Whitefish stormwater plan costly, complex

Public can comment at Monday meeting

A long-awaited stormwater master plan for Whitefish shows the need for $2 million in capital improvements over the next five years and suggests that development be limited in some drainage-sensitive areas.

It also recommends the city spend $97,000 annually to maintain the stormwater system. That's about five times the amount currently spent each year on maintenance.

Finding the money for both stormwater improvements and maintenance will be the biggest obstacles in putting the plan in place, city officials conceded Monday during a special City Council meeting.

Craig Caprara, project manager for Missoula-based HDR Engineering, stepped the council through the massive plan drafted by HDR and Anderson-Montgomery Consulting Engineers.

Last July, Whitefish put a hold on new development in sensitive drainage areas until a stormwater plan could be adopted. While the city won't be able to pay for improvements all at once, the document will nevertheless become a tool the city can use to set policy as it considers development in environmentally sensitive areas.

The public gets a chance to weigh in on the proposal at a meeting from 7 to 8:30 p.m. Monday at Whitefish City Hall. Following a short presentation by HDR and the city public-works staff, those attending will be able to ask questions about the report.

Copies of the report can be perused at the Whitefish Library or City Hall.

Engineers studied the five biggest trouble spots for Whitefish drainage - State Park Road, Monegan/Voerman Road area, Karrow Avenue, the Armory Park area and northeast Whitefish. Detailed aerial mapping, the first of its kind developed for the city of Whitefish, helped establish areas of critical concern, Caprara said.

Drainage along State Park Road next to the golf course will be the most expensive undertaking, the report indicated. It pegs a storm drain and outfall system on that road at $1.24 million and schedules the work for 2009.

State Park Road work probably needs to be done before then, Public Works Director John Wilson said, but he doesn't know where the money will come from.

"The street fund is our only source" for stormwater projects, Wilson said. "I'm not sure we can chip-seal all [the streets] we need to this year, so I don't know how we can pay for six-figure improvements."

Karrow Avenue, a westside corridor where future growth could occur, has problems with high groundwater and flat topography. Wetlands on the south end of Karrow also have to be considered, Caprara said, along with the runoff that currently drains through people's back yards.

The study recommends density restrictions in the northeast Whitefish area where drainage is complicated by high groundwater, dense soil and wetlands.

Across-the-board recommendations include:

-Limits on the amount of fill allowed in high groundwater areas.

-Limits on clearing existing trees in sensitive drainage areas.

-Stricter limits for construction on steep slopes.

-Options for protecting natural drainage channels. One idea would exclude natural drainage channels from areas designated to meet open-space requirements. Another option would subtract the natural drainage channel from the gross area used for density calculations.

-Low-impact development designs in steep and high groundwater areas to limit the amount of impervious surface area.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com