Ordinance 1234 - Zoning - Wallace•` M1
ORDINANCE NO. 1234
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY
OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO. 1175), BY ZONING
PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOT 1, INSTENESS SUBDIVISION IN THE NE1/4 OF
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD
COUNTY, MONTANA (PREVIOUSLY ZONED R--1, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL), R-4,
TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY -COUNTY MASTER
PLAN, AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chris and Libby Wallace, the owners of property known
as Lot 1, Insteness Subdivision in the NE1/4 of Section 19, T28N,
R21W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, petitioned the City of
Kalispell that the zoning classification attached to the above
described tract of land be changed to R-4,Two Family Residential,
and
WHEREAS, the property as described above exists as property
surrounded to the north, east and west by City R-1 classification,
and to the south by County R--1 classification, and
WHEREAS, the petition of Chris and Libby Wallace was the
subject of a report compiled by the Flathead Regional Development
Office, #KZC-95-06, dated November 5, 1995, in which the Flathead
Regional Development Office evaluated the petition and recommended
that the property as described above be rezoned R-4, Two Family
Residential, as requested by the petition, and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning
Commission issued a report recommending the property as described
above be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, and
WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the
proposal to zone the property as described above R-4, Two Family
Residential; the City Council makes the following based upon the
criterion set forth in Section 76-3-608, M.C.A., and State, Etc. v.
Board of County Commissioners Etc. 590 P2d 602:
Does the Requested Zone Comply -with the Master Plan?
The subject property is within the jurisdiction of the
Kalispell City -County Master Plan. According to the map
of the.Master Plan, the property is currently designated
as "Urban Residential", with a maximum density of 8
dwelling units per acre. R-4 is considered in compliance
with the Master Plan.
Is the Requested Zone Designed to Lessen Congestion in
the Streets and Facilitate the Adequate _Provision of
Transportation, Water, Sewer, Schools, _Parks and Other
Public Requirements?
Congestion in the street and the provision for adequate
transportation is related to an overburden of the system
by traffic. The zone in this case would not overburden
the system because traffic generation is a function of
the number of dwelling units and uses that are allowed
within a given area; this density of development is
anticipated under the Master Plan. In addition,
Sunnyside Drive is considered a Collector street by the
Master Plan and is expected to handle the increase in
traffic.
A change of zone will allow a greater density of
development to occur. However, the area is being served
or can be served by urban infrastructure including:
municipal street, parks, fire and police departments, and
sewer and water along with other utilities. Any
development of this site will require further City
review, whether in the form of a conditional use permit,
subdivision review, building permits, and/or Site Plan
Committee review. Impacts from specific development
would be addressed at the time of that request. No
significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Secure Safety from Fire Panic
and Other Dangers?
Development within the R-4 zone is subject to certain
standards including maximum building height and the
provision of off-street parking. Further, any
development of the property is subject to review by the
City's Site Plan Review Committee and requires the
issuance of City building, plumbing, mechanical and State
electrical permits. These requirements and review
processes help ensure that development of the property
subsequent to the zone change is done in a safe manner.
In addition, this type of development activity is
anticipated at this location per the Master Plan. The
property is not known to be in any hazardous area. No
significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Change Promote the Health and
General Welfare?
The general purpose of the City's zoning ordinance is to
promote the general health and welfare and does so by
implementing the City's Master Plan. The City's Master
Plan does support the requested zone change. The
requested zone would not intrude on the health or general
welfare of this particular neighborhood and in fact would
promote the health and general welfare of the City by
providing an area for urban density development to occur
where services are available as provided for in the
2
40
1
Master Plan. The surrounding residential uses are
compatible with the proposed zoning classification. No
significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Provide for Adequate Light and
Air?
The parking, landscaping, and clear vision setback
requirements of the 'zoning ordinance, subdivision
regulations, and review by the Site Review Committee
would ensure that light and air are adequately provided.
No significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Change Prevent the Overcrowding
of Land?
Overcrowding of land can occur when development out -paces
or exceeds the environmental or service limitations of
the property. Adequate infrastructure is in place to
accommodate the land uses allowed in the requested zone.
No significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Avoid Undue Concentration of
People?
Concentration of people is a function of land use.
Residential redevelopment would certainly occur on this
site if the zone change is approved. The uses associated
with the R-4 zone are anticipated for the concentration
of people expected and should not create an undue
hardship on the neighborhood. No significant negative
impact is expected.
Does the Requested Zone Give Consideration to the
Particular Suitability of the Property for Particular
Uses?
The subject site is well suited for uses permitted within
the R-4 zone. The property is of adequate size and has
adequate access to facilities for the type of uses
permitted in the proposed zone. No significant negative
impact is expected.
Does the Requested Zoning Give Reasonable Consideration
to the Character of this District?
The property in question is well suited for the type of
development anticipated under the requested zone because
of the topography, access, regional location, and size of
the proposal. No significant negative impact is
expected.
3
408
ti
'•t
Would the Proposed Zon ing Conserve the Value of the
Buildings?
The subject request would not significantly impact
buildings. There are no known uses that would be
affected by this zone. A change to the R-4 zone will not
significantly impact, erode or devalue the neighborhood
beyond the type of uses that are currently allowed to
exist. No significant negative impact is expected.
Will the Requested Zone Change Encourage the Most
Appropriate Use of the Land Throughout the Jurisdiction?
The requested zoning classification is consistent with
the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. The Plan
specifically identifies this area for urban residential
uses. The area consists of residential uses with the
same zone north of Sunnyside Drive. The proposed zone
change would be the most appropriate use of the land. No
significant negative impact is expected.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 27.02.010, of the Official Zoning Map
of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, (Ordinance #1175) is
hereby amended by designating the property known as Lot
1, Insteness Subdivision in the NE1/4 of Section 19,
T28N, R21W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, as R-4, Two
Family Residential.
SECTION II. The balance of Section 27.02.010, Official
zoning Map, City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance not
amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION III. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty
(30) days from and after the date of its final passage
and approval by the Mayor.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL THIS Z DAY OF _► 1996•
bdug-lao D. Rauthe, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debbie Gif o a, C
Clerk of Council
4