04-14-09 Click to Download Minutes

Document Sample
04-14-09 Click to Download Minutes Powered By Docstoc
					            KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION
                    MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
                             APRIL 14, 2009

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL   The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board
CALL                     and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
                         Board members present were: John Hinchey, Rick Hull,
                         C.M. (Butch) Clark, Jim Williamson, Richard Griffin and
                         Troy Mendius. Bryan Schutt was absent. Tom Jentz and
                         Sean   Conrad    represented   the    Kalispell   Planning
                         Department. There were 14 people in the audience.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES      Clark moved and Hull seconded a motion to approve the
                         minutes of the March 10, 2009 meeting of the Kalispell City
                         Planning Board and Zoning Commission.

ROLL CALL                The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

PUBLIC COMMENT           No one wished to speak.

BERTELSEN ANNEXATION     A request from Neil Bertelsen to annex 2.48 acres and zone
                         the land B-2 (General Business) with a Planned Unit
                         Development (PUD) placeholder zoning district over the
                         entire site upon annexation. The 2.48 acre site is located
                         approximately 500 feet west of the intersection of Highway
                         93 South and Cemetery Road. The property is developed
                         with a single-family residence with the address of 135
                         Cemetery Road.

STAFF REPORT KA-09-01    Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell                         Planning
                         Department reviewed staff report KA-09-01.

                         Conrad reviewed the location of the property along Cemetery
                         Road near the Town Pump Gas Station, and stated the owner
                         is requesting annexation into the city with the initial zoning
                         of B-2/PUD (General Business/Planned Unit Development).
                         Conrad reviewed the surrounding uses which include
                         residential and commercial.

                         Conrad continued the Kalispell Growth Policy designates this
                         site as commercial which calls for zoning that would allow a
                         combination of commercial/office/light industrial and
                         residential uses. This use is consistent with the commercial
                         land use designation on the growth policy map. The PUD
                         overlay is proposed to coordinate the design with the existing
                         development both to the north and west of the site,
                         incorporate good access design at this critical intersection,
                         making sure future development does not negatively impact
                         the airport to the north, and that any development at this
                         location is attractive because of its prominent location at the
                         entrance corridor to the city.

                         Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and


                                                             Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                   Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                                Page 1 of 7
                        Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-09-01 as findings
                        of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
                        zoning for the properties upon annexation be B-2/PUD
                        (General Business/Planned Unit Development).

BOARD QUESTIONS         Griffin asked what liability would the city assume through
                        annexation of Welf Lane and Conrad said the annexation
                        boundary would be to the center of Welf Lane and the Public
                        Works Department would be required to maintain at least
                        that portion of the lane. Conrad added in talking with the
                        Public Works Director, in areas where the city has ½ of the
                        road and the county has the other ½ they work out a plan on
                        who will do the plowing and maintenance on that road. He
                        noted Cemetery Road is currently under a similar plan.
                        Griffin asked when the city will address curb, gutters, and
                        sidewalks for this property and Conrad said those
                        discussions will be held when a development proposal is
                        submitted to the city.

                        Hull asked if the landowner could remove the PUD overlay
                        zoning district in the future and Conrad said yes but that
                        would have to come before the board and city council for
                        approval.

APPLICANT/CONSULTANTS   Debbie Shoemaker, Marquardt/Marquardt Surveying said
                        she is representing the client and is available for questions.
                        Hull asked what general plans are being considered for this
                        property and Shoemaker said no plans to develop the
                        property are currently in the works. The property owner is
                        preparing the property for his children and possibly for sale
                        in the future. Hull asked why the PUD and Shoemaker said
                        the planning staff recommended that a PUD placeholder be
                        put in place so then if someone purchases the property they
                        would have to come back to the board and council for a
                        review of their proposal.

PUBLIC HEARING          No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.

MOTION – ZONE CHANGE    Clark moved and Hull seconded a motion to adopt staff
                        report #KA-09-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                        Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for the properties
                        upon annexation be B-2/PUD (General Business/Planned
                        Unit Development).

BOARD DISCUSSION        Clark said this property and zoning fits into the current
                        commercial designations/development in that area.

                        Hinchey said he agrees and added he likes the PUD because
                        it provides for a review of the future development of the
                        property.

ROLL CALL               The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.



                                                             Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                   Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                                Page 2 of 7
MAW CONDITIONAL USE      A request from Steven Maw for a conditional use permit to
PERMIT                   construct a 4-plex on a 12,500 square foot lot zoned RA-1
                         (Low Density Residential Apartment). The property is
                         located on the south side of Vista Loop in the Three Mile
                         Views subdivision, located on Three Mile Drive.

STAFF REPORT KCU-09-05   Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell                         Planning
                         Department reviewed staff report KCU-09-05.

                         Conrad reviewed the location of the property and provided a
                         brief history of the subdivision that created this lot. Conrad
                         reviewed the site plan. He noted one issue is the access onto
                         Vista Loop. Public Works had some concerns with the access
                         point because there is already a driveway serving a single
                         family residence immediately north of the site, a driveway
                         serving the future townhouse units immediately to the west
                         and a 20 foot driveway that would serve this 4-plex for a total
                         of 4 driveways in a fairly short distance. Public Works met
                         with the developer and it was agreed that street trees would
                         be planted on either side of the driveway as well as sod laid
                         to help delineate the driveway from the rest of the street.

                         Conrad provided a photo of another similar 4-plex that this
                         developer built located on East California Street. He noted
                         the building would be a 2-story building however additional
                         architectural features would be required so the 4-plex would
                         blend in with the existing houses in the neighborhood.
                         Conrad described the architectural embellishments for the
                         board and indicated if the CUP is approved the Architectural
                         Review Committee would review the design before
                         construction.

                         Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and
                         Zoning Commission adopt staff report KCU-09-05 as findings
                         of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
                         Conditional Use Permit be approved subject to the 15
                         conditions listed in the staff report.

BOARD DISCUSSION         Hinchey asked if No Name Street behind this development
                         was an actual roadway and Conrad said it is a driveway
                         serving houses that are still in the county.

                         Williamson asked if the bike rack noted in Condition #9 is
                         designed to be in addition to the normally required parking
                         or is the bike rack intended to allow them to reduce the
                         parking. Conrad said under the parking regulations the
                         developer would be allowed to reduce parking by 5% with
                         the addition of the bike rack however, that would only
                         equate to about 1 less parking space.

APPLICANT/TECHNICAL      Steven Maw, building contractor and applicant of the
SUPPORT                  conditional use permit stated he built another 4-plex similar
                         to the one proposed and the reason he chose this lot is the
                         size of the lot that would enable him to build the 4-plex

                                                             Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                   Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                                Page 3 of 7
                 back away from the street where the view would not be
                 obscured. The city’s recommendation of trees along the
                 driveway would also screen the building from view. There
                 will be townhouses or duplexes also running east to west
                 along Three Mile Drive and additional multi-family lots
                 would be allowed with a conditional use permit. If this
                 project is approved the next phase would be to acquire a
                 building permit and go through architectural review and he
                 added he is not opposed to anything that the Architectural
                 Review Committee would require.

                 Hull asked how tall will the building be and Maw said it will
                 not exceed 30 feet and have a 5/12 pitch roof.

                 Clark said it appears that the building is moved far enough
                 east to not block the view to the south and Maw said that
                 would be correct. Maw added a duplex, if located on this lot
                 instead, would be orientated differently than what is
                 proposed and could very well block the view to the south to
                 some extent.

                 Williamson asked for a review of the layout of the units and
                 Maw provided that information. Williamson agreed
                 additional architectural embellishments should be required
                 along with additional windows and Maw said that could be
                 done.

                 Griffin said a letter submitted indicated that this area was
                 intended to be open space and Conrad said no the lots were
                 ever designated as parkland or open space in the Three Mile
                 Views subdivision. Jentz reviewed the location of parkland
                 that would serve this subdivision for the board.

                 Clark asked if the city would consider access onto Three
                 Mile Drive and Jentz said when the entire subdivision was
                 developed the Public Works Department and MDT agreed no
                 access would be approved onto Three Mile Drive only the
                 internal street.

                 Griffin noted No Name Road accesses onto Three Mile Drive
                 and Jentz said No Name Road serves as the driveway for 4
                 lots that are still in the county and has been there more
                 than 25 years. He added at one time this area was at the
                 edge of the city and now the city extends 1-1/2 miles
                 beyond this point.

PUBLIC HEARING   Greg Husby, 59 Sunset Court, Kalispell stated he lives 3
                 doors down from this proposal. Husby said when he was
                 first told that townhouses would be built down the street
                 they were not very happy and now with a 4-plex that seems
                 a bit much, especially considering the location. It is at the
                 corner of a very narrow street and there are a lot of kids in
                 the neighborhood. He added this 4-plex will also have a
                 negative effect on the value of his property.

                                                    Kalispell City Planning Board
                                          Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                       Page 4 of 7
Ray Connelly, 51 Sunset Court, stated he is involved
because his house is directly north of the proposed 4-plex.
Connelly said behind his house is a row of trees that
already obscures his view of the mountains and so if the 4-
plex is built instead of a duplex or townhouse they will lose
any views they have.

Connelly said they received a letter from the city that a 4-
plex was to be built that would be out of character with
their single-family community. He indicated the zoning had
already been changed to permit the construction of
duplexes or townhomes and they feel any additional
movement in this direction would be pushing the envelope
and spoiling the beauty and quality of their neighborhood.
He said they purchased their home in August of 2008 and
the neighborhood has been a safe and quiet family
neighborhood. Children play freely and the parking needs of
the residents and visiting friends on these narrow streets
has been sufficiently met without becoming overly crowded.

Connelly said this proposed zoning amendment would not
only threaten the safety of their family neighborhood and
overcrowd the narrow streets but they are concerned about
the negative effect the proposal will have on their property
values if located next to what might become apartment row.
He added once approval is granted in this case there will be
nothing preventing the construction of more and more
similar units that would encompass the entire length of the
street. He asked will they be able to allow their children to
play freely in their front yards and walk down the street.
Would the lifestyles of the apartment residents and their
visiting friends endanger the sense of security they need
and rightfully deserve. Additionally, he continued, crime
would increase which would place a greater burden on the
city’s law enforcement, legal system and county assistance
programs.

Connelly said there seems to be more than adequate 4-plex
units to meet the needs of Kalispell in other areas and he
believes any new housing should not drastically differ and
detract from already established neighborhoods and affect
negatively the lives of its residents. They sincerely hope
that the board will consider the needs of this neighborhood
and rule favorably on behalf of the community.

Connelly submitted a letter from Irene Edwards, 63 Sunset
Court; and Richard Sherrill, 115 Vista Loop to the board for
their consideration. Copies are attached to the minutes.

Skyler Hellbusch, 55 Sunset Court stated this is just too
tight of an area to bring in that much traffic. He could see
townhouses but not apartment buildings unless the access
was off of Three Mile Drive.

                                   Kalispell City Planning Board
                         Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                      Page 5 of 7
                   Todd Morstein, 45 Vista Loop stated this 4-plex will
                   depreciate the property values throughout the subdivision
                   and the streets are too narrow. This is a family subdivision
                   with lots of kids with adding at least 8 cars into the
                   neighborhood the probability of children getting hurt is
                   increased.

                   Husby agreed there will be safety issues with children and
                   vehicles and he thinks standard townhouses would look
                   better.

                   Connelly said he wouldn’t mind a townhouse either, in fact
                   that is what they expected. He repeated he has major
                   concerns with children’s safety and security in their
                   neighborhood.

BOARD DISCUSSION   None.

MOTION             Clark moved and Williamson seconded a motion to adopt
                   staff report #KCU-09-05 as findings of fact and recommend
                   to the Kalispell City Council that the Conditional Use Permit
                   be approved subject to the 15 conditions listed in the staff
                   report.

BOARD DISCUSSION   Clark said he thought a duplex or townhouses could be
                   built west/east and possibly block more of the view than
                   this proposal; however a duplex or townhouse would
                   produce less traffic than the 4-plex.

                   Hinchey said the board should look at the 4-plex on its
                   merits and he feels it is inappropriate for this neighborhood.
                   Townhouses are a part of a residential community and an
                   apartment building is not and the street is too narrow.
                   Hinchey said the design doesn’t fit into the character of the
                   neighborhood of single family homes and a parking lot in
                   the front yard is definitely out of character with the adjacent
                   single family homes. Clark agreed.

                   Griffin said he agrees with Hinchey also. Griffin noted he is
                   not concerned about the rental aspect because a duplex
                   could still turn out to be a rental property however multi-
                   family will change the nature of the neighborhood.

                   Hinchey said there is a reason a duplex is a permitted use
                   and a 4-plex needs conditional approval because this
                   proposal doesn’t meet the conditions.

ROLL CALL          The motion to approve the conditional use permit failed
                   unanimously on a roll call vote.

BOARD DISCUSSION   Hinchey suggested the board amend the findings to support
                   denial of the conditional use permit.


                                                       Kalispell City Planning Board
                                             Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                          Page 6 of 7
                           The board feels a 4-plex is inappropriate in this case
                           because it would change the nature and character of the
                           neighborhood. The board also cited their concerns with the
                           additional traffic and agreed either a duplex, single family
                           home, or 2 unit townhouse on these lots would be a better
                           fit.

                           The board agreed with those findings.

MOTION                     Clark moved and Griffin seconded a motion to adopt the
                           amended findings of fact and deny the conditional use
                           permit.

ROLL CALL                  The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

OLD BUSINESS:              None.

NEW BUSINESS:              None.

ADJOURNMENT                The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:00 p.m.

WORK SESSION               A work session was held following the regular meeting to
                           discuss the following:

                           Zoning Ordinance Update – Zoning Districts (Uses and
                           Development Standards) and PUD’s.

NEXT MEETING               The next work session of the Kalispell City Planning Board
                           and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, April
                           28, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council
                           Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell.

                           The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning
                           Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday,
                           May 12, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council
                           Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell.



/s/Bryan H. Schutt/for                        /s/Michelle Anderson
John Hinchey                                  Michelle Anderson
Vice President                                Recording Secretary

APPROVED as submitted: 05/12/09




                                                              Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                    Minutes of the meeting of April 14, 2009
                                                                                 Page 7 of 7
            C
                         ‘




:                    .
(                            &f-P                       L


(                                .‘-—--        —.




                             & .
                 /r/                                                     .- . .
                             /                              V   7
        -
                .4s,                      ....,-



                                          .1        .   ..‘Y’




                  uet        ..e..
-_____
                                                    7
                                                    b
                                                                    ..      .     ..
L____Zzz


t,




    —


        (   —————--—-—
                                   IRENE EDWARDS
                                  63 SUNSET COURT
                                 KALISPELL, MT. 59901




April 14, 2009



To Whom It May Concern;

I am not in favor of granting a zone change on the lot on Vista Loop. I would
oppose a multi-housing project. The original plan called for “park land”. I do not
understand what laws would allow this to be changed and multi housing to be
allowed. I think that at this time it is zoned for single family housing and also for
duplexes. I am fine with this.

I would also oppose the zone change, due to the current street size. Al! of the
homeowners in the area recognize that the streets are too narrow for the single
family housing that now occupies the neighborhood. I understand that the
proposal would include parking for the 4-plex, but the congestion on the streets
that would be involved is already too much. This additional street traffic would
have a negative impact on the children and pets that currently reside in the area.




             £2a4o
Irene Edwards

Business Manager, Smith Valley School

				
DOCUMENT INFO