Loading...
E5. Ord. 1883, R-4 Intent Second ReadingCITY OF KALISPELL Development Services Department 201 ls' Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: PJ Sorensen, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance 1883 — R-4 Intent Zoning Text Amendment Second Reading MEETING DATE: June 20, 2022 BACKGROUND: The City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035 land use map includes a designation for Suburban Residential, which includes areas that are seeing annexation and development for residential housing. The zoning ordinance, in each chapter relating to zoning districts, includes a section on the intent of the zone along with the growth policy designations where that zoning district would typically be found. Suburban Residential is included in the intent of the R- 1, R-2, and R-3 residential zones. Those zones are predominantly single-family zones with limitations on townhomes. With greater demands for density with new housing projects given current market conditions for construction and housing, there has been a greater need for higher density projects, many of which have included townhomes, that have been reflected in Planned Unit Development ("PUD") overlays on R-3 zones. Those PUDs effectively create R-4 zones for most purposes. Therefore, staff presented a proposed zoning text amendment which would allow the R-4 zoning district to be implemented in the Suburban Residential growth policy areas. Section 27.07.010 would be amended to read: "This district is comprised of primarily single-family and duplex dwellings. Development within the district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential and urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map." The Kalispell City Council, at their meeting on June 6, 2022, approved the first reading of Ordinance 1883 relating to the zoning text amendment unanimously. RECOMMENDATION: TEXT AMENDMENT: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve the second reading of Ordinance 1883, an ordinance to amend Section 27.07.010 of the City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance 1677, by including suburban residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time. ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1883 May 10, 2022, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes Staff Report Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1883 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 1677), BY INCLUDING SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL AS SUPPORTING R-4 (RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICTS AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has submitted a written request to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission by the Kalispell Planning Department as a recommended text amendment by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts after making such evaluation under 27.29.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the KPD Report and the transmittal from the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings made in Report #KZTA-22-01 by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1677, is hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A". SECTION 2. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1677 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022. ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk Mark Johnson Mayor EXHIBIT A Section 27.07.010 would be amended as follows: "This district is comprised of primarily single-family and duplex dwellings. Development within the district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential and urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map." KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MAY 10, 2022 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning CALL Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Board members present were Chad Graham, Doug Kauffman, Rory Young, Joshua Borgardt, Kurt Vomfell, Pip Burke, and Kevin Aurich. PJ Sorensen and Jarod Nygren represented the Kalispell Planning Department. Keith Haskins represented the Public Works Department. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Graham asked if there were any nominations for President. Kauffman (PRESIDENT) nominated Graham and Vomfell seconded the nomination. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Graham asked if there were any nominations for Vice -President. (VICE-PRESIDENT) Vomfell nominated Kauffman and Young seconded the nomination. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vomfell moved and Kauffman seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the April 12, 2022, meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. HEAR THE PUBLIC None. MORNING STAR COMMUNITY — The planning board will receive public comments regarding the MEPA REQUIRED PUBLIC environmental review record for the proposed sewer and water project COMMENTS that will provide city service to the Morning Star Court Community, as required by the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). Morning Star Court is a cooperatively owned affordable -housing mobile home community, consisting of 41 residential units, located at 1717 South Woodland Drive, Kalispell, MT. The community is proposing to abandon their aged onsite water and wastewater infrastructure and connect to adjacent City of Kalispell services. At the public hearing the proposed project will be explained, including the purpose and proposed area of the project, activities, budget, possible sources of funding, environmental review findings and any costs that may result for local citizens as a result of the project. All interested persons will be given the opportunity to ask questions and express opinions regarding the proposed project and any environmental impacts. Comments may be given verbally at the meeting or submitted in writing prior to May 10, 2022, at 5 p.m. Anyone wanting to review the environmental review record and project impacts or submit questions and comments should contact Jonathan Gass at WGM Group, (406) 728-4611. Copies of the draft environmental record is available at Kalispell City Hall Development Services Department, 201 1st Avenue East, Kalispell, MT 59901 and will also be available at the public meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Jon Gass w/ WGM Group, representative for Morning Star Community, resented a brief power point for the board and public about the project Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page I 1 and the grants they are applying for. KA-22-04 — MORNING STAR A request from Morning Star Community, Inc. for annexation and initial COMMUNITY ANNEXATION zoning of R-4 (Residential) for property located at 1717 South Woodland Drive containing 5.88 acres. The proposal would annex an existing mobile home park to allow for the units to connect to city sanitary sewer, which is located within the South Woodland Drive right- of-way. The property to be annexed and zoned can be described as Lots 23, 24, and the North Half of Lot 9 of Block 1 of Greenacres, according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Flathead County, Montana. STAFF REPORT PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Report #KA-22-04. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be city R-4 (Residential). BOARD DISCUSSION Young asked about the road connections to the property on the south. PUBLIC COMMENT None. MOTION Vomfell moved and Borgardt seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be city R-4 (Residential). BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. KA-22-02 & KPUD-22-01 - FARM Files #KA-22-02 and KPUD-22-01 — A request from Kelcey and DISTRICT Tawnya Bingham for annexation and initial zoning with a Commercial Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 37.6 acres of land. The development, called the Farm District, would be a mixed -use development with a focus on an indoor youth athletic and arts facility along with commercial and residential uses. The property is located at the northwest corner of Highway 93 North and Church Drive and can be described as a tract of land situated, lying and being in the east half of the southeast quarter of Section 12, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M, Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows to wit: Lot 2 of Patterson Tracts, as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 17246 (both records of Flathead County, Montana) and containing 37.635 acres, subject to and together with a 60 foot county road known as Church Drive, subject to and together with all appurtenant easements of record. STAFF REPORT PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Report # KA-22-02 and KPUD-22-01. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page 12 Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be B-2 (General Business), with a PUD overlay. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Farm District PUD be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Discussion regarding pulling building permits prior to final plat, condition 918 access off Church Dr, the geotechnical report requirement in condition 922 and site plans. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Mulcahy — Land Use Planner, Sands Surveying, 2 Village Loop — representative for the applicant. Let the board know they are pleased with the conditions in the staff report. MOTION — KA-22-02 Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report # KA-22-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be B-2 (General Business), with a PUD overlay. BOARD DISCUSSION Vomfell likes the project and feels it's very innovative. Graham noted he likes this visionary project and likes to see something coming though for youth. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — KPUD-22-01 Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22- 01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Farm District PUD be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. KPUD-22-02 — NOLLER TRUCK & A request from JCA Management, LLC, for a Commercial Planned Unit RV Development ("PUD") overlay on approximately 9.72 acres of land. The property is currently zoned B-2 with a placeholder PUD overlay, which requires a full PUD submittal prior to development. The proposal includes locating a truck and RV Center on the property. The property is located at 3178 Highway 93 South near the intersection of Highway 93 and the Bypass. It can be described as Assessor's Tract 3C, a tract of land situated, lying and being in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, shown as Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey 21952 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, Flathead County, Montana. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page13 STAFF REPORT PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Reports #KPUD-22-02. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Noller Truck and RV Center be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Discussion regarding the required developer's agreement in condition 92, sewer main extension requirements in condition 912 and the entrance on Hwy 93 and how it will be affected by the new development and MDT's involvement. PUBLIC COMMENT Lonnie Martin — Project Manager, CFS Engineers, Topeka, KS — representative for applicant — offered to answer any questions the board may have. Andy Matthews — 1000 Basecamp Dr — owner of Montana Basecamp RV Park — concerned with how this development will affect his RV Park. MOTION Vomfell moved and Kauffman seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22- 02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Noller Truck and RV Center be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Discussion regarding the land use and zoning in the area. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD MEMBER SEATED Young recused himself from the Eagle Valley Ranch Addition KA-22-03, KGPA-22-01 & KZC-22- A request from Spartan Holdings for a zone change, growth policy map 03 — EAGLE VALLEY RANCH amendment and annexation and initial zoning of property, to be known ADDITION as Eagle Valley Ranch Addition on 6.8 acres of land at 3201 U.S. 93 North. The developer of Eagle Valley Ranch PUD has acquired land adjacent their development (Home Outfitters) and neighboring property currently within the County that is being requested to be included in the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The application includes a zone change of the existing Home Outfitters building which is City R-2 to the Eagle Valley Rand PUD, and annexation and initial zoning of surrounding County property from County SAG-10 to the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The request would also include a growth policy map amendment from suburban residential to urban mixed use on those properties annexing into the city, allowing for neighborhood commercial uses, similar to the commercial properties within the current Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The goal of the change is similar to that of the original PUD which is to provide a diverse neighborhood close to existing services and commercial development on the north side of Kalispell and allows for inclusion of properties that are currently segregated from the development. The proposed development is generally situated along Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page 14 Highway 93 south of Ponderosa Residential Subdivision, east of Northern Pines Golf Course and north of the Montana National Guard facilities in the West '/2 of Section 19, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. A more particular legal description can be obtained at the Kalispell Planning office. BOARD DISCUSSION Discussion regarding the development of the property where the existing building sits and what requirements there might be if the building were to be torn down and the signal light that will be installed by MDT at Rose Crossing. PUBLIC COMMENT None. MOTION — KGPA-22-01 Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KGPA-22- 01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map be amended from Suburban Residential to Urban Mixed Use. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — KA-22-03 Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be City RA-2 (Residential Apartment) with the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD zoning overlay and conditions herein. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION — KZC-22-03 Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KZC-22-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be rezoned from City R-2 to City RA-2 with the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD zoning overlay and conditions herein. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD MEMBER RESEATED Young re -seated. KZTA-22-01— R-4 INTENT A request from the City of Kalispell for a zoning text amendment amending Section 27.07.010 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The amendment would change the intent of the R-4 (Residential) zoning district to include areas designated as suburban residential in addition to urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. STAFF REPORT PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Report #KZTA-22-01. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page 15 Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KZTA-22-01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as provided herein. BOARD DISCUSSION Discussion regarding how this will affect future land growth, the difference between R-3 and R-4, and allowable density with this change. PUBLIC COMMENT None. MOTION Vomfell moved and Young seconded a motion that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report # KZTA-22- 01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as provided herein. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS Nygren updated the board on the recent city council meeting. NEW BUSINESS Nygren updated the board on the June planning board meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:41pm. Chad Graham President APPROVED as submitted/amended: Kari Barnhart Recording Secretary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022 Page 16 R-4 (RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT INTENT ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF REPORT #KZTA-22-01 KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAY 4, 2022 This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a text amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to amend Section 27.07.010 relating to the intent of the R-4 (Residential) zone. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Planning Board for May 10, 2022, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035 land use map includes a designation for Suburban Residential, which includes areas that are seeing annexation and development for residential housing. The zoning ordinance, in each chapter relating to zoning districts, includes a section on the intent of the zone along with the growth policy designations where that zoning district would typically be found. Suburban Residential is included in the intent of the R-1, R-2, and R-3 residential zones. Those zones are predominantly single-family zones with limitations on townhomes. With greater demands for density with new housing projects given current market conditions for construction and housing, there has been a greater need for higher density projects, many of which have included townhomes, that have been reflected in Planned Unit Development ("PUD") overlays on R-3 zones. Those PUDs effectively create R-4 zones for most purposes. A: Applicant: City of Kalispell 201 First Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any R-4 zoned property within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Kalispell will be affected by the proposed changes as well as areas designated as Suburban Residential in the City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035. C. Proposed Amendment: Section 27.07.010 would be amended to read: "This district is comprised of primarily single-family and duplex dwellings. Development within the district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential and urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map." Page 1 of 4 D. Staff Discussion: As shown in the above map in the light yellow, the suburban residential land use designation is used throughout a significant portion of areas currently outside the city limits, but within both the annexation boundary and the growth policy area. The Sections 27.04.010, 27.05.010, and 27.06.010 tie the R-1. R-2, and R-3 zones to that land use designation. Those zones are primarily single-family zones. There is very little R-1 zoning in the city, which are half -acre minimum lot sizes and allows agricultural use. The R-2 and R-3 allow for 10,000 square foot and 6000 square foot minimum lot sizes respectively, and both allow for townhomes with a conditional use permit. The R-4 is very similar to the R-3, with all the same lot size and development standards. It was intentionally put together so that the only real difference would be allowing duplexes and two - unit townhome configurations as a permitted use. That difference in use then allows two units on a standard 6000 square foot lot. It is important to note that is different than overall density, which would need to take streets, parks, and open space into account and is a separate discussion. Since overall density in the different land use designations is outlined in the growth policy, the past number of years have seen development patterns which have included R-3 zoning with PUDs which have allowed for shifts of density within the boundaries of a project that remain within the overall allowable density. For example, there are projects that have utilized townhome designs at 3000 square feet per unit, but have maintained parks and open space that keep the overall density within the growth policy limits. That type of development is specifically Page 2 of 4 provided for in the PUD chapter of the zoning ordinance. The end result is essentially creating an R-4 development that is subject to a PUD level review. As it has become common to approve these projects more or less subject to existing design criteria and conditions that would otherwise attach as part of a subdivision or other review, the extra time and expense of a heightened review process does not seem to add a significant benefit to the city, the developer or the public that outweighs the added cost. Staff believes that, by allowing the R-4 zone in suburban residential growth policy areas and relying on city codes, regulations, policies and design criteria, the same result can be accomplished through a more streamlined process. It is also important to note that any property within the suburban residential designation would not automatically be entitled to an R-4 zone, but would need to go through a public hearing process to analyze the most appropriate zoning designation as well as review any specific subdivision or other proposal under the applicable standards. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-303, M.C.A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-304, M.C.A. 1. Is the zoning regulation made in accordance with the r�policy? The proposal is consistent with the growth policy in several respects. First, Chapter 3, Community Growth and Design, Recommendation 3 of the Growth Policy, states that the City should "continually monitor, update, and streamline development codes to keep abreast of changing trends and technologies, to better coordinate the development review process, and to avoid unnecessary, costly delays in processing applications." This proposal, as discussed above, is an effort to do precisely that. Chapter 4A, Land Use — Housing, Goal 1 of the Growth Policy also recognizes the need to "provide an adequate supply and mix of housing that meets the needs of present and future residents in terms of cost, type, design, and location." Furthermore, Chapter 4A, Land Use — Housing, Policy 10 of the Growth Policy, in defining low density suburban residential neighborhoods, includes single-family homes on 5000 square foot lots, zero lot line/patio homes, and townhomes as types of housing that are appropriate in the suburban residential designation. The R-4 zoning district fits within that character of development. 2. Does the zoning regulation consider the effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems? The proposed amendment would not have a direct effect on the transportation systems themselves, although the potential higher densities could have an effect. Under city codes, individual projects would be reviewed for their impact on those systems, typically with a traffic impact study that would provide recommended mitigation. Page 3 of 4 3. Is the zoning regulation designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers? Any development will continue to be required to meet building, fire, and health codes. 4. Is the zoning regulation designed to promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare? The general health, safety, and welfare of the public will be protected by city regulations which would apply to the development of any of the properties affected. 5. Does the zoning regulation consider the reasonable provision of adequate light and air? The development standards within the zoning ordinance help provide for appropriate interaction between developed properties, including light and air. 6. Is the zoning regulation designed to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water; sewerage,, schools, parks, and other public requirements? The zoning ordinance creates a more predictable, orderly, and consistent development pattern. That pattern allows for a more efficient allocation of public resources and better provision of public services. 7. Does the zoning regulation consider the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses? The amendment reflects the residential character of the districts affected and maintains the general residential nature of the suburban residential growth policy areas. 8. Does the zoning regulation consider conserving the value of buildings? Building values are conserved by providing reasonable standards within zoning districts and through development standards under city regulations including building and fire codes. 9. Does the zoning regulation encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality and promote compatible urbangrowth? The amendment helps create consistency throughout comparable zones, which promotes compatible urban growth. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-22-01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as provided herein. Page 4 of 4