Loading...
12-12-06KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING 0 C) MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2006 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: Timothy Norton, Rick Hull,. Bryan Schutt, Robyn Balcom, 'and John Hinchey. Bob Albert and Kari Gabriel were absent. Sean Conrad represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 8 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Balcom moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the minutes. of the November 14, 2006 regular .planning board meeting. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC No one wished to speak. FOX TROTTER MEADOWS - A request by FESN LLC for annexation, initial zoning and ANNEXATION & preliminary plat approval of Fox Trotter Meadows on PRELIMINARY PLAT approximately 11 acres located at 250 Stillwater Road. The owner is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with the R-2 (Single Family Residential) zoning district and is also requesting a preliminary plat to create 24 lots ranging in size from approximately 1/4 to one acre in size. STAFF REPORTS KA-06-14 Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning & KPP-06-15 Department presented Staff Reports KA-06-14 & KPP-06-15 for the Board. Conrad noted . the annexation request includes 3 separate properties, the 10 acre project site, a 30 foot strip just south of this site that will be incorporated into the project as well as 9/ 10ths of an acre proposed for off -site parkland dedication. The owners of this site also own the 200+ acre property that includes the off -site parkland. Conrad said that the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map designates this site as suburban residential and the R-2 zoning is consistent with that designation. Conrad continued that the preliminary plat of Fox Trotter Meadows is a 24 lot residential subdivision. A majority of the lots range from 10,000-14,000 square feet. The developer is proposing off -site parkland dedication, located on Parcel A of Certificate of Survey 15697, which was reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. In addition a condition of approval requires the subdivider to dedicate an additional 10 feet of R/ W along Stillwater Road to allow for future expansion of the road and for a bike/pedestrian path along the project's frontage. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 1 of 15 Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff reports KA-06-14 & KPP-06-15 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-2, Single Family Residential and the preliminary plat of Fox Trotter Meadows be approved subject to the 24 conditions listed in the staff report. QUESTIONS BY THE Hinchey asked if the bike path along Stillwater Road is being BOARD installed or are they just dedicating the land. Conrad said both. Hinchey asked if the path will connect with any others and Conrad said not at this point and he reviewed the location of bike paths in the area. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Mike Fraser, 690 North -Meridian Suite 102, Kalispell noted that he is wearing 2 hats in that he is providing technical assistance on this project and is a partner in the development. Fraser noted the area is in transition and reviewed the zoning and recent developments along Three Mile Drive. Fraser said they want to make Fox Trotter Meadows a classic R-2 subdivision. The minimum lot size is 10,200 square feet which will provide each lot with 85 feet of frontage and a depth of 120 feet which will allow a nice home with a yard to be built and done in a complementary architectural style. Fraser said they are proposing an off -site park dedication. Originally the Parks Department wanted parkland on -site and located in the northwest corner, however that area is a sloping hill and not suitable for a park. They then went to the off -site area which is relatively flat and adjoins Four Mile Drive. When the 200 acres adjacent to this project develops there will be an additional park dedication which .will feed into the regional park concept. Fraser said there is an existing house on the north end of the site and added they concur with the staff recommendation that at such time when the water and sewer fails on the existing house they will be required to hook up to city services. Regarding traffic concerns Fraser said the 24 lots will generate 170 - 210 vehicle trips per day. Stillwater Road is seeing a lot of traffic and it will continue to increase. They are dedicating 10 feet for a bike path along their boundary with Stillwater Road which gives them room to develop an urban arterial on the site. They also support the concept of a waiver of protest of an SID so the residents of this subdivision will know that they will eventually have to help pay for improvements on Stillwater Road. Also it is anticipated that future impact fees will be charged that will Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 2 of 15 also help with the road improvements. L> Fraser continued because of the development in the area the drainage patterns have changed. The city standards are pretty explicit in that you can't change the drainage patterns nor can you discharge more stormwater than what existed pre -development. The development will create more impervious area and there will be less area for infiltration and they will deal with the water on -site with swaling and retention as part of the landscape and design features of each lot. Secondly, they will be looking at infiltration trenches and dry wells. Fraser added that they plan to work closely with the neighbors on these issues. Fraser said they request the approval of the annexation and initial zoning of R-2 along with the approval of the preliminary plat. Fraser said that all of the conditions look acceptable and reflect the nature and character of the subdivision. Schutt asked what sort of time frame are they anticipating with the development of the 200 acres where the parkland dedication is located. Fraser said the board should see a neighborhood plan by mid -next year and then they would look at annexation and phasing following approval of the neighborhood plan. Hinchey asked if there will be access from this project to the park through the 200 acres. Fraser said yes on the plat in the northwest corner on lot 10 there is a 20 foot temporary access easement and he added there will be a similar access easement across the 200 acres to the park site subject to relocation at the time the 200 acre site develops and then there will be a permanent dedicated path. The easement will not be developed but will be dedicated and in city ownership. PUBLIC HEARING Ed Weber, 1070 Quarter Horse Lane, Kalispell stated that they live in Quarter Horse Estates. Weber said 3 years ago when the area started to develop he discussed the issues of traffic, drainage, impacts to the school system, fire protection, etc. with staff. Now that Empire Estates, Blue Heron, Cottonwood and Northland Subdivisions have been developed there have been a number of impacts to their neighborhood and promises made but to date haven't been kept. Weber asked if the cumulative effects on Stillwater Road are being discussed with the new Forest Service building, the 3000 homes that are proposed, and the new high school. The truck and residential traffic continues to increase yet there have been no improvements to Stillwater Road. When Empire Estates and other developments were approved the drainage wasn't done right and the fix for that problem has been to dig out the culvert so it continues to drain onto his and his Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 3 of 15 neighbor's property. Weber said they now have problems with weeds which are supposed to be taken care of by the developers or homeowners associations but they aren't. Weber noted they built in this area with the anticipation of having a certain type of quality of life and soon they will be totally surrounded. He asked what is there in place to protect them against development where no one is held accountable. Weber described the problems they already have with drainage and he feels those impacts will be increased with this development. Marshall Corbett, 1080 Quarter Horse Lane, Kalispell stated that he owns Lots 5 & 6. Lot 6 is directly across the road from the driveway of this subdivision and his concern is that any large amount of precipitation from this subdivision will run straight onto his lot. He said he retired and bought this property to have open space and he hates to see the Flathead Valley developing so rapidly. Corbett said he doesn't object to the property developing but he thinks that lot sizes should be reconsidered. He cited his additional concerns with roaming animals, traffic and maintenance of Stillwater Road. Corbett said he is also concerned about property values because every time one of these developments goes in next to them their property values go down. He said people may not want to buy 5 acres when the density around them is so high. He would like to see the neighborhood develop into one or two acre lots which he feels is more reasonable. Corbett requested that the board rethink this proposal. BOARD DISCUSSION I None. MOTION - ANNEXATION & Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff INITIAL ZONING report KA-06-14 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-2, Single Family Residential. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked who would be responsible for the maintenance and improvement of Stillwater Road and the drainage. Conrad said it is a county road and is still maintained by the county. If development continues up Stillwater Road the city will take over the road and then come up with a plan for major improvements to Stillwater Road including paving, curb & gutter and bike/pedestrian paths on both sides. Conrad added when Empire Estates was approved the developers were not required to do any improvements on Stillwater Road but did dedicate an additional 20 feet from the edge of the road R/W on their property to accommodate a bike path. Conrad noted if the city were to see a project like Empire Estates now they would probably require the developer improve that half of Stillwater Road to city standards. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 4 of 15 \J Balcom asked if the property put aside for a path could be used instead to widen a road. Conrad said there is 60 feet of R/W there right now and the developer is dedicating an additional 10 feet. The city would be able to construct a minor arterial within an 80 foot road R/W so as development occurs on both sides of Stillwater the city will ask for additional R/W for the improvements. Balcom asked what the city has in place to ensure that the work is done right and Conrad said the city now has a Construction Manager who oversees these projects while roads and sidewalks are being built and utilities are installed. In addition the city also has a Storm Water Engineer who reviews the plans for drainage prior to approval of the subdivision and prior to the work commencing. In the past subdivisions have been installed and were not inspected as well as they should have been. Balcom asked . if there are fines if the developer doesn't do what they are supposed to do. Conrad said that the developer bonds for the unfinished improvements which would cover the completion of the work if it isn't done correctly. Fraser reviewed the process the developers have to go through to get approval of a project and the city's role in ensuring that the project is done correctly. Weber said that he understands the process but what happens to them as landowners if in fact the approved drainage system fails and their property is damaged after the bond expires. Norton said hopefully with the staff in place now this won't be the case. Weber said the purpose of people coming in and giving testimony is to show that there may have been problems in the past and should prevent those things from occurring with additional development. Norton agreed and added that is why testimony from the people who actually live in the area is important to the board. Schutt wrestles with whether urban development should be taken to a line and then break off to a more rural development. Schutt said that he shares the concern that the R-4 at Empire Estates seems dense and not very compatible with the neighborhood. As they look at the appropriate initial zoning and the next phase of development he personally likes the idea that they start to decrease the density as the city moves away from the core. However, Schutt said with the development of the additional 200 acres decreasing the density doesn't seem to apply very well in this case. Schutt shares the concerns of the homeowners who are faced with the fact that the city has grown out to them but he feels the quality of growth within the city of Kalispell is superior to what is going on in the county. He is not saying that reduces the impact on the neighbors who are already there but R-2 is Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 5 of 15 a lot better than what could be going in this area. Schutt said he is in favor of R-2 zoning. j Norton said Quarter Horse Estates was• a good subdivision at the time. It was close to the city with nice large acre estate parcels. But, as soon as you get sewer and water in an area density will follow. When properties are annexed the city has limited options such as R-1, one acre minimum, and R-2, 9,600 square foot minimum lots. He added this subdivision is proposing larger than 9,600 square feet lots. Norton said Empire Estates and the other subdivisions in this area were approved with a condition where they waive their right to protest an SID. Therefore when the city takes Stillwater Road over most of the landowners who live in the city and access this road will help contribute to the improvements. Norton said the city has methods in place to ensure the storm water/drainage and other infrastructure is installed correctly and all the board can do is trust the staff. Norton added that he disagrees that the land values of lots in Quarter Horse Estates will be adversely affected. Norton feels that the large acre parcels within a dense area will be highly coveted. ROLL CALL I The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4-1 with Balcom in opposition. MOTION - FOX TROTTER Schutt moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff MEADOWS PRELINIINARY report KA-06-14 as findings of fact and recommend to the PLAT Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Fox Trotter Meadows be approved subject to the 24 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton noted the 10 foot wide bike/pedestrian path is being counted as parkland and asked if that was typical. Conrad said that was mentioned in the Environmental Assessment but the bike/pedestrian path isn't counted toward any kind of parkland dedication. Norton asked about condition # 12 which deals with the Homeowners Association for the maintenance of the bike path but it doesn't mention anything about the off -site park. Conrad said the off -site park is being dedicated as strictly land with a temporary easement and there will not be any kind of improvements to the park at this time. When the 200 acres develop adjacent to this property a permanent easement will be put in place that would provide access from Fox Trotter Meadows to the park located within the future 200 acre . development that will be shared by both developments. Norton noted the existing house on Lot 1 will be hooked to city water and sewer when the current systems fail and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 6 of 15 �f asked if the road connection would be completed from this lot to Fox Trotter Loop in the future. Conrad said that was addressed in Condition # 18 which states "In the event of future subdivisions on lot 1 of phase 1, or at such time lot 1 of phase 1 connects to city sewer and/or water, access onto Stillwater Road shall be removed and all future lots or access to the existing house shall be required to access off of Fox Trotter Loop." Hull asked about the temporary easement to the park. Conrad further explained how this would work. Hull asked if the continuation of the road and grid system was dropped because the slopes were too steep. Conrad said yes and there was initial discussion about extending the cul-de-sac road on the preliminary plat up through proposed Lot 9 to provide connections with the adjacent 10 acre parcel to the north. Conrad said due to the slopes they would never be able to construct a road there that met city standards. The Public Works Department looked at it and felt that due to the slopes it wasn't feasible. Schutt said it is a bit tough to judge this subdivision on its own knowing there are 200 more acres coming before the board before too much longer. At first he was skeptical of the off -site parkland dedication and now it seems to make sense. Hinchey said that he still has a problem with the 20 foot temporary access to the park and asked if there will be a deed restriction on the other 200 acres if the developer sold that acreage tomorrow. Conrad said there would be an access easement recorded with the deed of the 200 acres providing the future residents of Fox Trotter Meadows access across that property to the parkland. Conrad added so whether the developer continues to own it or sells it that easement would be in place and in place prior to final plat approval. There was further discussion regarding the easement and park site. Weber asked what happens if Fox Trotter Lane dead ends and access is denied beyond this subdivision to access further development on the Tripp property? Norton said as Fox Trotter Lane hits the Tripp property the road would dead end and they would no longer have the ability to extend the road beyond this subdivision. Hull asked if they have the full 60 feet and Conrad said yes and added the annexation papers have been signed by the owner and the land is being incorporated into the eventual 60 foot road R/W that is proposed as Fox Trotter Lane. ROLL CALL I The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4-1, with Balcom in opposition. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 7 of 15 C-11 C� (D CO TTAGE GARDENS - A revised request from Apex 1, LLC, for annexation, initial ANNEXATION, PUD, & zoning, planned unit development (PUD) and preliminary plat PRELINIINARY PLAT approval of Cottage Gardens on approximately 10.75 acres. The owner is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with the R-2 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The owner is also requesting a PUD zoning district on the property to allow reduced lot sizes in the R-2 zoning district and a preliminary plat to create 47 lots ranging in size from 2,600 net square feet to 4,350 net square feet. STAFF REPORTS KA-06-05, Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning KPUD-06-02 & KPP-06-08 Department presented Staff Reports KA-06-05, KPUD-06-02 & KPP-06-08 for the Board. Conrad provided the location of Cottage Gardens to the board. He noted that the planning board reviewed a version of this subdivision in September and the PUD proposal included clustered pods that would access onto a 20 foot wide roadway. The original proposal was for 44 lots and the lots all looked out onto a common open space with garages in the rear. The project before the board has increased the number of lots to 47 and there are 2 pod areas where they look out onto the common open space and then there is a linear string of lots that are next to a common area and floodplain where open space and parkland is proposed. In the PUD the applicant is requesting deviations from the minimum lot size. The minimum lot size in the R-2 zoning is 9,600 square feet and the applicant is proposing lot sizes ranging from 2,500 to 4,500 square feet. In addition deviations from setbacks and the city roads standards are requested. Conrad reviewed the cross section drawings submitted by the applicant. He noted Cottage Garden Lane, the main road into the subdivision would be constructed to city standards. The deviation on Rosemary Loop is a 3 foot landscaped boulevard instead of the minimum 5 foot landscape boulevard. There would also be an 8 foot bike/pedestrian path along the Three Mile Drive R/ W in the southern area of Rosemary Loop. For Sage Loop the deviations are a sidewalk on the curb with no boulevard proposed and there would be no sidewalk along the property line adjacent to Mountain Vista Estates subdivision. A 45 foot R/ W is proposed on this section of roadway. The Public Works Department is recommending that all the roads in the subdivision meet the minimum standards for city streets, which would include the 5 foot minimum boulevards and minimum 60 foot road R/W. In addition the planning staff is recommending that the driveways from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door be a minimum length of 20 feet to provide off-street parking and ensure that vehicles parked between the street and the garage door do Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 8 of 15 not obstruct the sidewalk travel way. Staff is also requesting an increase in landscape buffering along Three Mile Drive to incorporate a minimum 5 foot boulevard along Rosemary Loop, 8 foot bike/pedestrian path and a landscape buffer varying in width to allow for a meandering 4 foot high landscaped earth berm. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KA-06-05 and recommend that the initial zoning of R-2 be approved and adopt staff reports KPUD-06- 02 and KPP-06-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the planned unit development request and preliminary plat of Cottage Gardens be denied as it fails to meet all required statutory criteria. However, should the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission elect to recommend approving the requested planned unit development and preliminary plat, findings shall be made to allow the requested deviations and adopt the conditions for both . the planned unit development and preliminary plat listed in the staff report. Conrad added if the board does recommend approval based on the conditions listed it will require a significant redesign of the PUD and preliminary plat. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull asked for clarification on a motion. Conrad noted if the board is inclined to deny the PUD and the subdivision they would adopt the staff report and recommend denial. Hull asked if the annexation and zoning should even be considered if the board is leaning toward denying the subdivision. Conrad responded the board could pass forward the recommendation for the annexation 8. initial zoning if they choose but there are still the issues with the PUD design and subdivision layout. Conrad suggested if the planning board opted to go forward with the recommendation of the initial zoning but denied the PUD and preliminary plat the developer could choose to carry forward the proposed R-2 zoning to city council and get the property annexed. Then at that point the property would be in the city and they could come back to this board again requesting a PUD or a straight subdivision that meets the R- 2 zoning requirements. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Bryan Long, Long Engineering, 347 West Idaho, Kalispell noted that he is representing the applicant. A general overview of the project was provided by Long. Long noted his concern relating to the. landscape buffering along Three Mile Drive. The buffering is covered under condition #3 in the staff report which basically recommends a minimum 4 foot high berm. Long noted it would take a major redesign to accommodate this condition. Instead they Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 9 of 15 would like to propose in the areas where they cannot provide a 4 foot berm they would provide a thicker vegetative cover as a break and provide berming in the areas they can. Long added that during the previous meetings they wanted to know if the landscaping berm was going to be strictly adhered to and were informed by the board that it hadn't been required by any of the other developments along Three Mile Drive therefore it didn't seem appropriate to require it for this proposal. Long added they took that into consideration with the redesign and this is what they came up with. Long said Condition #2 is requesting a minimum of 20 feet in length from the edge of the sidewalk to the garage door. When they did the redesign they tried to design as many of the garages as they could with the shared back wall so that the public wouldn't be looking at garage doors when they drove through, this subdivision. Long said that he believes that they can take the majority of the remaining garages and do that same thing. He suggested the following amendment to Condition #2 that would add the phrase "when the garage door faces the street." Long reviewed the requirement that the streets meet city design standards. He believes the variances for the road width falls within the PUD application and would provide more flexibility in design. Long said the main access road through the middle of this subdivision meets city standards. He then reviewed the deviations from city standards for the other roads within the subdivision which were noted by staff above. Long said if other properties are developed adjacent to this project additional R/W could be dedicated to meet the standards. In reference to the lack of through lots from Mountain Vista Estates, they came up with putting a restrictive access easement in this location. Within that they have a 3 foot restrictive access easement with a 6 foot high privacy fence. Cottage Gardens would be providing the property owners in Mountain Vista Estates a fence along their back yard and a landscape boulevard that would serve as a buffer between the 2 subdivisions. He added it doesn't seem appropriate to require a sidewalk along this side of the street when there are no lots to access it. Long continued that there was discussion of some of the lots not conforming to the cottage concept. All of the lots have a large common area outside their front door and all of them would have a right to all of the common areas and the clubhouse. Long said the applicant toured several of these cottage type facilities before deciding to pursue this type of development. He noted the central garage idea wouldn't be accepted here in Montana because of the climate, that is why they decided to have more of a residential type neighborhood Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 10 of 15 with individual garages. Long compared the previous proposal with this proposal and made the following points: the net acreages are very similar, they have a much better roadway system with a lot of additional sidewalks, individual contract haulers for garbage pickup, and no parking areas backing onto the street. There is room for 2 vehicles in the garage and one vehicle in the driveway and at least one more vehicle along the road which provides 4 parking spots per lot. They took the suggestions from the last board meeting and put them on paper. He indicated that staff and Public Works still have a few issues but if the conditions as presented in the staff report are approved it would require a substantial redesign of the project again. Long questioned Condition #6 which requires staking by a licensed surveyor prior to building foundations which he doesn't think is relevant in this situation. Long expressed his concern that they have submitted several landscaping proposals all of which have been sent back. He feels that Condition #7 should specifically state what they are looking for in a landscape plan. Dave Hofstad said he feels that they have come a long way from the prior submittal. He had the following comments on the conditions: Condition #20 f. which requires posting one side of roads 26- 32 feet wide as a fire lane. He asked if that was a new regulation because he feels it would litter the streets with signs for no parking when it hasn't been a concern in the past. Condition #21, Hofstad said he feels that the amount of cash -in -lieu for the Parks Department to install the ground cover and tree planting should be indicated in the condition so that the developer can determine whether they will complete the work or pay the cash -in -lieu amount. Condition #23, Hofstad noted that he had trouble with the wording of this condition which addresses the right to protest the creation of an SID. He understands that is a normal clause but asked how this would work when they are asking for a PUD/subdivision that is less than city standards in some of the aspects? If they agreed to this condition could the city come back 6 months later and require sidewalks be installed on the west side and the developer can't protest it. Condition #26, Hofstad said that he has a big concern with this condition which requires that a floodplain study be completed and submitted prior to final plat. Hofstad said the study would cost $20 to $30 thousand dollars and they can't get final plat approval until it has been accepted by FEMA Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 11 of 15 which could take a year or more. Hofstad suggested that a restriction be placed on only those lots that could be affected by the outcome of the study. In conclusion under Condition #30 Hofstad felt that restricting basements totally in this subdivision was not appropriate because there are some high areas where a daylight basement could be constructed without any drainage issues. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION TO TAKE THE Norton moved and Hull seconded a motion to remove this PROJECT OFF THE TABLE application from the table for further discussion and a recommendation to city council. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt commended the developer on the progress that they have made on this project. He was very concerned with the narrow pavement sections in the previous proposal and he is much more comfortable with the new street widths proposed now. Schutt said that he likes the effort to avoid the wall of garage doors and he would like to see more of the paired up garages with the zero lot line back wall oriented along the eastern edge of Rosemary Loop. All in all he said they have made a fair amount of progress and are moving in the right direction. Schutt said as a point of clarification he doesn't think that it was the intent of the planning board to indicate that they didn't want a landscape buffer along Three Mile Drive. They did not want to mandate a 30-50 foot buffer as opposed to the 15-20 foot buffer that other developers had created along Three Mile Drive. Conrad agreed that the board had mentioned that other subdivisions like Mountain Vista Estates, Blue Heron, and Empire Estates had all been required to install a 20 foot landscape buffer and construct a bike trail within that buffer and therefore this developer should not be held to a larger than 20 foot buffer. Hinchey said that he would also like to commend the developer on the cottage nature which he feels has merit. But, Hinchey continued, he still has a problem with the layout. He understands that this is a PUD and as such there is some flexibility in the rules. Hinchey added that they have taken that to the extreme in this project. The board is adjusting setbacks, boulevards, R/W width, and lots that are 1/3 smaller than the minimum lot size in the R-2 zoning. Hinchey said taken all together they are pushing the PUD too far. Balcom asked for staffs greatest concern with this project. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 12 of 15 01 �J Conrad said he would weigh all of the concerns equally and he reviewed them for the board. Balcom noted that a recommendation for denial from staff weighs heavily on her decision. Hull said that he is concerned with the smaller boulevards and he doesn't think this project has enough room to dump snow and perhaps isn't made for this climate. Hull agrees this type of project would be better suited on a narrow lot somewhere in the city as infill. Norton said that he really appreciates how far they have come. A lot of his concerns and questions were answered in the engineer's report. Norton said agrees that the staking of each lot for the foundation seems like overkill and he understands the frustration over the landscape plan. He said he doesn't recall anywhere in the city that the posting fire lane signs was required. Conrad said that the fire marshal has been requesting the inclusion of the fire lane signs on streets 26 - 32 feet wide because when cars are parked on both sides the road becomes too narrow for fire equipment. Norton continued that he agrees that the amount of cash -in - lieu for landscaping should be included in the condition. Regarding Condition 23 and the SID he said the condition is there so that the city can come in and improve the streets but is specifically meant for the upgrade of Three Mile Drive. Norton said the requirement of a floodplain study in Condition 26 has been asked of several developers especially in this area. He added he feels it is a reasonable request to put a restriction on only those lots that could be effective by the floodplain study. Norton said that he doesn't have a problem with the shrinking of the boulevards. The main road meets the city standards and the layout provides the interconnectivity that the board is looking for. He doesn't have a problem with the vinyl fence, restrictive easement and lack of sidewalk adjacent to Mountain Vista Estates. Regarding the 4 foot berm along Three Mile Drive he feels the developers alternative to install denser vegetation in areas where the berm is not appropriate is a good idea. Norton said however, he feels that they are still trying to cram too much into this property. He thinks that they can achieve a better cottage feel by eliminating a few lots around each one of the pods. Not increasing the lot size but increasing the common area. Schutt noted that he shares the same the concerns with the conditions. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 13 of 15 MOTION TO TABLE Norton moved and Balcom seconded a motion to table the project for an additional 90 days in order for the applicant to address the following concerns of the board: Reducing the density and increasing the size of common areas 1 and 2, increasing the size of the lots, increasing the number of shared garages throughout the subdivision, redesigning the streets to meet the city's design standards and providing adequate driveway lengths so, that cars parked on the driveways will not obstruct the travel way of the sidewalks. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked if the floodplain study has been required in the past Conrad said yes. P.J. Sorensen agreed that the one year estimate seems appropriate. Blue Heron, Cottonwood, and Aspen Creek had flood studies. Hull said that he has some concern regarding the challenge to all of the conditions and he felt that these were questions that could have been answered elsewhere. Norton agreed. Hinchey said increasing the footage behind the garage door in order to park a car there without blocking the sidewalk and wider road widths are deal breakers for him. Hinchey said he is not an expert in Public Works and he has to listen to the recommendations from staff and the other city departments. He has a problem with the lot sizes being almost a 1/ 3 of a typical R-2. ROLL CALL The motion to table passed on a roll call vote of 3-2 with Hinchey and Hull in opposition. OLD BUSINESS: Norton reviewed the work session at City Council for the Riata Ridge project. Norton said that he presented to council the board's position on this project and the fact that the board tabled the proposal in order to give Mr. Priest a chance to redesign the subdivision. Norton felt that Mr. Priest was trying to circumvent the process by going to the city council while the project was still on the table with the planning board. Conrad noted that they did not opt to go forward to the December 18, 2006 City Council with the annexation at this time. He added council was not in support of the R-2 and suggested that perhaps the R-2 with a PUD that would decrease the density was more appropriate. Jentz added that the applicant went forward because he needed to understand that if he was going to make changes to a subdivision was it going to be an R-2 subdivision or not. Council suggested that Priest talk to the neighborhood before he comes back in with a revised proposal. Further discussion was held. NEW BUSINESS Jeff Key, Robert Peccia & Associates - Update on the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 14 of 15 Kalispell Transportation Plan. Key reviewed the Transportation Plan Update for the Board. A copy of the presentation was distributed to the board and given to the members who were absent for their information. Due to the late hour no discussion was held. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:45 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, January 9, 2007 beginning at 7:00 p.m. The next work session will be held on Tuesday, January 9, 2007 following the regular meeting. Items to be discussed are pending. Timothy Nor n President APPROVED as submitted/corrected: 01/09/07 Michelle Anderson Recording Secretary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 12, 2006 Page 15 of 15