gotten irito significant, legal trouble requiring offl-site
i m prove rnents that are neither adiacent to the subject development of- are not identified by the traffic study lie
intersections). Just want to make sure we're all clear on that and off on the right foot. It wasn't terribly cle Zr to
LIS corning out of the Pre -App meeting what the City's expectations were.
3. Engineer's Estimate and budding for improvements makes sense, for the directly adjacent improvements
identified in 1-42 above. I think that's what you were referring too but �,varfted to make surf} all internal stuff vvas
taken care of in the SIA of a subsequent development,
4. The existing house on Lot 18 can be hooked Lip to water fairly easily but a connection to sewer vias assumed to
be worked into the development of a subsequent subdivision. The existinig
, house discharges out the b ac to the
north with, the dra infield in the back, Sewer service would be much easier to incorporate and manage to
collection mains internal to a subdivision withoui tearing up 8"' and searching for a sewer main in that area. If
vve frooked LII) to water within the two years after annexation and sewer when the main is installed to fots
adjacent to that nowise internal to the subdivision is that doable. Sewer connection to existing collection SOLIVI Of
8"" isn't a good or viable option I don't believe.
I'll start craftinu the Annexation Agreement on the issues below if you canI give me some feedback on the 4 points above
that would be much appreciated, Thanksi
Thanks,
Scott Aspenlieder, P.E.
scott!@performance-ec.com
Office: (406) 384-0080
Mobile: (406) 461-8392
PERFORMANCE
608 North 29i1 street • Billings, MT 59101
v, ww. performance• ec.co m
From: Forrest Sanderson [mailto:Forrest.Sandersonajklien .comj
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 10:07 AM
To: Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>
Subject: Annexation Agreement - Major Components
Importance: High
Scott:
Your team can use the following bullet points as a guide on the issues for the Annexation Agreement:
✓ Quiet the Title to the 30 feet of the property adjacent to Yard Office Road.
✓ Dedicate East 8`1 to the City of Laurel as Residential Collector (70') ROW.
✓ Dedicate Eleanor Roosevelt to the City of Laurel as Residential Collector (70') ROW (Where you can).
✓ Dedicate additional ROW for Yard Office (Where you can) to the City of Laurel as Commercial Collector (80')
ROW.
✓ Dedicate additional ROW as Residential Collector (70') such ba
to Yard Office Road.' Is will be required with the first filing of
✓ Prepare a Final Annexation Ezhi its owing:
to iust do it
o All lands included in the annexation
o All existing Rights -of -Way adjacent to or proposed to be dedicated to the City of Laurel as part of the
annexation;
o All Park lands or other public lands that will be included with the annexation.
✓ Provide an Engineers' Estimate of Cost for:
a The cost of Engineering design of Water, Sewer, Street, Curb, Gutter, Sidewalks and a Bike Pedestrian
path in all of the to be annexed ROW where the infrastructure does not meet the minimum standards of
the Laurel Standards for Public Works Improvements, the MPWSS, and the Laurel Rules and Regulations
Governing Utility Services and Streets.
o The cost of Construction of the designed improvements, discussed above, to the Water, Sewer, Street,
Curb, Gutter, Sidewalks and a Bike Pedestrian path where the infrastructure does not meet the
minimum standards of the Laurel Standards for Public Works Improvements, the MPWSS, and the Laurel
Rules and Regulations Governing Utility Services and Streets.
o A performance bond or other security, consistent with the Laurel Subdivision Regulations (Title 16) at
125% of the Engineers Estimate of Probable Cost to complete the design and construction of the
improvements discussed above. The Engineers Estimate of Probable Costs may be submitted to the
Contract City Engineer for review and comment prior to acceptance and Final Annexation approval.
o The executed security mechanism will be required at the time of application for Final Annexation.
✓ A signed and notarized acknowledgment by the Developer that is binding upon their heirs, successors and
assigns that all required improvements to the off-site public improvements will be completed within two (2)
159
years of the approval of the Final Annexation or that the City Of Laurel rnay utiliZe the performance band or
other acceptable securities tocomplete the improvements Outlined above.
�
The City agrees to assign Laurel RLMF and Laurel CC Zoning to the subject properties at the time of Final
Annexation Approval in accordance with the petition of annexation and request of initial zoning as submitted by
Ahe
ii��t the Developer may apply for Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval during the term of the Annexation
Agreement but that NO FINAL PLAT will be approved until such time that the City APPROVES the Final
Annexation of the terms of the
�
agreement have been met,
�
The City of Laurel recognizes the significant costs associated with the improvements necessary to the existin�
Roads, Water, Sewer, Curb, and Gutter and will consider the creation of a 'Late Comers Agreement' to spreaa
these costs to other benefited properties via the Subdivision processes should the Developer so desire and \
request
er of all right to protest, josludingjudicial revjew the creation of any Special Improv - i6nt
District. This waiver shall be deemed by the City to be a Covenant that , runs with the land, the form of which
must beapproved byCity Staff and the City Attorney.
�
The City will assign the properties to be annexed to an Election Ward at the time of Final Annexation consistent
with the Montana Code Annotated,
^~ Atthe time ofFinal Annexation Appmva|,the existing house onLot- 18must:
u
Either beremoved from the property; OR
�
Connected to the Laurel Water System in a manner consistent with the Laurel Stan 0 lards for Public
Works Improvements, the MPWSS, and the Laurel Rules and Regulations Governing Utility Services and
Streets.
o ConnectedtotheLaore|WasteWaterCoUectkonandT"eatmentSysteminamanncrconsisten1vv|ththe
Laurel Standards for Public Works Improvements, the MPVVSS.and the Laurel Rules and Regulations
Governing Utility Services and Streets.
o
That any outf
steodin�eesorassessments., including but not limited toSystem Development Fees, shall
be paid to the [ityofLaurel,
�
Should the property have water rights, irrigation or otherwise, that they will be 100% L,ansheredmthe City mf
Laurel atthe time ofFinal Annexation Approval,
/ ThatvviththaexcepsionofthehouseonLot'l8,thacthebo|anceofthepropecymiU6eaemedbyrheLaurei
Solid Waste Services.
| hope that this |iStWill give YOU the backbone ofthe agreement and{hulhroz/gn7zethatthemmaybaotherbemsthet
you may want to include in the agreement as you move forward,
The Council Schedule for the next month is:
2/l9
Action
2/26
Work Session
3/5
Action
3/I2
Work Session
3/I9
Ac/ion
Given the time I would expect for YOU to complete the annexation agreement I submit that we are looking atthe Work
Session on March 12 and Action on 3,119. In order to make this schedule work.. we would need your draft agreement for
Staff and Legal review on or before 2/27. Just nzyou know, Kurt will beonvacation fromZ/2OtoZ/27and his input will
becrucial tothe review and approval process,
if you have questions please feet free to give me a call!
San«:su,-;, AJyc ,v,d C,F-JV..,
<\KLI
400-37»72,10
406-794-1460
4'V 1 a 10 M- G
Fyhiny MT 59102-71-
r161]
Laurel City Planner
From: Laurel City Planner
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 3:41 PM
To: Craig Dalton
Cc: Scott Aspenlieder; 'Tony Golden (tgolden.realty@gmail.com)'; Katrina Svingen
Subject: RE: Goldberg Sporting Estates - Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal
Attachments: LMC - Schedule of Fees 2018.pdf
Hi Craig,
I spent some time reviewing the Preliminary Plat and draft SIA with Kurt. We have identified some concerns with the
preliminary
plat and SIA. I have provided some links to our Subdivision Code which will be important for your review.
➢
Chapter
16.03 —Subdivision Review Procedures
➢
Chapter
16.04 — Development Requirements
➢
Chapter
16.10 — Dedication of Parks, Trails, And Open Space
➢
Chapter
16—Appendix C — Pre -Application Meeting Form
➢
Chapter
16 — Appendix D — Preliminary Plat Requirements
➢
Chapter
16 — Appendix E — Preliminary Plat Application
Some items discussed in our initial review included:
➢ Street connectivity within the Subdivision
➢ Street and intersection design
➢ Road continuity with the adjacent Laurel street system
➢ Parkland Dedication/Cash-in-Lieu
➢ Road Dedication
➢ Phased development
I suggest specifically reviewing Ch. 16-04.060—Streets and Roads, as this section contains some points which will need
to be addressed. It would be best to review the codes and develop your rationale for the current preliminary design
decisions or begin to update the draft documents.
It would be best if we could plan to set up a pre -application meeting to have an in-depth discussion about the proposed
subdivision and the requirements of our subdivision codes and our public works standards. I have also attached Laurel's
Schedule of Fees for your review. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you for your time
and I look forward to hearing from you.
Regards,
Nick Altonaga
City Planner
406.628.4796, Ext. 5 (office)
406.628.2241 (fax)
naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov
City of Laurel
PO Box 10
115 West First St.
Laurel, MT 59044-0010
F162]
From: Laurel City Planner
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 9:54 AM
To: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>
Cc: Scott Aspenlieder <scott@perform ance-ec.com>; 'Tony Golden (tgolden.realty@gmail.com)'
<tgolden.realty@gmail.com>; Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Subject: RE: Goldberg Sporting Estates - Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal
Hi Craig,
Thank you for the email. I will take a look at this preliminary plat and SIA and get back to you by early -mid next week
with my initial comments. I look forward to working with you on this process.
Regards,
Nick Altonaga
City Planner
406.628.4796, Ext. 5 (office)
406.628.2241 (fax)
naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov
City of Laurel
PO Box 10
115 West First St.
Laurel, MT 59044-0010
From: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 9:32 AM
To: Laurel City Planner <naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov>
Cc: Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>; 'Tony Golden (tgolden.realty@gmail.com)'
<tgolden.realty@gmail.com>; Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Subject: Goldberg Sporting Estates - Preliminary Plat Pre -Submittal
Good Morning Nick,
Please find the attached preliminary plat and SIA for the Goldberg Estates Subdivision. While this is not an official
preliminary plat submittal, I wanted to get this over to you to review and provide feedback prior to our official submittal
2 163
coming in November. Upon our official submittal the statutory timelines will start so I am hoping we can get most of the
details addressed prior to that time. Upon your review, please contact me to discuss questions/comments you may
have.
Thank you,
Craig Dalton, P.E.
Project Manager/Principal
craig@performance-ec.com
Office: (406) 384-0080
Mobile: (406) 459-8456
PERFORMANCE
608 North 291' Street • Billings, MT 59101
www.performance-ec.com
This message is for the sole use of the intended recipients and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
original message. E-mail attachments may contain viruses which could damage your computer. While we have taken precautions to minimize this
risk, we cannot accept liability for such damage and you should carry out your own virus checks before opening an attachment. Thank you for your
cooperation.
164
Laurel City Planner
From:
Laurel City Planner
Sent:
Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:21 PM
To:
Katrina Svingen
Cc:
Craig Dalton; Scott Aspenlieder; Tony Golden
Subject:
RE: GSE Prelim Plat Meeting Notes - 11.08.19
Attachments:
Yard Office - Resolution No. R19-43 - AA - Waiver.pdf, Pre_Application_LTR2019022.pdf,
LMC - Schedule of Fees 2018.pdf, Rules and Regulations Governing Utility Services and
Streets Div. 1.pdf, Rules and Regulations Governing Utility Services and Streets Div.
2.pdf; Standards for Public Works Improvements 2003.pdf; Yard Office Annexation
Agreement CC APPROVED.pdf
Hi Katrina,
First and foremost, I was reviewing Yard office and GSE files and have not been able to locate fully
signed/executed copies of the Annexation Agreement and Waiver of Right to Protest for the lots in the
subdivision. I have attached the City of Laurel's approved resolution which has unsigned copies of the
Annexation Agreement and Waiver of Right to Protest which were found to be up to city standards. I have also
attached a clearer copy of the AA and Waiver PDF to ensure any final signed version is clear. Right now I
recommend moving onto an official preliminary plat application. At this point city staff are looking at the
proposed preliminary plat piece by piece. Moving onto the official process would allow staff to fully review the
preliminary plat and all required supporting documentation.
The Current situation:
• Subdivision Pre -Application Meeting took place on February 4, 2019.
• Summary of Subdivision Pre -Application Meeting was prepared by Forrest Sanderson dated February 7,
2019. (Attached)
• No preliminary plat application was submitted.
• No Preliminary Plat application fee was submitted.
Before submitting a preliminary plat application and supporting documents I would suggest to:
➢ Review the approved Annexation agreement
➢ Review the subdivision pre -application meeting summary sheet
➢ Review Chapter 16 for specific regulations
➢ Update the preliminary plat and supporting documents to ensure that the items included with the AA
and pre -App meeting summary been included/addressed in the preliminary plat and SIA
➢ Ensure that the preliminary plat conforms to Chapter 16.
➢ Provide us with a signed Annexation Agreement and Waiver of Right to Protest for filing with the YC
Clerk and Recorder
Please ensure that the Preliminary Plat and documents follows the rules laid out in Ch. 16 - Subdivisions.
Below I have also linked important and pertinent subchapters in Ch. 16.
➢ 16.03 — Subdivision Review Procedures
o 16.03.030— Major Preliminary Plat application submittal
➢ 16.04— Development Requirements
➢ 16.05 — Guarantee of Public Improvements
165
o 16.05.020—Security Guarantee, Part C, Sequential Development.
➢ 16.09 — Environmental Assessment
➢ 16.10 — Dedication of Parks, Trails, and Open Space
➢ Ch. 16 Appendix E — Preliminary Plat Application
➢ Ch. 16 Appendix F — Required Supporting Documents for Major Preliminary Plat Applications
Some Follow -Up on comments from our previous conversations:
Kurt would like to see a full road connection between the CC and RLMF portions of the subdivision for both
traffic flow and ensuring utility access. He reported that a 20ft wide utility easement was not sufficient for
running utilities as per Laurel standards, which would need a 30ft easement.
Overall I want to ensure that subdivisions coming into the city conform to our codes. We can go back and forth
on discussions regarding road connectivity inside and outside of the subdivision and designs but the bottom
line would be that anything that does not follow our code would require a variance.
At this point I see the parkland dedication location as very low priority and would not need to be brought to
council for their suggestion. I just want to ensure that the cash -in -lieu and the acreage/sqft amounts are
correct. I also reviewed Chapter 16.05.020 Part C which discusses phased (Sequential) development. We can
use this to guide how we ensure the phases of development move smoothly.
If you have any questions about this please let me know. Thank you for your time and I look forward to
hearing from you.
Regards,
Nick Altonaga
City Planner
406.628.4796, Ext. 5 (office)
406.628.2241 (fax)
naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov
City of Laurel
PO Box 10
115 West First St.
Laurel, MT 59044-0010
From: Laurel City Planner
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 8:11 AM
To: Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Cc: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>; Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>; Tony Golden
F1 66
<tgoIden.realty@gmai1.com>
Subject: RE: GSE Prelim Plat Meeting Notes - 11.08.19
Hi Katrina,
I will be finalizing comments and try to send them by the end of the workday today. Thanks for checking in.
Regards,
Nick Altonaga
City Planner
406.628.4796, Ext. 5 (office)
406.628.2241 (fax)
naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov
City of Laurel
PO Box 10
115 West First St.
Laurel, MT 59044-0010
From: Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 10:16 AM
To: Laurel City Planner <naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov>
Cc: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>; Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>; Tony Golden
<tgolden.realty@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: GSE Prelim Plat Meeting Notes - 11.08.19
Morning Nick,
Just wanted to follow up with you and see if you have comments ready for the Goldberg Sporting Estates Subdivision?
-Katrina
Katrina Svingen, P.E.
Associate Engineer
katrina@performance-ec.com
(406) 384-0080
PERFORMANCE
608 North 29th Street • Billings, MT 59101
F167]
From: Laurel City Planner <naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov>
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 1:04 PM
To: Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Cc: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>; Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>; Tony Golden
<tgolden.realtV@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: GSE Prelim Plat Meeting Notes - 11.08.19
Hi Katrina,
Thanks to you and Craig for the conversation this morning. I will work to try and have my comments and follow-ups
done by the end of next week. Feel free to contact me with any other questions or comments in the meantime. Thanks
again.
Regards,
Nick Altonaga
City Planner
406.628.4796, Ext. 5 (office)
406.628.2241 (fax)
naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov
City of Laurel
PO Box 10
115 West First St.
Laurel, MT 59044-0010
From: Katrina Svingen <katrina@performance-ec.com>
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 11:35 AM
To: Laurel City Planner<naltonaga@laurel.mt.gov>
Cc: Craig Dalton <craig@performance-ec.com>; Scott Aspenlieder <scott@performance-ec.com>; Tony Golden
<tgolden.realty@gmail.com>
Subject: GSE Prelim Plat Meeting Notes - 11.08.19
Nick,
As a follow up to our phone call this morning, here's a marked up PDF with comments, concerns and points for moving
forward. I've made a bullet list below as well and outlined who has committed to doing different tasks going forward.
(1) Street connectivity within the Subdivision
o Possible private road connecting residential and commercial areas
o Nick to comment on any concerns with proposed private road with public access easement for the
commercial area and connection road between residential and commercial area.
(2) Street and intersection design
o PE to double check minimum distances (50' for internal roads and 100' for external road connections)
(3) Road continuity with the adjacent Laurel street system
F168]
o Question about continuity with Mulberry Avenue
■ Reasoning for location includes:
• Mulberry is a dead end that does not connect to E Main Street,
• Approximately 240' separation between access points off of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr, and
• Proposed entrance is aligned with existing driveway of business to the south (Cotter's
Sewer, Septic, and Portable Toilet Services)
(4) Parkland Dedication/Cash-in-Lieu
o PE to double check numbers for parkland areas and ensure existing public park to north and stormwater
pond areas are not included in proposed areas
o Nick mentioned Section 16.10.010C of code that outlines governing body recommendations for
parkland... City of Laurel to comment on preference or okay proposed parkland dedication with
additional cash -in -lieu option.
(5) Road Dedication
o Dedication of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr to be shown on the plat
(6) Phased development
o Deed restriction and release example for Nick (included in this email)
Thanks again for taking the time to go over the project and let us know if you want clarity on anything or have any
additional questions concerning the proposed preliminary plat.
-Katrina
Katrina Svingen, P.E.
Associate Engineer
katrina@performance-ec.com
(406) 384-0080
PERFORMANCE
608 North 29th Street • Billings, MT 59101
F169]
File Attachments for Item:
6. Approve Meeting Minutes: September 1.6, 2020
F1701
AGENDA
CITY OF LAUREL
CITY/COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2020
5:35 PM
a CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Public Input: Citizens may address the committee regarding any item of business that is not on the agenda. The duration
for an individual speaking under Public Input is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the committee
will not take action on any item not on the agenda.
Roll Call
Chair called the meeting to order at 5:35PM
Evan Bruce
Roger Geise
Dan Koch
Ron Benner
Gavin Williams
Judy Goldsby
Nick Altonaga (City of Laurel)
General Items
2. Approve Meeting Minutes: August 19, 2020
Ron Motioned to Approve the Minutes from August 19, 2020 as written.
Evan Seconded.
Motion Carried.
3. Public Hearing: Review and Comments on Laurel High School Sign Replacement
Planning Director Altonaga provided an overview of the Laurel High School Sign and the required
public process.
Wayne Fjare, Facilities Director of Laurel Public Schools was in attendance. He provided details on the
sign that they plan to install. The sign will be an electronic reader board, and will be 20 inches higher off
the ground, and a much higher resolution. The current sign is not working, so this will be a full
replacement.
Ron asked if this will be a video sign?
Wayne answered that yes it will be able to do full video.
The Chair and other members want the School District to know that this is outside of the zoning
parameters. It would not look good to allow signs like this.
Members reported that it might not look good when the district has developments like this. It might not
look good when we allow the School District to install this type of sign versus private businesses being
denied for these types of signs.
Gavin spoke for the sign. He reported that he is a Laurel High School graduate and is happy to see
something presenting information about the school. There are a lot other issues distracting people than
animated signs for the High School. Sign could boost community relations and help with making the
school district more a part of the community.
Ron disagreed with it not being a distraction, stating that it might cause issues with more distraction,
especially with kids and students crossing during the day.
Judy: There are some allowable uses for the sign, including 30 second repeats. We can work with the
sign maker to come up with a middle ground.
Wayne stated that they do not want to create a hazard or an issue for the community. I will bring these
concerns back to the School Board.
Nick will send along a set of baseline rules for the sign to pass along to the Board.
Roger: Would just like some more parameters, Board meetings, sporting events, upcoming events,
Games, etc.
There were no proponents or opponents present at the hearing.
The Chair closed the Public Hearing.
New Business
4. Growth Management Policy - Chapter Review
Nick presented the Growth Policy for review. Nick reported that it has not changed much since the last
review, but all chapters have been prepared.
Board members reviewed the plan and discussed a number of items.
Is there any update from MDT on road development off the new Interchange? It would impact Laurel if
there are plans for more road network connections such as Buffalo Trail or towards the south.
Nick reported that there is nothing major that he is aware of.
Roger asked if there is any interest in companies developing by the new interchange?
Nick reported that no one has contacted him and is unaware of any other city departments
hearing anything about development near there.
Ron: Chapter 10: Local routes and maintenance section: Add verbiage for adding roads,
COMPLETING roads, improving roads. (Many roads are not full width and are lacking curbs and
gutters). Have a goal of future development
F172]
Gavin: Page 29: Chapter 4 — Student/Teacher ratio — Exactly the same as the United States? Please
double check this. Try to find a better data source for this?
Ron: Should there be a disclaimer for the facts and figures? Possibly a bibliography? Should state the
data sources?
Nick stated that he will see if that is the normal way things or done, or if it will be necessary,
with only a few separate sources of information.
Nick asked the board members to please review the document and get back to him with any comments
or concerns. He then discussed the updated schedule for review and approval of the Growth
Management Policy.
Old Business
Other Items
5. Upcoming Items
Nick provided a summary of some projects that will be coming up in the next few months. These
included The review and approval of the Growth Policy, the proposed Goldberg Sporting Estates which
is under review by the Planning Department, and a Conditional Land Use Permit for 1009 East 6"
Street.
Ron: Can Kurt be present at the meeting to discuss the Water and Sewer system for the upcoming
subdivision?
Roger: Have you addressed any of the issues with Regal Land Development?
• Karen and the Planning Director are working on these issues.
• City Council has also discussed their concerns at length.
Ron: Many people have built their fences directly on the property line to the Soccer fields. Have you
addressed the issue with fence setbacks or difficulty for players to retrieve balls?
• Planning has not been aware of this issue but can look into the issue.
Roger: Any movement on the Downtown District development or planning?
Nick reported that he would like to put together a downtown revitalization plan after the Growth Policy
is completed, possibly next spring or summer.
Members generally discussed downtown development and possible projects to help the district.
• Different projects taking place
• Possible projects that could improve the area
• Nick mentioned the numerous vacant lots that could be used for infill development.
Judy discussed the recent session with outside Rural development specialists with Laurel Revitalization
League to help with Laurel.
F173]
Ron: We need to see ourselves like the Heights, slow steady, consistent development to not have
everyone just go to Billings for services.
Members discussed options for downtown and outside funding supports and parcels available for
development or redevelopment. We could position ourselves as a regional hub for the nearby rural
communities.
Announcements
6. Next Meeting: October 21, 2020
Ron Motioned to Adjourn.
Roger Seconded.
Motion Carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 6:44PM.
The City makes reasonable accommodations for any known disability that may interfere with a person's ability to
participate in this meeting. Persons needing accommodation must notify the City Clerk's Office to make needed
arrangements. To make your request known, please call 406-628-7431, Ext. 2, or write to City Clerk, PO Box 10, Laurel,
MT 59044, or present your request at City Hall, 115 West First Street, Laurel, Montana.
F1741