[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6177763,"mediaKeyId","5333747-bc8839cd82496b1e9ddcc2a879524e19","parentId",5333747,"title","Planning commission sends Silver Brook Village PUD amendment for 198 condominiums to public hearing","audioSeconds",677,"startMs",10618000,"endMs",11295000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5333747-bc8839cd82496b1e9ddcc2a879524e19&start=10618&end=11295","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5333747-bc8839cd82496b1e9ddcc2a879524e19/thumbnail_10618000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6177763/Kalispell/Flathead-County/Montana/Planning-commission-sends-Silver-Brook-Village-PUD-amendment-for-198-condominiums-to-public-hearing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6177763-dbced55c40573f3145c820ccf1b04aef/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440283&Signature=iuq4HlrxeVJaIUrdzsyWz-yesIlZb31zuKn3FV6mSr0H4l670y955bpgT0T9F9GVg8PmlNzVwb4k6QvEgBtYUPGiWM30lJo57V0tuGCKMEfO~HIx01j3PxBpWgaofvliXMU9cRH02E4s-10RO65klT~QpNPxdMbwF4f20TrzeR6FNpDHE6GlH0lZwC5L98uX2VwLy4m0E5ANQyh6XioRWNm5LWPhUEV4qSYiJ7fm1smHroRCsUNKNzeX5zbjMgEmqbbekzsNOAOCZdwT-QYN~egfshA9UllGtwu50QHk0onMklSA7-E1kmioDETGJmbGa0646sIgIJN9MQTOaBMrfA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Kalispell, MT ","date","2025-07-08T23:58:12Z","article","Kalispell planning staff presented an amendment to the Silver Brook Village planned-unit development (PUD) during the commission's July 8 work session; the amendment would allow about 198 residential condominium units and approximately 20,400 square feet of neighborhood business uses on an 11.7‑acre site at 441 and 465 Diamond Peak Drive.

The proposed plan combines a range of condominium types — two‑unit townhomes, row houses and larger multi‑unit condominium buildings — with mixed‑use buildings that would include neighborhood commercial on ground floors and residential units above. Staff noted the site is already zoned B‑1 with a PUD overlay and that the proposed mix is consistent with the city's neighborhood commercial/high‑density residential designation under the growth policy.

Mike Brody, the project's engineer, described circulation and pedestrian design choices, including an alley‑style interior drive with a designated, at‑grade pedestrian strip. Brody said the intent of the at‑grade sidewalk in the alley area \"is just to build that sidewalk a little thicker, so there is the ability to utilize that in particular,\" and that the interior streets and parking areas would be privately owned and maintained. He also said the developer intends the product to be owner‑occupied condominiums rather than rental units.

Commissioners asked questions about sidewalks, snow removal, and private maintenance. Staff confirmed that the public roads around the site already include sidewalks and that the project's internal lanes and parking would be privately maintained; snow removal on private streets would be the developer's responsibility. The commission indicated it had no outstanding major concerns and voted to place the PUD amendment on the commission's regular public‑hearing agenda; the item will appear on the Aug. 12 meeting packet for a public hearing and formal action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","7/8/25 City of Kalispell Planning Commission Meeting (2)","oneSentenceSummary","Staff presented a PUD amendment for Silver Brook Village that would add roughly 198 condominium units and 20,400 sq. ft. of neighborhood commercial at 441 & 465 Diamond Peak Drive; commissioners voted to advance the PUD amendment to a public hearing, with staff and the applicant to provide final materials.","taxTitle","Kalispell, Flathead County, Montana","taxId",61441,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6177767,"Kalispell planning commission approves annexation, postpones conditional-use permit for 99-unit North Meadows apartments",9774,226000,10000000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5333747-bc8839cd82496b1e9ddcc2a879524e19&start=226&end=10000","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5333747-bc8839cd82496b1e9ddcc2a879524e19/thumbnail_226000.jpg","/articles/6177767/Kalispell/Flathead-County/Montana/Kalispell-planning-commission-approves-annexation-postpones-conditional-use-permit-for-99-unit-North-Meadows-apartments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6177767-50de49722fe78da05b7939b1ff3fb915/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440283&Signature=NPcoBez24swkVBEyJdS74dqe8JieotAId7A18H6EKv-Tejzt-uqDAW2Ca9ffg-7xybAEyLVxilsX9q83f5G2inFHiO5TantcUPc~n9VQbkSwdU4ZMv5m0KNFVq87~k4x0ua5WS1OmDOqS7IRt7q7T7Agvi-pDLkDnqsUdHimh-dgvoUSr5aYS7B8Gt8k-tPx9XtmWRo1RwrhhfMZqqK7KnpBFAfbbBaPxu9LJUZKzSTN-mxTXtd0IWp2gUPoZ3GS2Vkdswq~C322vvctTD4gnr0Ahm3u80VDaNel18eLdbdDrqc85enFJX4gRaQMYwCN3I1PdG96ioVHpouNtjf3-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Kalispell City Planning Commission on July 8 recommended annexation and initial RA-1 zoning for a proposed 99-unit multifamily development at 1859 South Meadows Drive, but the commission declined to grant the project's conditional-use permit and instead tabled the CUP for additional information and developer response.

Donnie Baff, Planner 2 for the city, described the application as \"a request for annexation, initial zoning to RA-1, [and] a conditional use permit for a new residential development in Kalispell,\" and said the project \"supports the city's goals for compact growth, housing diversity, and responsible infill.\" The applicant proposes annexing approximately 12.13 acres, building seven two‑story apartment buildings with a clubhouse and associated amenities, and preserving roughly 4.8 acres of open space and a riparian buffer along Ashley Creek.

The commission voted to recommend annexation and the RA‑1 zoning. The motion and roll-call votes were recorded in the meeting minutes and show the commission forwarded the annexation and zoning recommendation to city council. Commissioners recorded on the roll call as voting on the annexation and zoning recommendation were Pip Burke (aye), Joshua Borgart (aye), Doug Kaufman (yes), Shelby Lecron (no), Kate Walker (yes) and Chad Graham (yes).

Public comment dominated the hearing. Neighbors raised safety, traffic, geotechnical and school-capacity concerns during a lengthy comment period. Rhonda Hawkins (1731 Bluestone Drive) told commissioners, \"My concern is primarily with this project, all of the vehicles and the safety hazard that will happen,\" and asked the commission to consider sidewalk and emergency access issues on Bluestone Drive. Ricky Moffitt (147 Rimrock Court), whose backyard would border the site, cited a history of slope and creek instability near Ashley Creek and said local reports show substantial erosion within the creek corridor; he urged commissioners to account for landslide risk and environmental impacts.

Staff and the applicant's representatives answered technical questions but did not persuade the majority of the commission to approve the CUP that night. Toby McIntosh, representing the applicant and Jocola/\"Jacola\" Engineering and Architecture, said, \"I think a lot of the concerns this evening are captured in the conditions for the conditional use permit that allow city staff and the departments that regulate the rules that the city has adopted to allow for review of the project as the permits are being submitted for the actual design.\" McIntosh said he was available to answer questions and to work with staff on required studies and permit conditions.

Key technical details raised in the hearing: staff's traffic impact study estimated about 667 average daily vehicle trips associated with the full build-out and projected that peak‑hour levels of service at studied intersections would remain at level C or better under the TIS methodology; staff said municipal utilities are available nearby but would require extension onto the property (water and sewer mains at the end of South Meadows are 8‑inch mains); the proposed buildings are approximately 33 feet tall (below the code maximum) and the applicant proposed a variable riparian buffer up to about 200 feet from the creek top of bank, with a geotechnical setback discussed in the site reports.

When the commission voted on the conditional-use permit, the motion to approve failed on a roll call (Doug Kaufman and Pip Burke voted in favor; Joshua Borgart, Kate Walker, Shelby Lecron and Chad Graham voted no). After that vote the commission made and passed a separate motion to table the CUP so staff and the applicant could return with additional information and responses to public concerns. The tabling motion passed by roll call with the commission voting to continue the matter to the Aug. 12 meeting.

The commission and members of the public identified the following outstanding items the applicant and staff should address before the next hearing: 1) more detailed geotechnical and slope‑stability analysis focused on the Ashley Creek corridor and adjacent properties that have experienced bank failure; 2) clarification and, if appropriate, revisions to the traffic study that consider event traffic (baseball/park events), peak summer circulation and parking patterns on Bluestone and nearby streets; 3) a haul‑route and construction‑management plan that addresses the condition and width of Bluestone Drive, parking, and the anticipated number of construction vehicle trips; 4) confirmation and engineering plans for utility extensions (water/sewer) onto the site; and 5) more information on the proposed permanent cul‑de‑sac and whether and how a future connection point could be provided.

The commission's recommendation on annexation and zoning will be transmitted to Kalispell City Council for its consideration. The planning commission will revisit the conditional‑use permit and additional materials at its next meeting on Aug. 12.","The Kalispell City Planning Commission on July 8 recommended annexation and RA-1 zoning for a proposed 99-unit multifamily project at 1859 South Meadows Drive but did not approve the project's conditional-use permit; the commission voted to table the CUP for additional information and developer follow-up and will reconsider it Aug. 12.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission sends Silver Brook Village PUD amendment for 198 condominiums to public hearing

Kalispell planning commission approves annexation, postpones conditional-use permit for 99-unit North Meadows apartments