Loading...
07-10-07KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JULY 10, 2007 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Bryan Schutt, Robyn Balcom, Kari Gabriel, Rick Hull, John Hinchey, Jim Williamson and C.M. (Butch) Clark. Sean Conrad & Nicole Johnson represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 35 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to approve the minutes of June 12, 2007. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC None. WILLOW CREEK, GROWTH A request from Wayne Turner for a growth policy amendment POLICY AMENDMENT, from industrial to suburban residential, annexation and ANNEXATION AND INITIAL initial zoning classification of R-3, Urban Single Family ZONING, PLANNED UNIT Residential, on an approximately 24.5 acre portion of a 164.5 DEVELOPOMENT AND acre project site. In addition, the developer is requesting a PRELIMINARY PLAT Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay zoning district on a 140f acre portion of the 164.5 acre project. site. The developers have also requested approval of Willow Creek, a preliminary plat to create 322 single family lots, 74 townhouse lots and 6 lots which. would accommodate multi- family buildings. A total of 17 multi -family buildings are proposed over the 6 multi -family lots and would allow up to 184 condominium units. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned R-1, Suburban Residential, and I-2, Heavy Industrial. The property is located on the north side of Foys Lake Road at the intersection of Foys Lake Road and Valley View Drive. STAFF REPORTS KGPA-07- Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department 03, KA-07-13, KPUD-07-01 presented Staff Reports KGPA-07-03, KA-07-13, KPUD-07-01 & KPP-07-02 8s KPP-07-02 for the Board. Conrad provided a brief history of the Willow Creek project. Conrad noted that before the planning board tonight is a somewhat revised PUD proposal as well as a new growth policy amendment and initial zoning proposal. The board looked at the 140 acre site primarily west of the bypass during their April and May meetings. Before the board tonight is land that includes the bypass and east of the bypass which contains 24 acres. They are requesting that this property be changed from industrial to suburban residential. Annexation & initial zoning of R-3 is also being requested for this 24 acre site. In addition to the growth Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 1 of 27 0 policy amendment and the R-3 zoning the developer is proposing a revised PUD for the 140 acre site, as well as a preliminary plat. The revised preliminary plat has reduced the number of dwelling units from 710 to 580. In addition the developer has revised the PUD and preliminary plat to move all units out .of the 200 foot setback of Ashley Creek, and have reduced the number of condominium/multi-family units. Conrad said for the board's consideration if the PUD were approved, the developer would be provided increased density on this property and would be allowed to vary the lot sizes and the uses from the traditional R-3 zoning district. What the city would get in return is open space along Ashley Creek, developed parklands within the subdivision as well as a pedestrian/bike path that extends throughout the project site and along Foys Lake Road. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KGPA-07-3 and recommend that the growth policy land use designation for the 24± acre site be Suburban Residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-07-13 and recommend that initial zoning of the 24± acre site be R-3 as shown on the zoning district map for the property. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-07-1 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD for Willow Creek be approved subject to the 18 conditions listed in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-07-2 as findings. of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Willow Creek subdivision, phase 1-6, be approved subject to the 36 conditions listed in the staff report. Conrad noted they have heard a lot of concerns regarding storm water associated with this project site, especially by the residents south of Foys Lake Road. Based on additional input from the Public Works Department they have requested an amendment to condition #26 that would read: "That the storm water report must include an impact analysis on the down stream surface water drainage systems. The analysis must start from the detention discharge location and finish at Ashley Creek; the analysis must review the existing drainage and existing drainage tributary capacity, and the impact to the drainage tributary on adjacent properties from the addition of the new volume Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 2 of 27 of surface water generated from the proposed developed subdivision." Conrad said an additional condition that the board should consider adding is to place a note on the final plat that states: "Property owners shall waive their right to protest the creation of a Special Improvement District for road upgrades in the area to city standards which are impacted by this subdivision." Conrad noted after the packets were sent out the planning office received 3 letters which were distributed to the board tonight. One letter is in favor and sites the fact that they feel that the subdivision has given much thought to the design and location of the subdivision and they appreciate that the more dense areas are to the east and as you move west towards Stoneridge the lots get larger; the large amount of parkland proposed; and the fact that the higher density, areas are in close proximity to downtown Kalispell. The 2 letters in opposition site density of the overall project as well as traffic associated with the density; the impacts this subdivision might have on Peterson School and the district; and that the high density housing should be located in an area where there are amenities that people can walk to, such as grocery stores. Conrad suggested that the board consider each element of this proposal with a separate motion and action. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt said the board approved the growth policy amendment at the May 8th meeting and Conrad said yes for a portion of the site. The growth policy amendment being considered tonight is just for the 24 acres that includes the bypass and land east of the bypass. The same istrue for the R-3 zoning. Hull said the amendment to the condition that addresses storm water mentions Ashley Creek and he asked if the amendment is designed to take care of the problems with the small creek that runs to the south. Conrad said yes Public Works wants to look at how storm water would be conveyed from an area of the subdivision that crosses under Foys Lake Road and into the small creek that eventually goes into Ashley Creek. Balcom asked why the extra land was included for a growth policy amendment and annexation at this time. Conrad didn't know the reason and deferred that question to the applicant or his consultant. Clark said it appears that the lots along Foys Lake Road are smaller than originally planned. Conrad said they did reduce Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 3 of 27 0 �J the lots along Foys Lake Road and they now range from 51- 55 feet wide. The previous plan showed lots that narrow but other lots were wider. As a result of exchanging condominium lots for single family lots some of the lots were reconfigured and designed narrower. Clark noted they appeared to be. apartment complexes and Conrad added they also reduced the 20-plex condominium units to 16-plex. Clark said the park on the west side appears to have shrunk. Conrad noted a lot was added in that vicinity which did in fact reduce the size of that particular park. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Wayne Freeman, CTA, representing the applicant noted that STAFF the reason they were coming forward with the additional growth policy amendment and annexation was at the request of the city. Since the property was owned in one legal description they decided they would bring in the last piece even though there is no intention to develop on that additional property. Freeman said the previous design had a number of units that were larger on the southern side of the property which were reduced in the revised plan, but are still much bigger than most of the lots that surround them. This project has an excessive amount of parks and open space, much more than what is actually required by the city. They have provided a 200 foot buffer along Ashley Creek that is going to either be a park or just open space, which will be determined by the city Parks Department, and Fish, Wildlife & Parks. Freeman oriented the board on the project. He noted there are no apartment buildings on the property, but condominium units with home ownership. There were 340 individual condominium units and they have reduced the number to 184, and have moved all buildings out of the 200 foot buffer from Ashley Creek. Freeman noted the revised design calls for 314 single family units, 82 townhouses, and 184 condominium units, totaling 580 units. (Recorder's note: The revised submittal listed 322 single family units, 74 townhouses, and 184 condominium units totaling 580 units.) They have reduced the size of most of the condominium buildings - 8 to 16-plex units to try to make them more in keeping with a neighborhood complex. They are proposing to build a large park and although it is smaller than originally proposed with the addition of a lot in that area, it is still a very large community park, along with 3 neighborhood parks and the large open space that will be provided along Ashley Creek. Freeman continued it is important to look at the design guidelines. The development is intended to have a mixed income level. There are lots that are 10,000 square feet and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 4 of 27 others that are much smaller down to 4,000 square feet. In each case they stress a certain architectural style, which Freeman reviewed for the board. Freeman said there was a traffic study conducted for this project which indicates 50% of the overall traffic will exit the subdivision on the new roadway to Highway 2; 15% will exit using the secondary access; and 30% will exit unto Foys Lake Road. There is going to be increased traffic but this developer is replacing and improving an already failing system at 3 intersections, plus improvements to Foys Lake Road. There was a lot of discussion from the public at the last hearing about ' the amount of sawdust that has historically been placed on this property. With the exception of the areas that MDT will be acquiring for bypass R/W, and areas north of the bypass that the developer is removing, there are no buried piles of sawdust anywhere else that they have found on this site. He added however, as a part of construction if any unsuitable soils are found the soil will be removed. Freeman stated this project is an infill project. This property would be constructed at the same level of density as the adjacent historic area of Kalispell. Freeman noted they have reduced the density and are asking the board for a favorable recommendation. Hull wanted some assurance that the route to Highway 2 is part of the PUD and will be built and Freeman said it is. Schutt said in the prior traffic study there were a series of traffic remediations at various build out points and as the project has been reduced in scale from 700 to the current 580 he asked if the remediation points have been adjusted. Freeman said the traffic impacts are approximately 14% less. Schutt asked if the build out points have been scaled back or remain the same. Freeman noted the staff report requests an accelerated period of improvements but they were initially asking that those improvements . be constructed as recommended in the original traffic study. PUBLIC HEARING John Rauk, 125 Stoneridge Drive said he personally feels the density is too great. There are impacts on the folks who are already living in the area who have made their purchases and built their homes based on one acre or larger properties. Rauk said when they see something like this come in it affects them all. He added they are not opposed to R-1 zoning where one acre development would be continued in the area. Density this great has a tremendous future impact on schools, roads, access and safety which may be hard to put a value on, but there will be major impacts. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 5 of 27 Rauk added that his wife counted the number of lots on the revised plat map and she came up with 655 lots. She said what they don't see are the 74 townhouses added on to the 580 units. Rauk suggested the board take a look at the discrepancy. Marilyn Bain, 3350 North Ashley Lake Road read a letter for the board. (A copy is attached to the minutes.) Julie Robinson - 955 Foys Lake Road said that she supports all of the objections that Ms. Bain voiced. Robinson reviewed her comments that were made at the public hearing on April 10th, and again on May 8+h, regarding her concerns with the stormwater runoff, the raising of Learn Lane, and the affect the water from Willow Creek development will have on her property and her neighbor's property. Robinson added for the record that she will not waive her rights to seek regress and damages both to her property value and potentially her barns which are in the low area from the impact of this proposed development. Robinson agreed that there should be a water study as addressed in the condition that was recommended be amended by the board tonight. Robinson added there is no existing flow because of the raising of Learn Lane it will be new and she would be more comfortable if it is specified existing flow during spring runoff. Clark asked Robinson for the location of her property which she provided. Robinson added her property has always been used for agriculture and she sees no reason why she should have to discontinue her agricultural enterprises in the future. She suggested that bonds be required to protect the neighbors of that area from unforeseen water damage as a result of this development. Jeannie Luckey - 341 Stoneridge Drive read a letter to the planning board. (A copy is attached to the minutes.) James Miller - 557 Stoneridge Drive asked if the board had received 2 petitions from the surrounding property owners that were submitted to the planning department today. Conrad noted that petitions were received for the R-3 zoning, and those petitions, although they will be passed on to city council, do not have any bearing on the planning board's recommendation. In accordance with state law, if the petitions are valid the city council will need to have a 2/3rds majority vote if they want to approve the requested R-3 zoning district for the property. Miller said that he agrees with the comments shared on the density and he encouraged the board to consider the R-1 zoning for the reasons heard before but specifically the impact on the schools. Peterson School is basically full. If the property remained at the R-1 level there would be a buffer for Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 6 of 27 growth for many reasons including school population growth. If half of those lots had kids another school the size of Peterson School would be required. Donald Towe - 220 Learn Lane said that he is in agreement with Julie Robinson and her comments on the flooding that is already a problem. Towe said in the last couple years when he gets within 75 feet of the creek he is walking on solid ice all the way across the creek. There is no drainage going on during the runoff and adding more water to it is going to increase that problem. Eventually that water will make it all the way to his house. They built a dike along the road this year and it is going to act as a dam to prevent any water from leaving that area. The culverts also freeze over and do not drain. Stacey Schultz - 304 Stoneridge Drive said they are new to the area, just moved here a couple of months ago with 3 young children. She had done a lot of research on schools and heard that Kalispell schools are rated high nationally. So they get into town, heard how great Peterson School is, and her kids can't go to Peterson School because they are full. She asked what type of research has been done into School District #5 as to the capacity of the schools. She was told by the Superintendent of School District 5 that the schools are at capacity. Her kids are currently going to Elrod. This project would produce a large number of children in this area. She feels you should be able to send your kids to their neighborhood school. Schultz said the school issue is a huge concern to her and she agrees with everything else that has been said. Nadine Roach - 963 Foys Lake Road said that she agrees with Julie Robinson regarding the water overflow from across the road. The ditch is an intermittent creek that was built by Sam Bibler for run-off from Foys Lake Road. A lot of times there is no water and at other times it is really flowing. Roach asked where the water is going to go that will come across from this project. They need to have the ditch completely redone in order to do anything like that and if it isn't they will be flooded out also. Mary Ann Lannaghan, 726 Ashley Drive said she wishes everyone could experience what has happened in Arizona. Arizona has . gotten so crowded. There is so much development and crime, and the school situation is exactly as was just stated. Lannaghan asked the board to consider this development with their heads and their hearts and vote for R-1 zoning and not R-3. Jeff Peterman - 29 Stoneridge Drive said that he agrees with most of the concerns that have been expressed and the zoning should be R-1. Peterman said 2 nights ago he decided Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 7 of 27 to observe the traffic on Meridian Road and before he could get to 2nd Street, heading south he was stopped at the south end of Albertson's and had to wait behind 14 cars that were in line at the stop sign at Center Street and South Meridian. To add this many homes in this area would add a phenomenal amount of traffic on a largely residential street which was not designed to hold that volume of traffic. He used to drive that road daily and would often see children trying to cross the road and added it is already unsafe. Where the access road to Highway 2 id proposed the site distance is very poor and traffic is traveling at such speeds it would be an accident waiting to happen. A stop light should also be required. Also the access road should be immediately constructed so the construction equipment can use that route. Gary Young, 200 Kookoosint Trail said he also owns some land across from Stoneridge in this area. North of Foys Lake. Road Forest Products dumped and spread sawdust there for many years and there has to be an overburden of sawdust at least 2-3 feet deep in that area. He said they used to haul it out there with trucks and used a tractor with a drag behind it to spread it day after day. Young said something should be done to address the soil problems there before they start building on that site. Jim Pickering said that he purchased 614 Stoneridge Drive as a possible investment and a place to build based on the character of the area. He noted he has lived in the Gallatin for along time and when you walk into Belgrade where they have that high density housing it doesn't look like the photograph, it is blocks and blocks of crammed in houses, large volumes of traffic, and the schools are in chaos. 4,000 square foot lots should not be allowed. He is not in favor of the development and, he added, he doesn't feel proper notice was given to the neighborhood. Pickering said there seems to be overwhelming reasons not to approve this zoning change and he encouraged the board to take some time in considering the affects of the high density and the neighborhood and deny the request. Bob Gerbo said they will reside at 40 Stoneridge Place in the near future. They were not aware of this proposal until just recently and he has seen these types of developments before and they are houses all massed together. The sad part about it is they chose the area because it was R-1 and they were thinking that it would stay that way. He drives everyday from the east side of town to the building site and traffic is a mess all through that area. He just can't imagine driving down Foys Lake Road and looking at the back of 50 foot wide garages along that whole stretch. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 8 of 27 l� Pete Wessel - 121 Rainbow Drive said at the work session he heard most of the board members saying that this project is too dense. Wessel said that the developer is now trying to move forward by adding an additional 24 acres that could potentially be an additional 200 homes on 7,000 square foot lots. However, that is the proposed bike path along the east side of the bypass and he questions the request for R-3 on that property. Wessel said the idea of the SID is just passing on some unknown costs to homeowners. Mr. Conrad mentioned it could include improvements on Foys Lake Road and Meridian Road where they will need to add sidewalks, widen the road and try to squeeze left turn lanes in at Center Street and 2nd Street West. Wessel said there will also be 2 traffic signals in front of Peterson School which is not always a great idea, in addition to a stop sign at 7+h and possibly 2 more stop signs with the bypass and possibly a traffic signal at Valley View Drive. He doesn't think this is the right place for this development. Wessel thinks the city should have a zoning designation between R-1 and R-2 and the board should continue to discuss creating one. Wessel added you don't have to look at an entire piece of land and decide the entire piece is going to be R-3 because obviously it doesn't need to be R-3 up against Stoneridge. He hopes the board will take that into consideration. Ted Dykstra Jr., 2354 Coot Court said he owns Ted Dykstra Real Estate in town. He grew up in this area on Buckboard Lane and he is in favor of this development. Currently there is a desperate need of affordable housing in our area with low income, lower priced lots. As of this evening there are currently 24 listings that are connected to city water and sewer for townhouses. Out of those 2 are under contract so there are currently 22 actual lots that someone could build affordable housing on. Dykstra said he has also looked at property in Stoneridge for himself and this development would not prevent him from continuing to look at that option. He does believe that the structure of the proposal is such that allows both affordable and upper end housing and he thinks that is important. Dykstra said as to the issue of the schools being full, he volunteered to work on the location of the Glacier High School and as, of this fall the 6th grades will all be at the Junior High which will create space in the other schools. Debbie Rauk - 125 Stoneridge Drive said she would like to correct that information. She is an educator and as of now they have full-time kindergarten where they had half -day Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 9 of 27 O O kindergarten so now the schools are back to capacity again. Diann Gerbo, 405 - 2nd Avenue East said they just purchased a lot in Stoneridge, which is a retirement dream come true and this dream is not looking too great right now. They have seen housing developments like this in several places in Montana as well as other states and she doesn't think many people would chose to live in one of these tiny houses. She understands low, entry level house prices but what you end up with is house after house with varying shades of green and brown and they all look the same. Gerbo noted that on the internet right now there are over 300 hundred homes at about $200,000 or less. Aside from that there are a lot of people who are trying to sell by owner because they have gotten into one of these little houses and now they can hardly get their money back out and they can't afford to pay the real estate fee. APPLICANT REBUTTAL I Freeman had the following comments: There are 580 units, not 650. They did submit a grading plan as part of the submittal and the board had this information in their packets. The easement shown on the eastern side is not a bike path, it is an easement. Freeman noted he had to shut a contractor down last week where the contractor did not follow the restrictions regarding dust control. The contractor has since remedied those problems. Freeman said Kalispell has a very strict storm water ordinance. He, agrees with the comments that there are probably some problems on the south side of Foys Lake Road and this developer will be required to improve Foys Lake Road. The storm water discharge cannot be increased it has to be filtered out in a very measured amount. Freeman said there were comments made about the access approach on Highway 2. It has over 1,000 feet of visibility in each direction and they have worked with MDT in advance of the preliminary plat, which is not typical. Freeman said this developer has rolled with changes on the bypass repeatedly and has saved MDT $3,000,000 in costs already. DEQ does not require a permit for excavation beyond the initial construction permit. Freeman noted that the developers are life-long residents of the Kalispell area and have been an employer of a number of Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 10 of 27 residents for the past 60 years. Freeman said CTA was part of the team for the new Glacier High School and they are concerned about the impacts to school districts in all the communities that they work in. It can be a tough issue when the development's taxes don't meet the funds needed to build new schools. However, people are going to live here and they are willing to work with the school district to see what can be done. Freeman said he does know that the school district is remodeling the middle school and there will be some redistribution of the students. It is not just this project that is causing growth issues it is project throughout the entire community. Freeman stated the image that he showed the board is not Belgrade or River Rock it is Bozeman and is the Harvest Creek project. It should also be noted that there will be a 50 to 175 foot buffer zone along Foys Lake Road. Clark asked for clarification on the number of units. Freeman responded there are 580 units. Clark asked about the discrepancy of the location of the sawdust throughout the site. Freeman said in normal construction procedures a soil density test will be done throughout the site, ordered by the structural engineer and he will tell you where those test holes should be dug. Then during construction a soils consultant will be on the project. Freeman said they now know the general profiles of the soil. However, as they are constructing if they hit an unsuitable soil condition those areas will be over -excavated or some other type of mitigation would be used. Freeman noted that he cannot tell the board that won't happen on this project but there is a framework for dealing with it during the construction process. He further added if there is somebody who knows where it may occur the developer would be willing to go out there and look at it. Clark asked who would be responsible to pay for this work and Freeman said that would be between the developer and the contractor, but not the homeowner. Williamson said numbers were discussed regarding the earth moving quantities and he asked Freeman to address the accuracy of those numbers and the final grading plan. Freeman said there is going to be a considerable amount of earth work and the construction traffic would access the property through the construction entrance (Highway 2 access) and not through Foys Lake Road. The majority of this soil will not go off -site but on to the northern site where wood chips are being removed. Hull asked if the entrance on to Highway 2 will be on or near Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 11 of 27 Fun Beverage. Hubert Turner said it is near Valley Recycling but it is well below the bottom of Hartt Hill. Turner said the reason MDT wants the access in this location is there is a long stretch of flat road to enable trucks to stop. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt asked Conrad for clarification on previous actions by the board and what is before them tonight. Conrad noted on April 10+h the board made a recommendation of approval for the growth policy amendment on the 140 acre site and then on May 8+h the board made a recommendation of approval for the initial zoning on the 140 acre site to R-3. The council took action on a Resolution of Intent to amend the growth policy for the portions of the 140 acre site that are currently designated Industrial. The public hearing is scheduled for July 16th. The annexation and initial zoning of R-3 may or may not be acted on July 16th at the discretion of the council. Conrad said the R-3 zoning and growth policy amendment from industrial to suburban residential that is being reviewed tonight is only for the 24 acre portion of this site that includes the bypass area and areas just east of the bypass. The PUD and preliminary plat on the 140 acre site is also being reviewed tonight. Balcom asked if the additional land was brought forward at the request of the city why wouldn't Conrad know that. Conrad said it could have been a conversation that the planning director had with Mr. Freeman of CTA or the Turners. Conrad said the PUD and subdivision were not included in this 24 acre portion but it could be a cleanup of the city's growth policy map and presenting zoning consistent throughout the site. Gabriel suggested that the growth policy amendment and R- 3 zoning for the additional 24 acres be set aside since it would not affect the other aspects of this project including the PUD and Preliminary Plat. Hubert Turner said it will not delay the process of the PUD and preliminary plat and they have no objection to tabling those items. MOTION - TABLE GROWTH Clark moved and Balcom seconded a motion to table the POLICY AMENDMENT & Growth Policy Amendment and R-3 Zoning for the 24 acre INITIAL ZONING OF R-3 portion until the August 14th meeting. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 6 in favor and 1 opposed. MOTION - PLANNED UNIT Hull moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff DEVELOPMENT report KPUD-07-01 as. findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD for Willow Creek be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, with the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 12 of 27 amendments as proposed by staff. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel said she wanted the audience to understand that the R-3 zoning (for the initial 140 acres) has already been recommended for approval by this board. However, there will be another opportunity for public comment at the city council level. Gabriel asked Conrad to review the process for notifying the school districts for developments. Conrad noted that CTA contacted School District #5 and the planning office also sent out a package to School District #5. They are aware of the project and have not submitted any comments. Conrad doesn't know what the district has in the way of master planning for new schools but the planning office contacts the district for all major and minor subdivisions. Gabriel said there is a value of PUD's because if they had come in with a project with 580 units and without the PUD you would lose amenities like trails, extra parkland, design and the route to Highway 2. That would allow the developer to put in a cookie cutter type development. Gabriel asked the difference with a PUD v. without a PUD in relation to this project. Conrad said the number of houses that they could put in without a PUD would be between 450 and 500 units depending on parks, road layouts, and the size of their lots. Clark noted that he has several problems with the project. The portion along the south looks to him like an apartment complex. The units .that are over 6 units are way too big and out of scale with the area and all of the condo buildings should be limited to no more than 6 units. He does like the overall plan but the noise abatement problem is going to be a severe problem and he added the noise abatement should be a berm and not a wall. He also thinks the condos next to the bypass should be limited to one story again for noise abatement. He feels the connector road should, without question, be put in before phase 1 for the construction traffic. He also doesn't like that the lots along Foys Lake Road were designed smaller in the revised preliminary plat. Hull said this project is not proposing any more density than the Kalispell historic residential neighborhood that is directly across Meridian Road from this site. This area is not a rural and pristine area way out in the county it is within 100 yards of the first development in Kalispell. Hull said he understands the concerns of the neighbors in the county but he feels it is a logical extension of the city. Hinchey disagreed. He said the lots in old town Kalispell are much larger than most of the lots in this proposal. He still has a problem with the density of the development. He totally supports limiting the condo units to alleviate some of that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 13 of 27 density and limit the condo buildings to a single story along the bypass. When they talked at the work session the board felt that the range of units that the majority of members could support was in the 450 to 500 range but apparently that message didn't get across to the developer. ROLL CALL The motion failed on a vote of 2 in favor, 4 opposed, and 1 abstention. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said the planning board just denied a motion to approve the PUD subject to the conditions listed in the staff report on a vote of 4-2. The preliminary plat reflects the PUD because there are deviations in lot sizes and uses. Schutt asked if they live or die as one entity and Conrad said the board should address the preliminary plat separately. MOTION - PRELIMINARY Clark moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to deny the PLAT - WILLOW CREEK preliminary plat of Willow Creek as revised. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel suggested that the board, if the vote is to deny, send a clear message to the developer on what the board would consider for approval. Conrad noted that the majority of the board voted to deny the PUD based on the density of the proposal. The preliminary plat as proposed now would not meet several areas of the zoning ordinance and the subdivision regulations that the PUD would have allowed. By denying the PUD a motion to deny the preliminary plat would be based in part to its inadequacies with both the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations. The board may want to consider taking the vote on the preliminary plat and then give the developer some direction. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a vote of 5 in favor, 1 in opposition and 1 abstention. BOARD DISCUSSION Clark said the problems go beyond density for him and the access road to Highway 2 has to be part of phase 1. Conrad noted the conditions do require the access road to Highway 2 West as part of phase 1. Clark also suggested the condominiums be restricted to one story to limit the noise coming off of the bypass at least for 150 feet back from the bypass and that the condominium buildings be limited to 6 units for the entire project. Schutt said the project crowds lots too tight along Foys Lake Road, the project is too dense, and the large number of condominium units is excessive for this neighborhood. Williamson said a positive note he likes the concept where you have more development toward the bypass and the lots Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 14 of 27 �I get bigger toward the west. He said based on what he is hearing from public it may be helpful to expand those lots to reduce the numbers along Foys Lake Road. Williamson said another positive item is the accelerated construction of improvements. Most developers are not willing to provide this information up front. In addition the developer may want to go ahead and commission a storm analysis, especially the downstream, off -site portions to address some concerns voiced by the public. Hinchey said that the sheer number of the 4,000 square foot lots bothers him because it looks like that is the majority of lots being proposed: Clark asked about the safeguards for design of the houses and Conrad reviewed the safeguards that are addressed in condition #2, and through review of the designs by the city's Architectural Review Committee. ASHLEY HEIGHTS A request by Ashley Heights, LLC for annexation and initial ANNEXATION & INITIAL zoning on an 11.1 acre tract of land located on the south side ZONING AND PRELINIINARY of Sunnyside Drive approximately 500 feet west of the PLAT intersection of Sunnyside Drive and Ashley Drive. The owner is requesting the R-2, Single Family Residential, zoning district upon annexation into the city of Kalispell. The owner has also applied for Ashley Heights, a preliminary plat to create 26 lots ranging in size from 9,600 square feet to approximately 17,880 square feet on an 8.5 acre portion of the 11.1 acre tract of land. There is a currently a house, addressed as 1204 Sunnyside Drive, and a shop located on the 11.1 acre tract of land. STAFF REPORTS KA-07-11 Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department & KPP-07-07 presented Staff Reports KA-07-11, 8; KPP-07-07 for the Board. Conrad said the request before the planning board is an initial zoning request of R-2 which is a single family residential zoning district with 9,600 square foot minimum lot sizes on approximately 11 acres and a preliminary plat request for the Ashley Heights subdivision that would plat 26 single family residential lots and a small park site. Conrad reviewed the location for the board. The planning board reviewed an initial zoning request on this same property in April. At that time the request was for R-4 zoning, which is a two-family residential zoning district with 6,000 square foot minimum lot size; staff was recommending R-3, which is a single family residential district with a 7,000 square foot minimum lot size; and the planning board, at the April planning board meeting, recommended the R-2 zoning. That recommendation was forwarded on to the city council but never acted on. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 15 of 27 Conrad noted a condition of approval would require the bike/pedestrian path to be located about mid -way between the block along the western boundary of the subdivision which is 1370 feet in length because the subdivision regulations require city blocks to not exceed 1200 feet in length. Conrad said there will be a homeowners association established to maintain the parkland in this subdivision however, over the years the homeowner's association may disintegrate and then there would be a weed patch that no one is maintaining. Therefore, the Parks Department is recommending that a Parks Maintenance District be formed for this subdivision. This recommendation would be placed on the plat and would require the lots be incorporated into the district, at the time the city took over the maintenance of the homeowner's park, and a fee would then be assessed to the lots within the subdivision for the cost of the park maintenance. Since this recommendation was made after the staff report was written, Conrad asked the board to consider adding this item to the conditions of approval. Conrad added there is also a recommendation for a noise study since this subdivision is located along the bypass. Four letters were received in opposition to the project, and copies were distributed to the board. Conrad noted the main concern addressed. in the letters is they are opposing the requested R-2 zoning and that it would allow density that is not consistent with this neighborhood and would increase traffic on Sunnyside Drive which is already too busy and can't support the additional traffic. In addition they don't feel this density should be located next to the bypass, subjecting homeowners to the noise. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-07-11 and recommend that the initial zoning of the 11.1 acre site be R-2 on the zoning district map for the property. Staff also recommends that the board adopt staff report KPP- 07-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the city council that the proposed subdivision, Ashley Heights, be approved subject to the 28 conditions listed in the staff report. Clark mentioned that the board insisted that a noise study be conducted on another project also and asked what if the study comes in and the only way they can get by is to move the lots back. Conrad said recommended condition #4 states that a noise study is required and that the condition may result in the loss of one or more of the proposed lots shown on the preliminary plat. Staff doesn't know the outcome of the noise study or what kind of mitigation would be proposed Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 16 of 27 �'O so they may or may not lose lots as a result of the study. Clark asked if the people who buy these lots will be protected from sound. Conrad said yes, that is why the noise study is a condition of approval. Clark asked what the easement at the back of Lot 4 was to be used for. Conrad said there is an existing 60 foot private easement that comes from Sunnyside Drive that serves 4 lots that have not been annexed into the city. Public Works is recommending that a 60 foot Road R/ W & Utility Easement be located at the end of Lot 3 to connect to this private easement if, in the future, that private easement is annexed into the city. That would provide the connectivity that the board has discussed in the past. This easement is addressed in conditions # 10 8v # 12. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Hubert Turner, 3300 Highway 2 West, Manager of Ashley STAFF Heights, LLC said this is the 2nd time the board has seen this project and it was designed this way, with R-2 zoning, at the request of this board. Turner stated that initially he had intended to connect to the easement on lots 3 & 4 but was later told that it was a private easement and the owners of those lots were not willing to allow access for this subdivision to connect to that road. Turner responded to Clark's concern about noise mitigation by saying that 60 decibels of noise is not that much but the subdivision regulations clearly state that if they have to realign more than 5 lots in the subdivision the board would be required to review those realignments. Turner said that MDT is meeting right now to discuss noise mitigation in this area, and their intention is to extend any noise mitigation that would be proposed to the south of this property along the western boundary of Ashley Heights to Sunnyside Drive. PUBLIC HEARING John Hammett, 1215 Sunnyside Drive said he lives directly across from this proposed development. Regarding the noise abatement Hammett said some of those lots will sit on a nice hillside and he doesn't know how noise will be mitigated for those lots. Hammett said he is asking the board to seriously consider a city or county R-1 zoning designation for this property. Eight to ten really nice homes on 8-1/2 acres will more closely align with the. present neighborhood and become a project the developer can be proud of. With the bypass and an off - ramp on Sunnyside Drive they will have major traffic problems. There is considerable pedestrian/ bike traffic using Sunnyside Drive to get to Lone Pine. There is an underpass proposed for pedestrian/bike traffic so that pedestrian/bike traffic will still be there. Hammett noted that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 17 of 27 a traffic count was done on Sunnyside Drive but it was only in place for 2 days and he believes it wasn't long enough to provide an accurate count of the traffic on that road. Hammett said that he believes it is the duty of this board to reject the R-2 and vote for either a city or county R-1 zoning. Angie Krukenberg, 1116 Sunnyside Drive said that her property is immediately adjacent to this development. Krukenberg questioned whether the 60 foot road and utility easement that Public Works recommended at the back of Lot 4 was necessary. She stated that the private road easement was constructed by the 4 homeowners along that road for their use only. Krukenberg showed the board photographs that she had taken for an unofficial traffic count and within 10 seconds 22 cars were photographed on a Sunday afternoon. The Sunnyside subdivision has a terrible traffic problem. She questioned the accuracy of the traffic study since the traffic counts were mostly compiled more than a year ago. Krukenberg said many houses have been built since that time. Sunnyside Drive cannot handle the 200+ additional cars that these 26 lots will generate. The road is too narrow and, she added, it was the same width more than 65 years ago. Sunnyside has now become the bypass. Traffic flows in and out from 1,000's of houses in the developments between Airport Road and Valley View Drive, plus hundreds of people from the subdivisions in areas around Foys Lake, Kila, Ashley Lake, Smith Valley and Marion who use this bypass, Sunnyside Drive, to get south of Kalispell. Why? Because of the lack of city planning for the transportation corridors used by masses of people. People use the shortest routes with the least amount of traffic lights. She felt officials were totally blinded to the vital arteries for traffic which should have been planned for and provided before pushing the. density they did. Whole neighborhoods are now subjected to the danger that is created from a totally inadequate network of major roads. Krukenberg asked the board to not allow this large additional volume of traffic to materialize by encouraging anything less than a rural R-1. She reviewed the water problems in the area and asked that the board not allow another development to add to these problems. She concluded by saying this is the last beautiful hill on this end of town and it must be left R-1 to be compatible with the rest of the neighborhood in this area. She feels Kalispell is one of the last best places in the country and should remain that way. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 18 of 27 Mary Ann Lannaghan, 726 Ashley Drive agreed with Krukenberg. They bought their home, a summer house, and every morning she would go for walks on Ashley Drive around the loop and come up Sunnyside Drive. It was wonderful. Now 2-1/2 years later she has to jump off the road to avoid the traffic. We are losing so much by overdeveloping and she asked the board to think carefully about approving this density. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Hubert Turner asked the board to refer to the traffic study that was completed for the traffic statistics. He hired a professional traffic engineer who does that for a living, using scientific methods to project traffic volumes from now until 2030. What the traffic report will tell the board is the traffic impacts created from this subdivision are entirely benign. BOARD DISCUSSION None. MOTION - ANNEXATION & Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff INITIAL ZONING report KA-07-11 and recommend that the initial zoning of the 11.1 acre site be R-2 on the zoning district map for the property. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel said it would be very atypical for the board to recommend zoning R-1 and the developer would not come into the city requesting R-1 because it doesn't make fiscal sense for them to come into the city with one acre lots. They are looking for city services and city sized lots. Schutt noted that it has been discussed before that there be a zoning designation between the R-1, one acre minimum lot size and R-2, 9600 square foot minimum lot size designations. He thinks it would be helpful for transitional neighborhoods such as this. However, Schutt said he finds the R-2 appropriate for this location. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 6 in favor and one Williamson abstention. MOTION - PRELIMINARY Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff PLAT ASHLEY HEIGHTS report KPP-07-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the city council that the proposed subdivision, Ashley Heights, be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, as amended by staff. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 6 in favor and one (Williamson) abstention. MONTANA SKY NETWORKS A request by Montana Sky Networks to construct a tower CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT which exceeds the permitted 40=foot height limit in the H-1 - INTERNET (Health Care) zoning district. The proposed tower would COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE serve Montana Sky Networks, an internet provider, and be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 19 of 27 60 feet in height. Section 27.12.404 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance allows structures up to 60-feet in the H-1 zoning district provided a conditional use permit is first obtained. The proposed tower would be located on the south end of the existing building located at 1286 Burns Way, the current location of Montana Sky Networks. STAFF REPORT KCU-07-04 I Nicole Johnson representing the Kalispell Planning Department presented Staff Report KCU-07-04 for the Board. Johnson noted this was a conditional use permit to increase the height of an internet communications structure in the H- 1 zoning district. It is located off of U. S. Highway 93 and Conway Drive. Johnson provided the board with the location of the site and a photograph of the existing and proposed structures. She reviewed the surrounding land uses, which consisted of residential properties that are more than 150 feet from this property, which is a criteria of the conditional use permit. There is an existing 40 foot internet communications structure and they are proposing to replace it with a structure that would be an additional 20 feet high. In addition 2 satellite dishes will be situated on either side of the top of the structure. As part of the conditional use permit criteria the proposed tower needs to be located more in the center of the property to reduce impacts to surrounding buildings and the area. The Architectural Review Committee reviewed the proposal and forwarded a favorable recommendation as proposed. Johnson noted the structure would be green in color to blend into the surrounding area. The property is located within the Kalispell Regional Medical Center campus and the ALERT helicopter pad is just east of the property. The planning department received notification from the Chief Pilot of the ALERT helicopter that this structure would not affect their flight operations. Concerns from the public were received that cited possible interference with the hospital related equipment. Currently the 40 foot structure is sending and receiving signals for Montana Sky Network and the tower has been in operation for about 10 years. No complaints had been received in that time. In terms of impacts on aesthetics and property values, there is already an existing structure and it is considered an accessory use and allowed in the H-1 zoning district. Johnson noted that prior to issuance of a building permit the city Airport Manager will sign off and approve the proposed Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 20 of 27 O structure because it is on the very northern edge of the Airport Affected Area. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KCU-07-04 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report. Balcom asked about interference with the hospital equipment and Johnson said none has been reported. Schutt asked about a future boost in strength and Johnson said the taller structure will allow them to communicate with the towers located on Blacktail Mountain and Lone Pine. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL None. STAFF PUBLIC HEARING Jerry Stahlberg, 2725 Farm to Market Road said he has a connection to the building which is next door to this building. There is a difference between 3 foot dishes on top of the structure instead of 2 antennas on top of a 30 foot pole. He feels it makes a difference with aesthetics and property values. Around this area are medical and office buildings and it doesn't really fit there. Would Board Member Clark have bought the Kalispell Grand Hotel if there was an antenna sitting in front of the Painted Horse, he doesn't think so. The trees naturally hide it a bit but those trees won't be there forever because they are Spruce trees and short-lived. Stahlberg said they bought the property as an investment and obviously it will change the values of their property. He is not against business but he is against the tower. BOARD DISCUSSION None. MOTION - ANNEXATION & Hinchey moved and Williamson seconded a motion to adopt INITIAL ZONING staff report KCU-07-04 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked if the surrounding property owners were notified and Johnson said the property owners within 150 feet were notified. Hull asked if the satellite dishes were new and where would they be located and Johnson said the dishes will be new and will be located at the top of the structure, not to exceed 60 feet in height. Williamson asked for the size of the dishes and Johnson said they would be 3 feet around and will be blended in with the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 21 of 27 surrounding area as much as possible. Gabriel suggested a condition could be added that addresses interference with the medical equipment should that become a problem in the future. Schutt said he didn't think that the planning board could adequately address that issue but felt that the medical community would be able to shut it down if that was the case. ROLL CALL I The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOUNTAIN VISTA A request by Touchstone LLC for annexation, initial zoning ESTATES, PHASE 4 and preliminary plat on a 7.6 acre tract of land located off of ANNEXATION & INITIAL Three Mile Drive. The owner is requesting to annex into the ZONING AND PRELIMINARY city of Kalispell and has requested the R-3, Urban Single PLAT Family Residential, zoning district. The owner has also applied for Mountain Vista Estates, Phase 4, a preliminary plat to create 19 lots ranging in size from 7,000 square feet to approximately 15,600 square feet. The tract of land is located immediately east of Mountain Vista Estates Phase 1 subdivision. STAFF REPORTS KA-07-12 Nicole Johnson representing the Kalispell Planning & KPP-07-08 Department presented Staff Reports KA-07-12 & KPP-07-08 for the Board. Johnson said this project is a request for annexation and initial zoning as well as a preliminary plat. She oriented the board as to the location. The property is currently zoned county SAG-5 which has a 5 acre minimum lot size and they are requesting R-3 with a 7,000 square foot minimum lot size. It is surrounded by city suburban and urban residential developments. Mountain Vista Estates, Phase 1-3 were approved with an R-2 zoning designation and PUD overlay and Spring Creek Estates to the south and Cottage Gardens were approved with R-3 zoning. The growth policy designates this site as a suburban land use area. The preliminary plat will contain 19 lots on 7.6 acres and there are no deviations proposed. There were a variety of issues raised that need to be addressed prior to final plat. A Floodplain Study must be completed. This developer and the developer of Cottage Gardens are working together to complete the study. The Public Works Department is concerned with the connection to Cottage Gardens subdivision and has requested that the street be straightened out so some of the lot configurations. may change. Fish, Wildlife & Parks was contacted regarding Spring Creek. A 50 foot minimum natural buffer area and 100 foot building setback from the high water line of the creek was recommended and included as a condition of Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 22 of 27 approval. And finally, a condition was included that requests special consideration in the construction of crawl spaces and basements in those areas where the water table is high. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-07-12 and recommend that initial zoning of the 7.6 acre site be R-3 on the zoning district map for the property. Staff further recommends the board adopt staff report KPP- 07-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Mountain Vista Estates Phase 4, be approved subject to the 27 conditions listed in the staff report. Schutt asked about condition # 10 which addresses the high water table and the construction of crawl spaces and basements in those areas. Schutt asked if the city has banned basements in certain areas as part of the conditions. Johnson said she is not aware of a city standard that would provide a minimum depth where basements and crawl spaces are prohibited. The water table map indicates the depth to water on this site is 10-20 feet deep in most areas. The depth to water increases gradually from the Spring Creek floodplain, ultimately recorded as 20750 feet in the southwest corner. Sean Conrad noted in the Stratford Village and Ashley Park areas where the water table indicates a 5- 10 foot level a condition has been added that prohibits basements. For Mountain Vista Estates, Phase 4 they didn't feel that it was as necessary because the depth to water is greater than 10 feet. Conrad added the condition was included so potential buyers would be aware of the high water table but basements and crawl spaces were not banned. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Narda Wilson, .184 Midway Drive in Columbia Falls said she STAFF is a private land use consultant and she is here representing Touchstone, LLC the developer of Mountain Vista Phase 4. Wilson said as Johnson noted this is a request for strictly R- 3 zoning with no requests for deviations that are often associated with a PUD. This subdivision would be part of Mountain Vista Estates Subdivision in as far as they would be subject to the same covenants but there are no special provisions that would vary the zoning under the R-3 district. They believe that this is consistent with other development in the area as the city continues to grow and agreed this is a transitional area between the rural western part of the valley and Kalispell. Wilson noted with regard to the floodplain issue, a preliminary flood study has been submitted to FEMA that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 23 of 27 C� was performed by Long Engineering and FEMA would have to review the study and then accept the report. The preliminary study indicates that there may be some minor adjustments as a result of the floodplain delineation and an area along Lot 17 may have to be reduced and a small corner between Lots 12 8v 13. They are fairly confident that the current layout won't be changed much because of the detailed floodplain analysis and the establishment of a base flood elevation. Wilson asked for clarification of condition 16 that requires the creation of a Park Maintenance District incorporating all the lots. She is unclear on how that would happen and asked if it would be more appropriate for that district to be formed at the time the city would take over the park. (Note: See page 13 of the Mountain Vista Estates, Phase 4 Staff Report) Wilson noted condition 14 c. indicated that the horse pasture that is located across the creek to the east of the proposed subdivision must be mitigated to prevent pedestrian/animal conflicts. Wilson asked how that might be envisioned to be accomplished. In addition it appears that condition 14 a. is a reiteration of condition 15 and perhaps condition 15 should be deleted. Otherwise all of the conditions that are being recommended they find acceptable and they ask the planning board for a favorable recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak. BOARD DISCUSSION None. MOTION - ANNEXATION & Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff INITIAL ZONING report KA-07-12 and recommend to city council that initial zoning of the 7.6 acre site be R-3 on the zoning district map for the property. BOARD DISCUSSION Hinchey said this is an area in transition and he is wondering why R-2 wouldn't be more appropriate. He noted the difference would be one less lot. Wilson asked to address the board. The R-3 zoning is consistent with the Cottage Gardens subdivision immediately to the south and also the Spring Creek Estates further to the south. The R-2 that is to the west of this property was under a PUD and when that subdivision came in was a mix of single family and townhouses and they got a density bonus. Wilson suggested the R-2 on the map is probably a bit misleading because everything in that area has an R-3 density even though it has an R-2 with a PUD overlay. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 24 of 27 O MOTION - MOUNTAIN Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff VISTA ESTATES PHASE 4 report KPP-07-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the PRELIMINARY PLAT Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Mountain Vista Estates Phase 4, be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull noted that standards for setbacks need to be established along all waterways in the city. Johnson said a similar recommendation was included in the conditions for Cottage Gardens to the south. The additional buffer from Ashley Creek in the Willow Creek project was related to the water quality issues for that area and was site specific. Staff met with Fish, Wildlife and Parks to discuss water quality and are coordinating with the department on a county -wide water quality development setback for riparian areas. Schutt asked about the comment from the developer's technical staff regarding similarity of conditions 14 a. and 15. Johnson said the addition of condition 15 was intended to mean that it would be an easement and not located within the individual lots which was not adequately addressed in condition 14 a. Schutt asked what kind of mitigation is proposed, as noted in condition 14 c. for pedestrian/animal conflicts. Johnson said staff has not proposed any mitigation. There is a small bridge that is about 10 - 12 feet wide that. connects the Fetveit property and there are horses grazing in that area and they have clearly accessed the area within this proposed subdivision. She added when this land is subdivided and the homes occupied the horses probably shouldn't be allowed in the common area where residents and pedestrians will be. Schutt asked if staff is proposing a fence and Johnson said no. It appears that it would be a responsibility of the owners of the Fetveit property to provide the mitigation. Schutt asked how deep and wide is Spring Creek in this area. Johnson said at the time of the report it was about 5 or more feet wide and approximately 4 feet deep. Williamson asked who requested that condition and Johnson said it was a requirement of the Parks & Recreation Department. That department was concerned with the safety of the area users and the horses. Since the board would be unable to impose mitigation on this developer that. would take care of their neighbor's horses, Schutt, Williamson and Clark agreed that the condition should be deleted. MOTION TO DELETE Williamson moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to delete CONDITION # 14 C. I condition 14 c. because it is not enforceable. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 25 of 27 0 ROLL CALL - DELETE The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CONDITION # 14 C. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The original motion, as amended, passed unanimously on a MOTION roll call vote. CRAIG-CRAIG RENTALS, A request by Craig -Craig Rentals, LLC for annexation and LLC ANNEXATION & initial zoning of two tracts of land that encompass 1.385 acres INITIAL ZONING located on the southern end of Kalispell's commercial and industrial entrance corridor. The applicant is requesting a B- 2, General Business, zoning designation upon annexation. The two properties proposed for annexation are located on the west side of US Highway 93 approximately three-quarters of a mile south of Kelly Road and one-third of a mile north of Lower Valley Road/Cemetery Road. The Fire Place Center, which is currently on the property is addressed 2790 Highway 93 South, Kalispell, Montana 59901. STAFF REPORT KA-07-10 Nicole Johnson, representing the Kalispell Planning Department presented staff report KA-07-10 for the board. Johnson provided the location of the annexation & initial zoning for the board. There is currently a Fire Place Center on the property and the existing business complies both with the county and the proposed city B-2 zoning. It is compatible with the surrounding land uses which include light industrial as well as commercial uses. It is also consistent with the Kalispell Growth Policy Map which designates this area as commercial and light industrial. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report KA-07-10 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be B-2 General Business. Hull asked if this . would create an island. Sean Conrad noted that it is kitty-corner from the Toyota Dealer and Town Pump properties that are annexed. Conrad added there are other property owners along the highway who are now looking at annexation due to the extension of water and sewer. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Jim Burton/Jackola Engineering, 1304 - 3rd Avenue East STAFF said he is representing the applicant. Burton noted that the highway in this location has been annexed for some time so it is. contiguous with city boundaries. Burton stated in reading the staff report, Item I under Availability of Public Services and Extension of Services it talks about water being on one side and sewer on the other. The Public Works Department periodically prints out the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 26 of 27 L� locations of the utilities and it shows that there is water and sewer on both sides of the highway, with storm drainage on the west side. Therefore they would not have to drill under the highway for these services. Burton noted that a boundary line adjustment has been completed on the 2 tracts that would provide 100 feet and 91 feet of frontage for the parcels. They are not requesting a subdivision but are requesting annexation and an initial zoning designation. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak. BOARD DISCUSSION None. MOTION Clark moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt Staff Report KA-07-10 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be B-2 General Business. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 12:00 a.m. The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on August 14, I 2007 at 7:00 p.m. r Bryan H. Schutt Michelle Anderson President Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted correct : �/ �j /07 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of July 10, 2007 Page 27 of 27 i July 9, 2007 Kalispell City Planning Board 17 2° Street E Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: Willow Creek proposed.development- revised $ JUL 10 2007 10LISPELL PLANNING DEM?TIIA,CNT Thank you for sending the information regarding the proposed Willow Creek development and the opportunity to make comments. As Flathead Valley residents since the mid 1980's, we have seen a lot of expected growth and change. Growth and development can either be beneficial or harmful to the community; appropriate planning is the key to successful growth resulting in community enhancement. Prevention is ten times as effective and a thousand times more economical than the remedial action resulting from poor planning, and the creation of problem areas that can be avoided through responsible development. There is no reason to create problems by approving projects based on economic development profit and taxes while disregarding the potential downside factors. In looking at the proposed Willow Creek project we believe that the proposal would not meet either the short term or long term needs of our community or improve our O environment for the following reasons: • Traffic problems - The addition of nearly 600 residences in the area will put an enormous stress on current roads and create severe traffic problems. As an example, I was driving from Hwy 2 & Meridian to Stoneridge Drive two weeks ago, and it took 15 minutes to travel the approximately 1.3 miles. Imagine what another 600-1000 cars are going to do to the current infrastructure. There is no practical way that Meridian can be widened to accommodate this significant traffic increase. • Density & Crime — This type of low to moderate income housing creates a ghetto - type density environment. This close proximity of many adults, children, pets, etc statistically translates into more crime, putting additional stress on our police force. The high -density narrow streets and associated limited parking space dramatically affects emergency vehicle access. A drive through any of this type of project quickly illustrates this factor. . • Schools — Petterson School and others would have difficulty accommodating the additional children. • Overflow - The property on the south side of Foys Lake Road will be adversely affected by the water overflow/drainage coming from that many housing units. • Property Aesthetics — Although this property is currently zoned as industrial, the request to change to R-3 is unreasonable. The Willow Creek property is not an ordinary piece of property since it has views, a stream close by, etc. It has the -- aesthetics that many other pieces of property do not have despite some of the drainage and possible industrial pollution existing in parts of the area. For comparison, the Valley Ranch Project south of Ponderosa Estates does not have the same aesthetics of Willow Creek and was approved with approximately 222 single-family houses on 80 acres. This is just about the maximum practical allowable density for that type of property. It is unimaginable to consider three times the density on less than twice the Valley Ranch acreage. There needs to be a transition compatible to the adjacent surroundings. . • Accessibility — High -density housing should lend itself for access to urban stores and services reasonably without having to drive a vehicle. There are none of these amenities available within walking distance from the Willow Creek proposed project. There are just too many negatives impacting this proposal. As business people we understand the right to conduct business and make a profit; however, development projects can change our environment with undesired results and each project needs to be scrutinized on the long term merits and with a vision of how we want to leave our legacy. Montana is truly one of the last best places and we want to be proud of the way we grew the community and left the community to our children and grandchildren. We are sure that you who have stepped up to the plate to give your time and energy to planning board activities also want to feel good about the decisions you have made that affect the beauty of this valley. In conclusion, we believe the proposed project is not in the best interests of the ll community nor do we believe the zoning should be reclassified as R-3. A reclassification to R-1 would be a far more acceptable alternative for many of the reasons listed above. Thank you, Jeannie and Stephen Luc ey 341 Stoneridge Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 O July 10, 2007 City of Kalispell Planning Dept. 17 2nd Street East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Kalispell City Planning Board, A May 4, 2007 letter written by Mr. Warren Wenz of Jardine, Stephenson, Blewett & Weaver, P.C., on my behalf stated numerous facts regarding this property and potential development. Many of these points still apply to the revised project submittal. I am attaching a copy of this letter to the hearing tonight. In spite of being notified in writing prior to the May 10, 2007 public hearing that a violation of 2.06 Prelimary Plat Process, Part B, 92 had occurred by the failure of notice to the Stoneridge Homeowners Association and each lot owner in this development. The Planning Board reviewed a portion of this project site for a Growth Policy Amendment (staff report 4KGPA-07-1) from Industrial to Suburban Residential. The Planning Board proceeded with a vote that this Growth Policy Amendment should be approved by the city council. The public hearings on April 10, 2007 and May 10, 2007 should not have been held and no action should have been taken in regards to this proposal until this requirement had been met. Any action taken should be null and void. My April 10, 2007 letter in response to the Applicant Mr. Turner's proposals referred to filled areas on the property. I would ask that you refer to my letter for the specific details regarding the fill areas. I have attached a copy for your reference. I most certainly apologize if I was not clear on the locations of the areas referred to. I was not referring to the sawdust piles on other locations of the 140+ acre site, as noted in the June 4, 2007 letter written to Mr. Conrad by Mr. Wayne Freeman Director of CTA Landworks. My comments were made in regards to the filled areas along Ashley Creek, the areas just North of Ashley Creek in the former Forest Products mill site, South of Ashley Creek that showed on the aerials as lumber storage and a filled area on the East portion of this property. In 1987 this property was a portion of a larger parcel referred to in the Settlement Agreement recorded in Flathead County as document 200029114250 dated July 17, 1987. I was one of several previous property owners of this property. During the course of negotiations for the division of the settlement property information was presented by one of the property owners that clearly depicted the filled areas on this property insuring that the.property under the filled areas was valued at a reduced rate so that the owner taking that portion of the parcel received more acreage as a result of the devaluation of the filled areas. Under Appendix A — Preliminary Plat — Contents of the Preliminary Plat — Part I. Specific information shall be shown on the face of the preliminary plat. The following sections have not been included. The scale of the plat shall be 200' per inch. However, a scale of 120' per inch has been submitted. Section E. refers to ground contours. This has not been included and is critical information because of the plans by the Applicant to level this site to accommodate this subdivision on this property. Section G. refers to existing easements and utilities, proposed easements and utilities including description of ` their width and purpose. My pumping station has overhead utility lines on a recorded easement and should be shown on this plat. Section J. refers to the 100 year floodway and should be delineated, it is not included. Section K. refers to location and size of all natural and environmental features on the site. This has not been included. Under Supplements to the Preliminary Plat, Part H. additional information has not been included that is required for submittal. Part A Vicinity Map(sl: 3. All tracts, lots or land adjoining the proposed subdivision together with the name and address of the owner of each tract, lot or land parcel verified by the County Clerk & Recorder or a title company. 4. Names of any adjoining platted subdivisions and or numbers of adjoining Certificates of Survey on record. 5. Location of any buildings, railroads, power lines, towers, roads and other land uses. Part B. Common Area Management Plan: This sub -section is very detailed as to the requirements regarding the common areas. Information has not been submitted. Part D. Phased Projects: The information that was submitted failed to give enough detail as required by this Jsection. Under Appendex B — Environmental Assessment: Part I — Property Description — The information in this section has not been included. Part II — Summary of Probable Impacts — Section a. refers to a potential conflict with an agricultural user facility. No information has been shown to protect my pump equipment, my underground pipe or any of my improvements at the pumping site. Part III — Community Impact Report — The information in this section has not been Included. I would also like to comment on several items listed in the staff report. Page 9 states "Lots proposed on the Western boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the Stoneridge subdivision would vary between 9,700 sq. ft. to 21,000 sq. ft." According to the staff report the intent was to provide larger lots in order to be consistent with the character of the area. I'll try to give you more information as to the lots planned along the boundary with Stoneridge. Lot 317 - .50 acres apx. 21,000 sq. ft. Lot 318 - .25 acres apx 10,000 sq. ft. Lot 319 - .25 acres apx. 10,000 sq.ft. Lot 320 - .25 acres apx. 10,000 sq.ft. Lot 321 - .22 acres apx. 9,700 sq.ft. O Lot 322,- .23 acres apx. 9,800 sq.ft. Lot 323- .26 acres. Apx. 11,000 sq.ft The minimum sized Stoneridge lots are 44,000 sq. ft. The size of Willow Creek lots bordering Stoneridge ranging from 9,700 sq. ft. to 21,000 sq. ft. does not compare with the lots of Stoneridge. Lots sizes which range from .22 acres to .50 acres are not compatible with lots that are 1 acre or more. These lots, nor are the other lots of Willow Creek, consistent with the character of the area. A zone change from R-1 to R-3 with a pud overlay will place an undue concentration of people in the area that has a rural character for many years. Page 10, #4: I beg to differ with the Applicants comments regarding the requested zoning classification. It will not promote the health and general welfare because an R-3 island in the middle of a neighborhood of R-1 properties is most definitely not compatible. Page 10, #6: This zone change will promote overcrowding of this land. A zone change to a zone with less density would fit and not promote overcrowding of this land. Page 10, #7: An increase in the number of people by this zone change will create an undue concentration of people. This property is currently zoned R-1 for single family residences. The jump to an R-3 with more lots, town homes and a variance for multi- family units will make a very undesirable impact on this rural neighborhood. G The property is described on Page 11 as being fairly level with the exception of a small hill. If this is true we would not see Exhibit 5.4 showing a total change of the vary nature of this site. We would see a subdivision that was designed to fit the contours of this property. Without the contours included in the preliminary plat design the public and the planning board cannot make a decision based on the actual facts. This site is not suited to the subdivision as presented. Grading of this site is referenced on Page 26 of this report. It is stated that "approximately 720,000 cubic yards of cut and 390,000 cubic yards of fill is needed resulting in a net of approximately 330,000 cubic yards of export." At 10 yd. of dirt for a standard dump truck load this would equate to approximately 33,000 truck loads of export material. The cuts and fills will range from 10' to 35. This is not standard grading and site prep for a subdivision. This will be an open pit mining operation that will affect the entire site of the subdivision. The subdivision is planned to be a phased project. This will mean that the dust from this site will directly affect Stoneridge to the West, the residential homes to the South, businesses to the North and the entire West side of Kalispell for many years. The air quality in areas around Kalispell are already compromised. The negative effect of the dust from this site can not even be comprehended. The Air Quality Board needs to be contacted for approval of this portion of the subdivision. The developer is providing a bike and pedestrian trail along the Western boundary of the property. This bike trail does not meet the recorded purpose of the easement between Stoneridge and this project. A storm water plan should have been submitted under the requirement of the pre -plat . C submittal. This should be reviewed by the public and the planning board during the public hearing process, not added as a condition by the planning staff. This storm water system will greatly affect neighbors to this subdivision. Also, it is a requirement of the pre -plat submittal. A change of Section 27.06.020 and 27.06.030 permitted and conditional uses in the R-3 zoning district would not be compatible to the surrounding neighborhood and will place an undue concentration of people with this variance. Section 27.06.040 states that a minimum lot area in the R-3 zoning district will be 7,000 sq. ft. The 7,000 sq.ft. is not compatible to the neighborhood. Lowering it to 4,000 sq.ft. makes it even less compatible. This should not be allowed to be reduced even more to accommodate the developer. One of the PUD requirements under Appendez B, Environmental Assessment, Part H, Section E. refers to the effects on agriculture and agricultural water user facilities. According to the staff report, Page 36, "there is also an existing pump station adjacent to Ashley Creek which conveys water from Ashley Creek through an approximately 12 inch mainline. The pump station is located immediately north of condo Lot 3 of Phase 4 of the subdivision. From the pump station the main line travels east up a slope and appears to terminate at the site of an old pole barn." I would like to state that this information is incorrect in its description of the location and the description of the mainline. A second (J main line exits to the West from this pump site as a T to the main line referred to in the staff report. This line continues underground in the 30' easement shown as running East and West on the northern property boundary. How will the developer protect my pump site and main line from damage? Number 32 under Condition of Approval requires a 60' wide road and utility easement to an adjacent property. This road when placed in use will sever my main line as it crosses my 30' easement. How will my main line be protected? Number 33 under Condition of Approval refers to the requirement of a MT Dept of Transportation approach. According the City of Kalispell Zoning, dated May 15, 2007 this approach will be going directly through the 100 year flood plan, as shown. The road will exit at the base of Hart Hill, a very steep portion of the road with limited visibility, onto Highway #2, a narrow heavily traveled highway with limited visibility from the East. Another very narrow county road, Appleway, is located a short distance to the East of this approach, that can not handle the amount of traffic that it has at this time. A portion of this road will cross an industrial site to the North. I would think that it is highly unusual to allow residential access to cross an industrial site. I do not believe that it has been stated as to the industrial use of this property. 54 other conditions are being placed upon this development. Many of the conditions are actual requirements that really should have been presented for public comment and �) review by the planning board prior to approval not. ' The City of Kalispell Zoning, dated May 15, 2007shows the 24 acre tract as being in the path of the by pass and covered by the 100 year flood plain. A major portion of this tract will be under the bypass and the general terrain of the property does not lend itself to being suitable for the changes requested by the developer. Also, this area contains a former mill site filled area. A subdivision could be placed on this property that would not totally destroy a beautiful property by removing 10 to 35 feet of dirt by cuts and fills and totally devalue the surrounding R-1 neighborhood. If the property adjoining Stoneridge retained an R-1 zone and added higher density gradually as it became closer to Kalispell it would create a buffer, as it should to protect the existing neighborhood. The former mill site filled areas should be used as park land not have more fill placed on top of them for future home sites or roads. It is my understanding that the city of Kalispell does not allow buildings on filled areas. Exhibit 5.4 shows the entire subdivision soils being affected. I hope that you will consider my comments in your decision regarding the requests presented by the Applicant for review this evening. He has requested major changes that will affect this area forever. He has not submitted all of the required documentation for review. Proper notice has not been given to adjoining property owners. The Applicant has not shown compelling evidence to substantiate the necessity for these changes. The changes that he is asking for will benefit him, but not the existing neighborhood. Please —� follow the zoning regulations as they are written and deny his requests, as presented. Thank you for allowing me time to present my comments this evening. Sincerely, Marily a i n JA"INE, STEPHENSON, BLEWETT JAMES E. AIKEN GARY W. BJELLAND GARYDONAW. ��J'� AVER, P.C. JOHN D. STEPHENSON BRIAN L, TAYLOR J. HLLAND N �Q� �716 i � L' PATRICK R. WATT LON T. HOLDEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW WARREN C. WENZ JON J. KUDRNA 300 CENTRALAvENUE RETIRED: / BRION C. LINDSETH SEvENTHFLOOR, U.S. BANK BUILDING JACK L. IS SUE ANN LOVE P.O. BOx2269 G. MATTEUCCI G. M GEORGE N. McCABE GREAT FALLS, MONTANA 59403-2269 K. DALETHUR K. DALE SCHWANKE TYLER G. MOSS TEL: (406) 727-5000 ROBERT B. PFENNIGS FAX: (406) 761-4273 E-MAIL: wwenza7ardine1aw.ccm May 4, 2007 Sean Conrad City of Kalispell Planning and Zoning Commission 17 2nd Street East, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 Re: Marilyn Bain Our File No. 84895-00201 Dear Mr. Conrad: I represent Marilyn Bain of Kalispell, Montana. As you are aware, she has protested the petition of Wayne Turner regarding the annexation and zoning of the property presently owned by the Charles and Wynona O'Neill Family Limited Partnership on Foys Lake Road. Her very legitimate concerns and objections are set forth in detail in her letter to you dated April 10, 2007, I have enclosed a copy of her letter for your convenient reference. While I do not intend to restate all of her very compelling comments, I do want to emphasize the fact that, as she points out, Mr. Turner will not and can not end up as the owner of the water right at the Ashley Creek POD site in the Willow Creek Subdivision. At best, he will most likely end up as the owner of an undivided 50% of this right. Ms. Bain owns one-third of the remaining 50%, as does her brother, Roger O'Neil. Therefore, the Planning Board has no legal authority to approve the subdivision because not all of the water rights will be acquired as required by Conditions No. 46 and 47, appearing on Pages 43 and 44 of the staff report. For your information Ms. Bain has never been contacted by anyone regarding this water right. In addition, I am advised that a contiguous property owner, Stoneridge Homeowners Association was not given any notice of the filing of the petition. It should have been given notice because it is the owner of two parks that abut this proposed development. Therefore, until proper notice is given this Association and each lot owner in the development and these people are given the opportunity to comment, the Planning Board can not proceed further. Further, it would seem to be unquestionable that approval of this very high density development would be inappropriate and in violation of the Kalispell Growth Policy and the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The Stoneridge development was designed and very carefully developed as an R-1 Suburban Residential District. Section 27-04-020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance states, in part, that the intent of such a district is: "to provide for estate -type residential development and for the performance of limited agricultural activities." The Kalispell Zoning Ordinance at Section 27.01.040 states, again in part, that its purpose is: "to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community; to promote the visual and aesthetic objectives of the community; ....; Sean Conrad 2 May 4, 2007 Re: Marilyn Bain l to conserve its natural resources; to provide adequate accommodations for transportation of people and goods; ...; to facilitate the provisions for public works requirements such as water, sewer and environmental needs;.." The petition under consideration seeks approval as an R-3 Urban Single Family Residential District with a PUD overlay. Given the stated objective of an R-1 District, it would seem clear that an R-3 District should never be allowed to abut such a District. Furthermore, this development as planned is in total non-conformance with the existing neighborhood. Approval of this development certainly will not promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community. It will not promote the visual and aesthetic objectives of the community. It would not conserve its natural resources. It will not provide adequate accommodations for the transportation of people and goods and it certainly will not facilitate the provision of public works. In conclusion, it would seem that the same rules ought to apply as are required to be considered before granting a variance. Before granting a variance of an existing zoning ordinance, Montana law requires: (1) The variance not be contrary to the public interest; (2) A literal enforcement of the current ordinance must result in unnecessary hardship ,owing to conditions unique to the property; and C(3) The spirit of the existing ordinance must be observed and substantial justice done. (Schendel v. Board of Adjustment of City of Bozeman (1989), 237 Mont. 278, 774 P.2d 379). The development requested by the current petition is, in fact, contrary to the public interest. Its denial will not result in unnecessary hardship, but will actually enforce the spirit and intent of the Kalispell Growth Policy and the zoning ordinance. A copy of this letter is being sent to the members of Planning Board so that they will have an opportunity to review it prior to your meeting next Tuesday evening. Very truly yours, JARDINE ST PHENSON, B EWETT & WEAVER, P.C. F Y Warren C. Wenz WCW:lb cc: Members - Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission Marilyn Bain Dale R. Cockrell April 10, 2007 City of Kalispell Planning Dept. 17 2nd Street East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Kalispell City Planning Board, I am responding to the four requests by the Applicant Wayne Turner for the changes to the property owned by the Charles and Wynona O'Neil Family Limited Partnership on Foys Lake Road. The Application for Growth Policy Amendment, as presented by Wayne Turner has some critical errors of admission. He states on Page 3, Section h, "There are no known hazards on the site." This same statement is repeated on Page 4, Section I. I beg to differ with this statement by the Applicant. This property was a portion of the former Forest Products Co. sawmill site. During the many years of operation of the sawmill this particular area was a portion of a mill pond. This mill pond area was filled in as the operation of the sawmill changed and no longer needed this mill pond. This area was filled in with bark, wood products, metal parts from unusable equipment. This fill area could be as deep as 20' in places. Fill was also placed along the banks of Ashley Creek. Some of this fill created the steep banks that are referred to by the applicant. Please refer C� to the aerial photo taken on Aug. 30, 1972 by Western Ways, Inc. labeled Exhibit #1. This fill area also shows in the aerial photo taken in 1980 by the same company. Please refer to Exhibit #2. As you can see this mill pond covered a major portion of the mill site. A requirement by the Planning Board should be core drilling of the industrial areas which were filled for the protection of future buyers of this property and the city of Kalispell for liability reasons. The land in this area and other areas of the sawmill site have a high water table that continually flooded in the spring. The balance of the acreage South of Ashley Creek also has areas of fill in several places. The largest area covers approximately 36 acres. This area was the original mill pond. This area was filled in with bark and other wood products. After it was filled in it was used for lumber storage. Other fill areas show as light patches on the 1972 aerial on Exhibit #l. Areas along the creek were also filled. This fill can be observed on Exhibit #1 and #2. It is stated in the application that access for this site will be through the industrial area to the North. However, it is not stated what the industrial use will be. I would think that it is highly unusual to allow residential access to cross an industrial site. The only access to the North would be onto Appleway Drive, as shown on the aerial labeled Exhibit #2. Highway #2 is approximately 150' or so away from this access. Most vehicles are traveling at a fairly high rate of speed as they exit from the highway onto Appleway Drive. Appleway Drive to the East is a very narrow road that can barely handle the ( 1 current vehicle use. I believe that this same access is proposed for the remainder of the C) Page Two, City Planning Board, April 10, 2007 subdivision, as an access point. This access will create traffic congestion a very serious safety concern. The Petition for Annexation and Initial Zoning states the need for smaller lots. However with the record number of subdivision requests for small lots with annexation approval that have already been granted preliminary approval I question his supposed need for high density lots. According to the paper approximately 6,300 small lots are waiting at this time for final plat approval. The developer should be required to present substantial evidence as to the need for the change to allow this zone change for this project. The applicant stated in his Application for Planned Unit Development on Page 25 that "The Applicant concluded that the adjacent property owners, general public and the new residents of Willow Creek will benefit from the requested relaxations, rather than be negatively impacted by them." Actually, the adjacent owners property values will be seriously and adversely impacted. R-1 zone regulations were followed to the letter for Stoneridge the subdivision directly to the West. They are not been followed in this proposal. The Applicant is asking for 9 variations to the regulations and has not presented evidence as to the necessity for these changes. This plan does not conform to the neighborhood. The adjacent property lots to the West are 1 acre in size or 44,000 sq.ft. The Applicant plans to back lots of approximately 14,000 sq.ft up to the lots in C� Stoneridge that are 44,000 sq.ft. in size. It appears that he does not plan to install a buffer zone, but plans to maximize how many little tiny lots that he can cram onto the property and has the audacity to claim that it won't have an adverse effect. The Applicant will be the only one to benefit from this variation. The Applicant in his Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application answered N/A to the 5 questions regarding his requested variances. I believe that he should be required to give a more detailed answer to each question because a subdivision could be planned for this property that would not require the variances that the Applicant is requesting. The Staff Report on Page 33 Section E refers to the Effects on Agriculture and Agricultural Water User Facilities. The March 16, 2007 letter from Mr. Turner fails to address the actual facts regarding the pumping site, water rights, water right ownership and recorded easements pertaining to this pumping site or POD. The details are fully spelled out in a document titled `Settlement Agreement' dated July 17, 1987. This document was recorded under the recording #2000291/14250. This pumping site is the main POD for one of the water rights listed in this document. The easements listed in. this document are not shown on the Preliminary Plat for Willow Creek. From a legal standpoint these easements must be revealed to future buyers of the lots in this subdivision. Three of these easements are very clearly detailed and directly affect this property. They are listed on Flathead County records as Certificate of Survey No. 8698. A 30' easement runs from the POD along the North property boundary to the property Page Three, City Planning Board, April 10, 2007 line ending at the Stoneridge. Another easement crosses the property from Meridian Road to the POD. A third easement runs in a North/South direction on the boundary line between Stoneridge and the proposed Willow Creek subdivision. This is a 60' easement with 30' on either side of the property. This 30' easement on the Willow Creek side will directly affect the useable space on the West end of the lots that border Stoneridge. I have briefly described these easements. The recorded document spells out the details and allowable uses of these easements. Mr. Turner's letter dated March 16, 2007 would lead one to believe that he will own the water rights at this POD and that this letter should take care of the problems with this site. This is not true. If he has an agreement regarding water rights in his purchase agreement of the property he will only receive a portion of the rights at this POD. Three other entities also own a share. I own a portion of these rights, the 60 horse pump and improvements at this site. Roger O'Neil also owns a share of these rights. He faxed me a letter regarding this POD and asked me to read his letter into this public record. It is as follows: see attached letter Page 43, #46 of the staff report requires the transfer of ground and surface rights to the city of Kalispell. It must be noted that only the portion that Mr. Turner will acquire at time of purchase of the property can be transferred. Page 44 447 of the staff report requires the pump station and any associated mainlines to be removed prior to the final plat of Phase 4. When property is purchased it is purchased subject to existing easements of record. I sincerely expect that the easements regarding this POD will be honored. As an owner of this water right with this historic POD site, I do not want my pump equipment, my underground pipe or any of my improvements removed from this site. I hope that you will consider my comments in your decision regarding the requests presented by the Applicant for review this evening. He has requested major changes that will affect this area forever. He has not shown compelling evidence to substantiate the necessity for these changes. He is simply asking for the R-3 zone change to allow a higher density on this property. This will benefit him, but not the existing neighborhood. Please follow the zoning regulations and deny his requests as presented. Thank you for allowing me time to present my comments on the Wayne Turner requests this evening. Sincerely, Marily ain +1°1� Vht��Y v t i "�5s s�i�t� ,'1 C9Nt �..,,��"N...,��M�, t.?.S��iS. �,r'v 9� � �� �i'>tR"*kr�►�,� .11, c N e f t Gt 12 � a J �C'A CV aR 1��fl i °, k `'z y _xAq.i,it s '`-f a ?t ' �=j�Y'f ``r +{ r t a ' 1 ol r'j� u i{rJryM,�y s ✓+ i^s,{i i '� l .,,� �' s r s` .f''f Yr, �5'. t a"�,� t '', r ! 4 h"i� lfn �,at:n rl i7d i'��`�i.{,�'��' � tG,: �' 5i�,,,b:� I°r,e} wad �t{ n t ,r Lfi111H1J i Y.,r x t >l ck fy. rN»ss. 'aCU'S+r1.r^'�..4''j�igti.�1. !x..,.54 d"i^ r 3ir= k,+ t r:l+' Y '� � s r`' r r r ni• y ,, ¢f t f j� JH/,tl '� ", �,»,W.���,'S I u daF R.y�J�,,v% rX � i '� Irsu'15{��;yir �'{t`'�{' z .�,vv 7"u r t `Trk7 as jF 7f��ta*" ,r.�'S' d4 t ih'� $$J rl` t4 ryLa .%+� s �� qrr• r v ,i F 1 r r! r r l�S�" r.J n xsilj� rht'sa,a J�,{ �{ !. t r � h r r: t rl td v�'r. r� o)zt✓i �b� lh yt, rV�".N Ny "f ✓;yl yr itk aVri v it �,�.. rY fi aiHT,v rt� �+' 'e�>Zt,�roN�... J v4. t r jr 9 h,c.r u ua!aS 41 r r � t kt N t,fk r 4Ae ,rt t u r{ t � �" �i ��' ! v ,+ i r.� p-t 1;. �',�4 y:•. ra �1,.� �{�+k '., 1i �r/� � as t�,�w Y `' Ri _ �. ,. tg' ar ,"Qt f s4y(�;ay�p lfi} wrY pgtO �n �:.r 4.YY' yr v N ti , 1 r (�In^�x dj��5 t7 C, LL 'r+.1 1, � ��'� Ctii i.h Ytlj 1+ ,. - 1 "� ,"� ) Y Y b •5t(�,W'V }�,+' ��.. ) 3' , f" r `7 e -tt �>• t Y, ,:r L} R y,'. t t F k.,r� 1 �j y� S'I t .. ) �, C 1 +,1'` � / ., r a.'� J .� 1,yi\ t`+j. � k) �i �.rAK �nY%/c � . r F'•'.., ,��>�t�iti�I d�. �,ro�5 z>4 : d. nMx P } 3 v ,+='�"Skla�� i �'h`'z �,v1 - at{5✓x� � - �sst1 7 a r ;i� ?'i �,-m.A.•„i,1 A �' a .r < � �1 rri� � ��t � t�h 1 yF t i ,, 5 t l ���.'' �'• •pt y� � r �1t s 7� f' ryy Y 1 � " Y4 SJ✓' §�{{u �1�� �l* "Yd 4 J S. � l *).'"y�N n.r�'s,"` ,tr a �'v'" % t nt " i rZt tt v ! a k, . °' ���, '� d I °x"�.�r �:i>✓. ,P, w•.a- t ,P"fi7Y js r� s?' A ro, raW rc ta4b`a' r%t :?' t t r 6+ idkt � r �•a"r'+.t3 ✓ ,+ Nti 4Fr f _ ^; a vy RAW, r r t 1. r v Mr�i kt y kvadu ,p�lVrt ar 'X'� y� ".r t 0 rat ; i, 7r[S ��t i r f S 2 �lS a17w� 'b V'{ t o kQ r � 1 j S traw9 t i s ry, r{,>t :2 a ."1n t 1 Y r2 .M;' K t sn Y N /. � ...� t M1 ! s � o t - rr k S\ r 'f 1 P �'. K i r r ry !te P� •, 1 r ti „7r i� r r L kli Apr Uy U( U1:UUp Koger U'Neil 9 April 2007 r ou- f oo-acoo P. Sean Conrad City of Kalispell planning and Zoning 17 2" d St. East Kalispell, MT 59901 Hubert Turner concerning water rights at the Willow Creek PUD Re: Letter dated 16 March 2007 from Dear Sean: The water rights involved with this property are not solely owned by Wp/Hubert Turner. The ownership is shared with three additional entities. Mr. Turners portion would represent only 50% of the total water rights. These would be acquired along with the purchase of the property from MFP— ia Any discussions and subsequent decisions that need tbemaldee involving and water the feeder esmwater ust includets d tt,e Section E pages 33,34 and 46 of the Effects on Agrioem respective owners. As one of the ownership entities, i request that you please keep me informed at the address below. Sin. ely, c Roger L. O'Neil 1934 Leucadia Scenic Ct. Encinitas, CA 92024 C) CITY OF KALISPELL ZONING MAY 15, 2007 �.... His <Zk