Meadow Lake subdivision sparks debate
The Columbia Falls City-County Planning Board unanimously approved two preliminary plat requests for the Meadow Lake Resort area at their Dec. 9 meeting. Both will go to the Columbia Falls City Council for final approval on Dec. 15.
With three of the board’s eight members absent, barely making a quorum, and a packed room, the Glacier Village Townhouses subdivision drew the most discussion.
Located east of the resort’s existing hotel and clubhouse, the 1 1/2 acre subdivision falls within a planned unit development approved earlier by the city. The plan calls for three duplex townhomes and an 18-room hotel, with the hotel likely to be built first.
In his staff report, city planning consultant Eric Mulcahy recommended a condition requiring an ongoing stormwater problem near the resort’s sewer lift station be addressed before final plat is issued.
This problem has come up in prior development requests, Mulcahy said. According to the developers’ environmental assessment, a solution may involve installing a stormwater pumping station and moving the flood water to an existing pond near holes 16 and 18 on the golf course.
Bruce Lutz, of Sitescape Associates, representing the developers, called the flooding a “pre-existing condition.” He said the subdivision’s use of swales and culverts will retain most of the stormwater at Glacier Village. Any water that left the subdivision would be the developers’ responsibility, he said.
Barb Riley, a Realtor at the resort, asked if the city could require the new pumping station to be enclosed so it looks nice to visitors at the resort’s entrance. Mulcahy said the city doesn’t have architectural standards on the books to enforce that request.
In his staff report, Mulcahy also recommended a condition requiring the subdivision be included in the resort’s master homeowners association, so property owners pay their fair share of maintenance for roads, open spaces and other obligations.
The developers, however, were reluctant to have the subdivision subject to architectural review by the master HOA, and in an e-mail they proposed different language. Lutz noted that the developers are the same people who drafted the resort’s architectural standards and wouldn’t build something unsightly.
Bruce Beecher, president of the master HOA and chairman of the architectural review committee, called for including the entire subdivision in the master HOA. He noted that architectural review for residences can be strict but not for commercial structures.
The point is to protect property values for the entire resort, Beecher said, noting that the time to place the subdivision within the master HOA is during the platting process. Riley noted that the existing hotel is part of the master HOA.
Mulcahy said additional details on this matter could be worked out between the parties at a later date. The board members agreed with Beecher.
Adequate parking at the 18-room hotel was also debated. Lutz said the developers planned to put 18 spaces underground, but Riley expressed concern about parking for hotel staff and a real estate office.
Mulcahy said only a site plan was being considered at this time. The hotel will have to comply with parking standards when it goes to site review, he said.
The planning board had less trouble with the second preliminary plat request, which called for building three single-family residences on Oakmont Loop instead of a six-plex condominium, cutting the density in half.
Beecher noted that the site was unzoned and had no established setbacks, but the houses must undergo architectural review. Mulcahy said the developers had already proposed setbacks.
The Oakmont homes will probably be used for vacation rentals, Riley said, adding that the fewer restrictions on property in a recreational environment, the more valuable it becomes.