Commission grants Ridgewater extension
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
POLSON – Last week, commissioners decided to honor Ridgewater developer Mike Maddy’s application for a fifth extension on plans for the development.
The Polson City Commission initially approved the Ridgewater Development Master Plan Subdivision in 2005. The plan proposed development of commercial and residential land to the west of U.S Highway 93.
Following the completion of a master plan, developers of subdivisions are required to submit more detailed plans for the property. In the 13-year life of the Ridgewater development, the commission has granted four requests to extended the deadline for submission of these plans. If the commission had not approved the request, the Ridgewater Master Plan would have expired on Oct. 16, the day after the meeting.
The commission held a public hearing on the extension, which opened with a staff report from City Planner Kyle Roberts. Roberts identified reasons the commission could deny the request but did not give a recommendation for approval or denial. The staff report pointed out that the requested 10-year extension would give Ridgewater a total of 21 years of extensions for preliminary plan approval. The Polson Development Code permits “no more than ten years” of total time extensions for non-phased subdivisions. In response, Maddy said that the development does consist of multiple phases and is exempt from this rule.
Roberts pointed out that according to the formula used by a traffic study on the development, Ridgewater would soon be due for a secondary access road. Currently, all traffic to the development enters through an intersection at Highway 93.
The traffic study uses a formula to calculate a theoretical number of vehicle trips on an access road per day using the type and number of operating units in the development. Currently, the formula indicates that a theoretical 6,300 trips are made into the development per day. The study stated that when road use reached a calculated 7,500 trips per day, a secondary access road was needed.
Roberts called secondary access an issue of “public health and safety.” He recommended that if the commission did grant the Ridgewater Subdivision the requested extension, a developer’s agreement should require the developer to address the need for secondary access road. According to the master plan, Hillcrest Drive is the only city road where a secondary access road can connect.
Maddy responded by saying public safety was not a concern because there are five emergency entrances to the development and building a secondary access road would be difficult.
“It’s ridiculous to ask us to build an access that is over a mile long when we haven’t even fixed the sewer problem,” Maddy said. The city is responsible for providing sewage services to the development.
Maddy said he thought the number of cars entering the development was far less than projected by the traffic study’s formula and offered to install a traffic counter at the existing access road to determine how much actual traffic is entering the development. Maddy said that when the traffic measured by the counter reached the 7,500 trip per day threshold identified by the traffic study, he would install a second access road.
Roberts said that the numbers in the study were theoretical and not meant to be compared to actual traffic numbers. As a result, the 7,500 trip-per-day limit was significantly higher than the amount of actual traffic that could safely use the single access road.
“It’s important that you don’t use that 7,500 number,” Roberts said. Contrary to Roberts’ suggestions, the motion that the commission passed did use 7,500 as the point at which a second road would be needed.
Maddy suggested counting traffic once per year at a busy time, and that when the number of trips per day approached the limit, conduct more frequent counts.
Members of the public voiced their concerns over added traffic to Hillcrest Drive, if a second access road is connected to it, and the possibility that the road would need to be widened, eliminating the pedestrian path alongside the road. Other public comments included concern over whether the developers had been following proper protocol when it came to planning.
Commissioner Bob Martin moved to approve the 10-year extension. His motion also required the establishment of a developer’s agreement. The agreement would require a traffic count and the construction of a second access road before 7,500 cars make trips on the existing access road per day. Martin’s motion passed with the support of all members of the commission except Jan Howlett.
