Loading...
08-08-06KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 8, 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, Kari Gabriel and Bob Albert. John Hinchey had an excused absence. Sean Conrad and Tom Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 30 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the July 11, 2006 -regular planning board meeting. The motion passed unanimously on a'roll call vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC No one wished to speak. WESTVIEW BUSINESS A request from Medical Arts Pharmacy of Kalispell, LTD, to CENTER #2 - re -subdivide two existing lots within Westview Business PRELIMINARY PLAT Center into three lots. The proposed lots would range in size from 21,900 square feet to 31,800 square feet. The two existing lots are zoned B-2, General Business, and. are located on the north side of Westview Park Place. STAFF REPORT KPP-06-07 Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning Department presented Staff Report KPP-06-07 for the Board. Conrad stated that in July 2004 the City Council approved the Westview Business Center, a 5 lot commercial subdivision zoned B-2. The owners of lots 2 & 3 are now requesting to further subdivide those lots taking 2 commercial lots and making them 3 commercial lots. Access is off of Westview Park Place which is a city maintained street, built to city standards off of Meridian Road. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KPP-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Westview Business Center, #2 be approved subject to the 9 conditions listed in the staff report. QUESTIONS BY THE Norton asked for the purpose of the one foot no access strip BOARD noted in Condition #5. Conrad said the Public Works Department wanted to limit the access onto Meridian Road and transfer the access for all of the lots onto Westview Park Place. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Christine Rommereim - TD & H, stated they have no issues with any of the conditions but requested a clarification of Condition #6 which is the dead and dying trees in the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 1 of 24 0 boulevard shall be replaced and the boulevard shall be reseeded. They have talked with the Parks Department and who stated they have the option if they chose to have the Parks Department plant the trees and reseed the boulevard after the development is complete. Rommereim provided the board with a memo from the Parks Department explaining the program. She requested that they have the option to either use this program or do the reseeding and planting themselves. All of the utilities and paving has been completed and there are no other issues. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Schutt moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to adopt staff report KPP-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Westview Business Center, #2 be approved subject to the 9 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull asked if the developer would be required to bond for the reseeding and replanting work. Conrad said the developers would have the option to either plant the boulevard or pay the Parks Department to do the work prior to submittal of the final plat. Norton noted that Condition #6 does not provide a timeframe. Conrad said that Condition #6 would have to be met before submittal of the final plat. Balcom thought it should be stated that way in the condition. MOTION Balcom moved and Albert seconded a motion that Condition #6 be amended to read, "Prior to final plat the dead and dying trees in the boulevard fronting the lots shall be replaced and the boulevard shall be seeded in accordance with the design standards and policies of the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Department." ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The motion, as amended, passed unanimously on a roll call MOTION vote. AUTUMN CREEK - A request from Lee and Linda Hershberger for annexation, ANNEXATION, initial zoning, preliminary plat and conditional use permit PRELIMINARY PLAT & approval of Autumn Creek on an 8.69 acre property. The CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT owners are requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with the R-2 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The owners are also requesting preliminary plat approval to create 20 lots (16 single family lots and 4 townhouse lots) ranging in size from 5,660 square feet to 13,900 square feet and a conditional use permit to allow the 4 townhouse lots within the requested R-2 zoning district. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 2 of 24 STAFF REPORTS - KA-06- Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning 07, KPP-06-10 & KCU-06- Department presented Staff Reports KA-06-07, KPP-06-10 & 07 KCU-06-07 for the Board. Conrad stated that the applicants are requesting annexation and initial zoning of R-2, a Suburban Residential Zoning District. That zoning district is single family residential with a minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. The Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 designates this property as well as surrounding properties to the north and south as Urban Residential. Conrad noted the subdivision has been heard by the planning board twice before. A public hearing was held in September 2005 and at that time the concerns were density, that the subdivision was out of character with the area, and safety and access at the intersection of Hathaway Lane and US Highway 2 West. The planning board recommended approval which failed on a vote of 2-2. Autumn Creek then went to city council in October of 2005 and city council denied the subdivision based on serious and unmitigated safety hazards on US Highway 2 West. In light of the approach on Highway 2 a secondary approach was needed to offer future residents a safe way out of the subdivision, and the internal road system contained a cul-de-sac which exceeded the city's 600 foot maximum length standard. Conrad said that since that time the owners have come back with a 20 lot subdivision, which would include 16 single family residences and 4 townhouse lots. They have also done a detailed floodplain study along the western side of the property. Conrad reviewed the impacts of the bypass which is near the property in relation to noise and decibel levels. He noted that mitigation is required for the decibel levels of lots 5 & 6, which are adjacent to the bypass. This includes placing the garages towards the rear of the property to allow a buffer between the bypass and the residence, and to notify the future property owners that they need to utilize sound mitigating construction standards. Conrad noted that the Public Works Department is recommending that Hathaway Lane be improved to city standards from the center line of the roadway over to the subdivision. In addition, the Flathead County Road Superintendent has also requested that Hathaway Lane be widened to a 24 foot wide driving surface with shoulders at the intersection with US Highway 2 West. Conrad stated that the MDT was contacted and provided a letter that states due to the relatively small number of lots in the subdivision and the low daily trips that the subdivision would create, they don't feel that any mitigation is necessary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 3 of 24 at the intersection of Hathaway Lane and US Highway 2 West. C-) Regarding the conditional use permit request for the 4 townhouse lots within the subdivision Conrad noted that the townhouse lots were originally located on the eastern side of the subdivision adjacent to the bypass and the developer has since moved them to the interior of the subdivision to reduce the amount of density along the bypass and to move them closer to the park area. Conrad added that staff is recommending that the townhouse units incorporate some design features so that they are not garage door orientated. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KA-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-2 as proposed. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KPP-06-10 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Autumn Creek Subdivision be approved subject to the 22 conditions in the staff report, including approval of the variance request. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KCU-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 3 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull asked about the variance for the cul-de-sac length. Conrad said that they are requesting a variance from the cul- de-sac length limit of 600 feet. The proposed length is 680 feet and both the Public Works Department and the Fire Department did not have any problem with the additional length. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Mike Fraser, TD & H stated the subdivision started with a density of 27 lots, they recently submitted an application of 21 units and after further consultation with staff the proposals is now at 20 units. There is concern about the garage door perspective so they oriented 2 lots on each street differently to provide a better feel and perspective. Fraser noted the concern over traffic and the variance. He noted the definition of street length is somewhat vague as to where you measure it from which he explained for the board. The Fire Department and Public Works supported the increased length of the cul-de-sac. Fraser reviewed the land use surrounding this proposal and added he felt that the subdivision as revised fits more with Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 4 of 24 the character of the area. It is anticipated in the Growth Policy that this area will eventually come into the city and the extension of water 8v sewer into this subdivision will make the utilities available for other properties currently on septic systems and individual wells. Fraser noted that the staff report recommends improving 304 feet of Hathaway Lane to city standards and they will work with the Public Works staff on the floodplain and wetlands issues during the design process. The county is asking that 150 feet of Hathaway Lane be increased in width to 24 feet with shoulders and 3/ 1 back slopes which would be a significant improvement to this portion of the road. Any other road improvements would be funded through SID's and other developments as they occur so the entire road would eventually be improved to city standards. Hull asked if the developer is agreeing to widen the road all the way out to Highway 2 West. Fraser said that they are agreeing to widen the 304 feet of road along the subdivision, as recommended by Public Works and agreeing to widen Hathaway Lane 150 feet to the intersection of Highway 2 West, as recommended by the County, and he added there will be a section in between which will not be improved. Balcom said the park is not large enough to be a city park and who would maintain it. Fraser noted that the staff report recommends the creation of a homeowner's association to maintain the walking path and the park. All of the owners will be members of the association and will pay a small annual assessment. Conrad noted for the record the letter from Ronald and Brenda Profitt and their concerns were the impacts that 20 residences would have on vehicular traffic at the intersection of US Highway 2 West and Hathaway Lane. PUBLIC HEARING Mark Noland, 4 8v 8 Hathaway Lane stated that he sees the work that has gone into this property and he thinks that the Hershberger's have gone overboard in trying to make it work. Noland said that he has a plan for his property because of the potential in having the water and sewer coming to his home and if they don't take advantage of getting the sewer and water under the bypass now it will cost a lot more later. He has paid thousands of dollars to have his septic rebuilt over the course of 18 years and he talked to some of his neighbors who have said the same thing and noted that some don't have the room for a pumped raised septic system. Noland thought the park aspect was nice to offer and the Hershberger's have met most of the neighbors concerns. He said that he is in favor of the subdivision. Norton stated for the record that letters in support of Autumn Creek were included in the staff report from Mark 8s Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 5 of 24 Kathy Noland, Edwin & Debra Mueli and Steven Fewlass. 0 Lee Hershberger, owner of this property stated that they have tried to reach out to the community and address the issues as they were presented the last time that they went through this process. He realizes the # 1 issue is traffic on the road and they have agreed to the completion of the requested improvements. No second egress is being proposed because there is no available space. As other properties are developed in the area a second egress will eventually be available. Hershberger noted having sewer available will make a difference for the wetlands and all of the homes out there in the course of time. They hope they are meeting the standards of the City of Kalispell and fit in with the Growth Policy for the area. Larry Parsons said he was on the fence. He owns 15 acres on Hathaway Lane and some adjoining property with this proposal. He has opposed the project in the past strictly on the traffic and safety issues. Parsons said that the Hershberger's have a beautiful plan but his concern is that without a traffic light at the bottom of Hartt Hill, it is another Stillwater and Reserve waiting to happen and he doesn't want to see that happen at any expense. Parsons continued he is positively affected by this development because he has had property for sale there for 2 years and he can't get anyone to look at it because of the proposed bypass. He sees the decibel level from the bypass as being a big problem too. He also owns the 6 acres down the road from this proposal and he would like to maximize his value out of that property in one way or the other. What is needed is to go through to Two Mile Drive for a second access but he understands that the Hershberger's probably don't have the money to acquire property to punch it through. Parson continued that he emailed the city council members saying that he would like to build a state-of-the-art equipment dealership on those 6 acres, employee 20 - 50 families, create a showcase commercial development, and increase the city's tax base. He received one response and basically the council member said it came down to there being no way the city and county would come together to provide the road to do this. Parsons noted he is not going to go through a Bucky Wolford effort to try and do it; he would rather sell and move. Parsons said that he is for the new plan but what was not addressed was the end of Hathaway Lane there is no cul-de-sac and people use his field to turn around in. There will be a lot of people who will pass this subdivision and hit that dead end and he would like to see something done about them using his property. He asked that more consideration be given to Lyle Bartlett with all the traffic going up and down next to his house and yard now. Also on lots 1 - 4 he didn't see any provision for sound reduction or abatement where they are within a couple 100 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 6 of 24 C) U feet of the bypass. Parsons said that he appreciates what the Hershberger's have done and he prays that he gets his job done but hopes no one gets killed to get it done. Lyle Bartlett - 33 Hathaway Lane stated that his property adjoins this property on 2 sides. Regarding the cud -de -sac he met Mr. Crowley from Public Works and the book states maximum length 600 feet. It is not ambiguous, it is 600 feet. It even goes so far as to state this is to be measured from the center line of the intersection of the center point of the cul- de-sac. Measuring this cul-de-sac it comes out to 680 plus and in his mind that is not a minor variation. You pay these people good money to come up with good guidelines to guide you on in your decisions on programs and if they are going to be totally ignored it seems facetious. The second point and more critical is the cul-de-sac comes onto Hathaway Lane. Hathaway Lane is defined as a lane for a good reason, it is not a street or a road, and it goes nowhere and is a cul-de- sac. You can't put a city cul-de-sac onto another cul-de-sac, which is what this is doing. There is no outlet from the road except out onto Highway 2 West. Carol Collins, 19 Hathaway Lane stated that she heard it said that the first concern was density and from all the meetings that she attended the concern was never density or the character of the area, it was mentioned briefly but the main concern was the access onto the highway. That is her concern. Collins noted the proposed 20 families in this subdivision are too many for that intersection. It is a 45 mph zone with cars and trucks coming downhill, traffic going out of town from the other direction it is very fast, faster than 45 mph. With the increased traffic from this subdivision and the possible development of another 40 acres there would be too many families adding to the traffic on the road. Collins thinks that the road issue should be addressed now before this is approved because it is really dangerous. Collins continued that as fax as comparing them to Greenbriar, Greenbriar feeds out onto a 25 mph Two Mile Drive which is nowhere near as much traffic as Highway 2 West. Collins noted a county subdivision that was approved halfway up Hartt Hill that will feed out on to the highway. The people coming out of that subdivision can't see the cars coming down Hartt Hill until those cars peek over that hill so if they are half way out on the road they will have to really gun it to make it down in time for the logging truck that will be coming down behind them. Collins added the MDT people made a mistake on that one and could make a mistake on this one. Collins said that they need another way out of there now rather than later after someone gets killed. Collins said there are only 10 houses on that road now and she has waited a full 5 minutes to get onto the highway. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 7 of 24 Nancy Rose, 1483 US Highway 2 West stated that they bought their property there in 1973. It was busy then and it is busier now. Rose said that her concern is the traffic. Everything that Ms. Collins said is accurate as far as the traffic situation goes. Another concern in this plan is the wetland appears to be drawn into the project map as if it is a part of that property. A wetland isn't a part of anyone's property it is an area set aside in perpetuity for the purpose of wetlands and is to be protected. Rose said that the proposal will not only have a park and a recreational trail beside the wetlands but to put a couple of the townhouses next to the park is a mistake because of health and survival issues. REBUTTAL Fraser reviewed the length of the cul-de-sac and noted they felt that a longer cul-de-sac was better planning and a better use of the land than the other options. Regarding the wetlands they will be a perpetual open space and will provide the animals with the same area as they have now. In relation to people turning around on Mr. Parsons' property Fraser suggested that a cul-de-sac would be an option but a sign could be placed on the road to notify drivers that Hathaway Lane was a dead end and another sign could serve to guide the traffic into Autumn Creek. MOTION - ANNEXATION Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff report KA-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-2 as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt asked how many lots were initially proposed. Conrad said 27. Schutt said that this planning board has discussed the need for a gridded street system. Given the routing of the bypass where can Hathaway go, or will it always be a dead end. Conrad said that there is no easement that he is aware of but in the future between the dead end of Hathaway Lane and Two Mile Drive there are 2-3 lots and if they were ever to come into the city to request initial zoning and a subdivision a request for additional R/W could be included on their property to make a future connection between Hathaway and Two Mile Drive. Schutt said that this reinforces why the board stresses the goal of a gridded street system. Balcom said the hot button issue is the traffic and yet the board would have no influence on those issues it would be up to MDT. Norton suggested the board could require the applicant to bring all of Hathaway Lane up to city standards. Balcom noted that the applicant would not have the ability to require the installation of a traffic light or that another safety measure be put in place at the intersection of Hathaway Lane and US Highway 2. Balcom said that this looks like a good project but when it comes to traffic it could be a deal killer. Balcom said she is not sure whether she can support this project of not. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 8 of 24 C') Norton said it is a very difficult situation because they are creating a subdivision that is on a city street that is accessed by a county road that accesses onto a state highway which is controlled by MDT. MDT did a traffic study which stated that this subdivision will not affect Highway 2 and they would not recommend any changes. However, there is a letter from the County Road Superintendent who states that Hathaway Lane, in order to handle the additional 270 trips should be improved to urban standards 150 feet from Highway 2, and staff is recommended 304 feet of Hathaway Lane be brought up to urban standards and agrees with the recommendation of the County Road Superintendent. Schutt said that the condition of Hathaway is one separate issue and Hathaway intersecting Highway 2 is the larger issue. Gabriel asked if there are any existing residences on this property and Conrad said none. Gabriel asked who does or does not have to hook up to city services when it is available to other property owners. Conrad said that when city sewer is run to a property when adjacent properties are utilizing septic systems if the system should fail and they are within 300 feet of a sewer line, unless the cost is 3 times to hook up to the sewer line rather than rebuilding the septic system, they would have to hook up to the sewer line. Gabriel asked how far the services will have to run to get to this development. Conrad said 300 feet from the Greenbriar subdivision, the cost of which is paid by the developer. Gabriel said that she likes the layout of the subdivision but wondered who would want to live in lots 5 & 6 because of the location of the bypass. She asked how many feet of roadway between the subdivision and the highway would not be improved and Conrad said approximately 700 feet which will be improved in the future through an SID. Gabriel asked if there was any attempt made by the applicant to contact any of the property owners between this development and Two Mile Drive and Conrad said that he didn't know. Gabriel said that council had a hard time with this proposal the last time and she knows they will say that the density, safety, and no second egress are still issues. Gabriel noted that she is struggling with supporting the project because of those issues. Albert said that he has issues with the traffic concerns but as stated these issues are controlled by MDT. There are 3 governments controlling the road systems, the city, county and state which will be difficult. Albert noted that he does have an issue with the variance to the length of the cul-de- sac. He added if it says 600 feet it should mean 600 feet and not 680 feet. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 9 of 24 Hull said last time he was in favor of this project and he has not changed his opinion. He doesn't see any way that MDT would put in a light at the bottom of Hartt Hill to serve an additional 20 homes. Schutt said to him the length of the cul-de-sac is not a huge variance. Schutt said that they can either forward the project with a positive recommendation or reject it in its entirety or try to find some sort of middle ground if they think that 20 lots would generate a lot of traffic maybe 11 would be better. Balcom asked if the wetlands issue was addressed adequately for Mrs. Rose. Hull said that the wetland does belong to the property owners but the Army Corp of Engineers is very strict as to what can happen in or near an established wetland area. He added with this particular creek Dairy Gold was fined over $5 million for polluting it. Hull said a floodplain is another control where you cannot build in a floodplain. Jentz said that it is perfectly normal to have wetlands show up in the common area. The concern would be if wetlands showed up in individual lots. It is private property and continues to be managed as private property and as a Jentz noted that the 600 foot rule for the cul-de-sac length was used to discourage the rampant use of cul-de-sacs. The city would prefer through streets going from point A to point B but with the bypass that road system can't go through so it ends with a cul-de-sac ,and then it becomes a question of what would be the best use of land in this situation. The Fire Department felt that the longer cul-de-sac was better than having a deep lot that they would have problems accessing. Norton didn't agree with having only parts of Hathaway Lane improved and not the entire road but realized it would be an undue burden to the developer to improve the whole roadway into the subdivision especially since he has the expense of bringing sewer and water in. Norton noted that he thought the dead end road sign idea from Mr. Fraser was an excellent idea to reduce the number of vehicles turning around on Mr. Parsons' property. Norton said that he voted in favor of this project before however, traffic is his major concern. He thinks they are making a mistake to allow another 270 trips onto the highway. ROLL CALL - ANNEXATION I The motion was denied on a roll call vote of 3 to 3. MOTION - VARIANCE I Hull moved and Albert seconded a motion to approve the REQUEST variance request for the length of the cul-de-sac. ROLL CALL I The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 10 of 24 MOTION - PRELIMINARY Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff PLAT - AUTUMN CREEK report KPP-06-10 as findings of fact and recommend to the SUBDIVISION Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Autumn Creek Subdivision be approved subject to the 22 conditions in the staff report, including approval of the variance request. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL - The motion -passed unanimously on a roll call vote. PRELIMINARY PLAT MOTION - CONDITIONAL Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff USE PERMIT - AUTUMN report KCU-06-07 as findings of fact and recommend to the CREEK Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 3 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel said that she doesn't have any problem with townhouses and she likes the way they fit into the subdivision. Schutt agreed that he doesn't like to see 40 townhouses laid out like a cookie cutter and to sprinkle them in is a lot better. Norton suggested eliminating the 2 - 2 unit townhouses to help alleviate some of the traffic. The board didn't think it would be significant enough to eliminate them. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. THE MEADOWS - A request from The Meadows, Inc. for annexation, initial ANNEXATION & PLANNED zoning and planned unit development (PUD) for The UNIT DEVELOPMENT Meadows on a 14.65 acre property. The owner is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with the R-4 (Two Family Residential) zoning district. The owner is also requesting a PUD zoning district on the property to allow 138 condominium units with approximately 6.7 acres of open space, a 4,000 square foot clubhouse and % of a mile of sidewalks and trails within the open space. The property is currently zoned County SAG-10 and is located on the south side of Four Mile Drive approximately 400 feet west of the intersection of North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive. STAFF REPORTS - KA-06- Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning 08 & KPUD-06-04 Department presented Staff Reports KA-06-08, KPUD-06-04 for the Board. Conrad noted that the property is located on the south side of Four Mile Drive just west of the intersection of Four Mile and North Haven Drive. The property is about 14.6 acres in size and is currently SAG-10, a suburban agricultural district in the county. The property owners are requesting Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 11 of 24 O city R-4 zoning, a Two Family Residential District with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. The permitted uses include single family and duplex units. Conrad reviewed the general land use characteristics in the immediate area. The Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 designates this land as Urban Residential which is defined as anticipating 3-12 dwellings units per acre and the R-4 would be consistent with that land use designation. Conrad stated the owners are requesting a planned unit development to construct 19 multi -family buildings that would allow 138 condominium units on this 14.6 acre site. The roads within the PUD would be private and there would be approximately 6.2 acres of irrigated open space which would include a clubhouse, putting green, a trail system and sidewalk connectivity between all of the units. They have proposed, in the northeast corner of the property, a retention pond that would be fenced and landscaped which is adjacent to Four Mile Drive. The Public Works Department commented that along this property's frontage on Four Mile Drive the road will have to be improved to city urban standards. The sidewalks will be adjacent to the curb and they are not proposing boulevards but they do have an adequate amount of open space and trail systems connecting all of the units. Conrad said in this immediate area just south of this PUD is the North Haven Subdivision, a 20-30 year old subdivision in the county. Several of the neighbors had concerns with the height of the buildings and visual impacts. The residential districts in Kalispell, R-2, R-3 or R-4 allow a maximum height of 35 feet. Given the size of these multi -family buildings planning staff is recommending that the building height at the southern property line not exceed 25 feet in order to mitigate impacts to neighboring properties to the south and their view shed to the north. Staff does not feel that this is unreasonable. There was also a lot of concern about the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive and a Traffic Impact Study was completed. The study gives an estimate of the number of vehicle trips per day this 138 condominium PUD would generate at full build out - 840. It also states that the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive is already at a level of service F for the left turn movement as you go left onto Four Mile Drive from Highway 93. Level of service F is the worst that it gets for any kind of road or intersection. The Highway Department was contacted and the local office was sent a copy, of the Traffic Impact Study and their recommendation was that the owners submit a Systems Impact Analysis for their review of the proposed traffic that would be generated by this development. Conrad noted the comments were received by the neighborhood and there were concerns about the condominium units being rented daily or Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 12 of 24 weekly. Conrad noted in the Kalispell residential zones you can rent units but they have to be on a month to month basis. A daily/weekly rental would be considered a hotel/motel and they are only allowed within the business zoning districts. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KA-06-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two Family Residential as proposed. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KPUD-06-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Planned Unit Development for The Meadows be approved subject to the 23 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom said the traffic study was completed in May and the fall season of soccer and football creates a higher level of traffic on that road. Conrad said he thought the high season was in the spring. Conrad said the Study notes the manual traffic counts were conducted at the intersections on May 3 8v 4, and May 10 & 11. He added what he felt could be concluded from the study is there are definitely issues at the Four Mile Drive/Highway 93 intersection during, at the very least, the p.m. peak hours. Obviously adding this amount of traffic that this development, if approved, would generate is going to make an impact at that intersection. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Presentations on The Meadows were given by the following consultants: Bruce Lutz, Sitescape Associates, Mark Johnson, Project Architect, and Brett Walcheck, 48 North Engineering. Mark Bancale, Professional Traffic Engineer, with WGM Group reviewed the Traffic Impact Study. He said they did manual intersection traffic counts from 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. which is the time period that the site would be generating the most traffic. The counts were conducted in May of this year, intentionally during the. time when soccer season was in session. They recorded approximately 500 more vehicles on Four Mile Drive in the afternoon peak hour than they did in the morning peak hour. The vast majority of those could be attributed to the activity on the soccer fields. Bancale noted that the counts were also conducted during the time when the Flathead Community College was in session, which is located just across Highway 93, as well as the local public schools. It was therefore, during a time when overall traffic conditions were at the busiest. The existing peak hour traffic volumes were identified and projected to the year 2009 which is the design year selected for this project. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 13 of 24 In order to get a picture of what the traffic will look like in 2009 they looked back over the last 8-10 years of traffic growth on Highway 93. MDT keeps records of traffic volumes at a location just north of Four Mile Drive and they reviewed that data which identified a growth rate of approximately 4.5% per year. They then used that rate to project forward the 3 years into the future to get an idea of what traffic will look like in 2009 without this subdivision. The 4.5% per year is probably on the high side because it also takes into account the arrival of several big box stores just north of this location. Bancale continued they then had a picture of what the conditions were going to be in the future if this development proposal doesn't move forward. Then they analyzed that both at the intersection of North Haven Drive and Four Mile Drive, as well as at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive. At North Haven Drive operations are really very good and there are no traffic issues there in terms of capacity, safety or delay. At Highway 93 North they identified under the existing conditions that in the a.m. it works pretty well, in the afternoon when all of the ball field traffic is taking place there is already a delay that would qualify as a level of service F for the northbound left turn. In the future there will be a worse level of service F because traffic volumes will grow and as they grow delays increase. He noted that the southbound left turn will begin to become a problem as well for the same reasons. Balcom said the Trip Generation Manual was used to estimate the number of trips that will be generated by this development. It was approximately 67 trips in the morning peak hour and 78 trips in the evening peak hour. That analysis said that at the 2 site driveways, as well as at North Haven Drive operations will be very good. Then at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive obviously if they are at a level of service F without this development that doesn't go away by adding more traffic. The southbound left turn isn't going to see any site traffic and therefore will not become worse but the northbound left turn will see an increase in delay. The solution to this left turning problem off of Highway 93 is very easy to identify and probably easy to implement. He said probably because it requires the cooperation of MDT, which obviously they have no control over. He has worked with MDT on a lot of projects over the last several years and he feels that they would be willing to discuss this intersection with the board and participate in a solution. The solution is simply to add protected left turn phasing to the traffic signal — green arrows. The traffic signal has all the equipment there to do that with a couple exceptions, which would be easy to engineer and to add, should MDT agree. What MDT would typically want to do would be to wait until the problem is clear and obvious and then come forward with a solution rather than saying this Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 14 of 24 O traffic study says there is going to be a problem let's jump out there now and fix it. By adding the green arrows you would have to take that time in the green cycle away from some other phase therefore some other traffic suffers. Bancale noted the Systems Impact Analysis that MDT has indicated they would like to have on this project is their way of saying give us the traffic report and let us have a chance to comment on it. The traffic report already exists and would not be a significant undertaking to make extra copies and send it to them. Their review time is typically several weeks. The left turn phasing on Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive is the only traffic mitigation that is identified in the report. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom noted that the days of the traffic survey were Wednesday and Thursday both weeks. Her experience is that the weekend, particularly Saturday is a banner day at Kidsport. Balcom said that she realized that this traffic is not the owner's problem it is a Kidsport problem but to her when you are looking at the traffic all of the traffic has to be considered and that concerns her. Bancale said that the counts were done on week days which is standard practice for a Traffic Impact Study for a residential development because residential developments generate the bulk of their concentration of traffic during the a.m. and p.m. rush hour. Lutz added that one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that when the State Lands property is developed, which is going to be in the fairly near future, a new alignment for Four Mile Drive is going to go out to Stillwater Drive. This alignment will provide an alternative route. Lutz noted that the reason the PUD was chosen was mainly to achieve the multiple connections with the units. An R-4 allows for duplexes but does not allow for anything beyond duplexes. All of the infrastructure for the project, as well as most of the road improvements and the club house will be achieved during the first phase of the development. It will be about a 5 year phase and the final phase will be the part of the project that is adjacent to the North Haven development. Lutz said that the density of this project is right around nine units per acre, which is well within the 3-12 range that is designated in the Growth Policy. Lutz concluded by saying that they concur with all of the conditions. Norton reviewed the letters from the following neighbors: John King, Dan & Cary Heskett, Steven & Elsie Johnson, Lorraine & Charles Wingard, Jerry Gillies, and Steve Lorch from DNRC. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 15 of 24 Norton added the majority of the letters were opposed to the project. PUBLIC HEARING John King - 134 North Haven Drive stated that he is against this project until there are some things that the developers can rectify. He is a developer and he has learned to do the things right but don't do them all the way - get out and get your money quick and go on to the next deal. He hopes this team does everything right for the people in the area, for the people who purchase this property, and for the people of Kalispell. King said the big issue for him is the traffic issue. He has lived on North Haven Drive for 15 years and having the vacant property in front of his home was a luxury but now they are telling him that 840 extra people are going up and down that road. He also was in support and his wife was on the board of Kidsport. This year traffic was backed up at the light on Thursday and Friday nights all the way to their subdivision. This morning 3 people went to the hospital due to an accident at this intersection. There is a need for another turn arrow on the other side of the light. King suggested that the entire road be improved to city standards instead of 400 feet with the future developments proposed tearing up the road several times. King continued that his house will sit right next to one of the buildings and is concerned that they will use the full 25 feet of height allowed. King feels that Bruce Lutz will do a quality job with the landscaping because he has seen his work but he hopes that the height for his neighbors to the west will be good because they have quality residents and the higher those buildings are the more value they will lose in their homes. North Haven is a nice subdivision with many view lots and they paid for those lots and to have a developer take them away isn't right. He said as he looks at the development there are 15 acres of level ground and the development can go into that quite easily. He hopes that if this is approved by the city that the city makes the developer toe the line. Holly Jean Larson, 852 - 5+h Avenue WN stated the reason that she is approaching the podium is two fold. First of all she received a phone call from an elderly friend who asked her to support this project for her because she wasn't able to attend the meeting herself. The woman is approximately 80 years old and she has many lady friends who are widowed and live in single family homes and are looking for facilities such as this before they go into a home where they can have a wonderful quality of life and not have to worry about maintenance. Larson said that the second reason she is here is she does design work for a couple of businesses, TK Builders and Desert Mountain Venture, and they have had some projects over the last year that were low maintenance townhomes - The Granary Ridge, and some duplexes in south Kalispell. When working with the people who have Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 16 of 24 invested in these homes she hears day in and day out that it is so nice to have quality homes/living environments with no maintenance. Larson said she hopes the board votes in favor of The Meadows development. David Palmer, 122 North Haven Drive stated that the Traffic Study was the most important thing. Fall would be a better time to run a traffic study. In the spring there is spring select which is a few teams who have their games there but in the fall they have the high school squads, JV squads, all fall rec, everybody is there and there all the time. Palmer said that they are hoping to bring the state tournament to Kidsport which is $2-3 million into the city and the traffic would be incredible. Getting the infrastructure first - turn signals and all of that would be big deal. He has a problem with turning the condos into rentals. He understands that is how condos work but he prefers ownership and some kind of tight leash would have to be put on people who rent by the month. Dan Heskett - 129 North Haven Drive stated that he would encourage the city to not look at this one isolated project and to understand the impact on the neighborhood, but to look at the entire surrounding area. As it was pointed out there are lots of plans pending immediately west of Kidsports, and he would encourage the city to look more long term, big picture rather than piece -meal, one project at a time. Roger Noble - 130 North Haven Drive stated he has a number of issues starting with the zoning change. They are going from a SAG-10 to an R-4 which is a quantum leap. In North Haven there are 30 units, Sunset View subdivision has 16 units, and The Greenery has 24 units so that is a total of 70 units on 30 acres. That equates to about 2.2 units per acre. The project is 9.4 units per acre which is 4-5 times as much. Also there are other subdivisions going into this area all the time. It is not compatible with the adjacent land use and is not consistent with the existing environmental and integrity of this area. Noble continued regarding the traffic it was mentioned that there would be an additional 840 trips. This will be 2 times as many trips from 1/3 the size of the amount of developed area. Noble added that is 6 times what is going out there right now which is a huge impact. Noble said that he heard a comment made that it is not the owner's problem but it is the owner's problem and if the board approves this subdivision they have the possibility to require them to get a left turn signal both onto Highway 93 and off of Four Mile Drive. Noble suggested that be a condition of approval. Noble said there is only one ingress and egress to this development. This property is in the county and they are asking for annexation into the city. If they were at a Flathead County Planning Board they would have to have a primary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 17 of 24 Cal J and a secondary emergency access. In the winter the snow blows out of the north and Four Mile Drive runs east/west and that road drifts in. With 138 additional units that will be 310 new people in that area who won't have emergency services. Noble said they are proposing to put a storm water detention pond in the northeast corner of this facility and they call it a retention pond. A detention pond will actually infiltrate the water and a retention pond holds the water. There is going to be a lot of storm water runoff that occurs in April and May and it is going to get worse in June. This area was underwater in the spring of 1997. There is no way a retention pond will work in this area because there is already standing water. Noble noted that the board has the capability to require an elevation level - they did that with Waterford development that is adjacent to this site - and with a development on Big Mountain where they actually made them lower their height elevation so that the neighbor's view shed would be protected. Noble said that based on the safety, traffic and engineering issues he recommends that the planning board deny this subdivision. Jerry Gillies - 110 North Haven Drive stated he appreciated the assistance that he received from Sean Conrad at the planning office and also thanked the owner for coming to meet with the neighborhood. Gillies said the density level should be reduced. Gillies noted that on Four Mile Drive he has seen the soccer events and the traffic is horrendous. Gillies recommended they ask the city to take Four Mile Drive in that area and bring the highway up to appropriate specifications of width to accommodate the traffic. If they do allow parking the road should be wide enough to accommodate parking curb -to - curb, one side or the other or both. Gillies has asked the owner to go to the city and request the area be designated as a no parking zone between the roadway, the grass strip and the chain link fence of Kidsport. As their own team said there are several more developments planned for this area and the board needs to be looking at the future development of this community. He is in opposition of the PUD because of the structure of Four Mile Drive and the density level. Gillies said he would like to address the traffic survey. The traffic was done in the middle of the week, Wednesday/Thursday and didn't take into consideration the big events. As a condition for this project the indicator is it can be easily mitigated by a left turn arrow. That would serve everybody in this community and he supports his neighbor Roger Noble in recommending this as a condition. Gillies said that he likes the project it is very well designed but it just needs some refining. He asked the board to consider the letters from the neighborhood. Good project, could be better. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 18 of 24 (7) Darren Cogar, 1545 Trumble Creek Road said they need to have places for the elderly to stay in this community. Most people who live in this valley do not live here year round and they want to have a place that is maintenance -free. Cogar coaches at Kidsport and he knows what the traffic is like. On Wednesday and Thursday it is as busy if not busier than Saturday. Cogar said that it sounds to him like they are putting Kidsport's parking and traffic problems on this developer. Maybe Kidsport should be looked at as far as parking. There is going to be additional developments where the rest of this land will get developed and something will have to be done but he doesn't feel that a change in the light at Four Mile Drive and Highway 93 should be placed on this developer when they do not have any control over it. They could put 70 houses on this property or they can put the condos on and he would much rather see condos than 70 houses, which he feels would cause more of an impact. Eisala Morton, 127 North Haven Drive stated her neighbors all had very valid points and she agrees with them. When the owner came to their home, introduced himself and showed them the project she appreciated that he came. Morton said that she likes the project and if these points which were presented this evening could be worked out they would have a fine addition. She likes this project better than several homes where everybody does their own thing. She sees the need for single ladies to have a nice place to live and a wonderful view. She understands that they are the ones who are most affected by this because of the height and she was told that the height would be taken care of. Morton said that the traffic and .other things need to be worked out and noted that the board should look at the whole picture because that is what makes Kalispell a great place to live. MOTION - ANNEXATION Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff report KA-06-08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two Family Residential as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said that he has a number of problems with this project. It is a dead end road until they punch through to Stillwater Road. He was out there today and the traffic was backed up from Meridian Road to the DNRC offices. The solution may be to put in a left turn arrow but it may mean even more delays on Highway 93. The project doesn't seem very Kalispell -like but seems more appropriate for Whitefish. The owners are proposing private roads which he hasn't heard of before in Kalispell. Hull said the design of the buildings is exactly what the board has been saying that they do not want with garages in the front and the front door being down a long corridor in the back. He is not comfortable with this proposal. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 19 of 24 �j Balcom noted that she appreciates Hull's comments but she doesn't think that Whitefish has the corner on good or bad projects. She likes the project and appreciates the design effort that has been put into it. Balcom said that she appreciates the fact that the owner went to the neighbors and are considering their view in the proposal. Gabriel stated this is her neighborhood and she knows the people who are speaking in opposition and she understands exactly what they are saying. She lives in Northridge and this is exactly what happened when the field directly west of her went away. Gabriel said that one of the things the council requests is infill and this is infill. The positives are the people who will be attracted to this type of living arrangement are going to need good medical care and it is very close to the hospital. R-4 is consistent with the city's Growth Policy and they have designed a complex where they have allowed for a lot of green space. It is important that their intention is not to block the views of their neighbors. The fact that Four Mile Drive will be improved with curb gutter and sidewalk to city standards is a definite plus. Gabriel said that she likes the look of the buildings because they are not your typically box style, cheap living quarters and that the architects and developer have presented a quality project. Gabriel said what she is struggling with is the vehicle trips adding to what is already an awful intersection and anything that they can do to work with MDT to change that has to happen. It is inevitable that this area is going to be developed. Gabriel said the pluses are outweighing the minuses except for the safety issue and that has to get fixed. Balcom asked if they could require the developers to get a green arrow at the intersection and add that to the conditions. Conrad said they could make that recommendation but it would be difficult because it is out of the city's jurisdiction. The intersection is maintained and controlled by the MDT. Conrad added that there is a condition that requires a Systems Impact Analysis. Schutt said that given that they are seeing a service level F currently wouldn't that get them close to needing the turn arrow. Conrad said he would presume so but it is up to MDT. Schutt asked if full improvements were being made to Four Mile Drive as it fronts this project. Conrad said yes but just the south side of the road. Brett Walcheck, 48 North Engineering stated that he talked to Public Works and they decided to delay improvements to Four Mile Drive instead they will do an SID when the other development occurs. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 20 of 24 0 Schutt said that he agrees with Gabriel that this is a positive infill project. The city has asked developers to put their projects onto major roads and hook up to sewer and water and this project would meet that request. Schutt said that it is a dense project and is in no way compatible with the R-2 county zoning immediately south but it is a different property in a different jurisdiction. Schutt said that with North Haven subdivision being built 30 years ago with septic systems it can not be compatible with a project on city sewer that has 9 or 10 units per acre. As they look at both traffic and impacts on neighbors those issues can be addressed through a reduction in density. Albert said that the developers have done a good job on their presentation. It is high density but density is increasing north of town. The traffic issues are not something that they can control from the board. Norton asked Conrad about the SID for Four Mile Drive and Conrad said they can confirm the discussion with the Public Works Department and address it at the council level with a subsequent memo explaining what took place after the staff report was completed and during the public hearing. Conrad noted that they could also consider adding a condition to waive the right to protest a future SID. Norton thought it may be appropriate to include the SID condition so that they are not worrying about the future upgrade of the roads as more development occurs. Jentz said yes there are other projects out there and they will carry the burden of putting more traffic on this road. There is a proposal to take Four Mile Drive up to the Reserve Connector road which is currently funded. It would take the road from Stillwater to Costco and provides a way out of Four Mile Drive. There is an entire grid of streets going north and south proposed for this neighborhood which will play out in the next 60 - 90 days. The real solution for Four Mile Drive is the SID. The dilemma with an SID is that 50% can protest and stop it and all city residents in the affected area would be required to kick in. Norton asked about the letter from Steve Lorch, DNRC that addresses the north half of Four Mile Drive never being properly platted. Jentz noted the road continues to be used but DNRC claims that the road doesn't exist because it has never been paid for. Jentz suggested that the city's legal office is sorting this out. The same issue exists with the B.P.A. Power easement. Hull named the dead end roads near this proposed development and added this is the problem when they do not have grids or another way out of the system which comes back to haunt the city. Hull said that the problem with the SID is that the developers will not be paying anything it will Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 21 of 24 be the people buying the property and the neighbors and it will be a case of, "the bad news is there is a development coming in next door and the worse news is that you have to pay for the upgrades." ROLL CALL - ANNEXATION The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and 1 opposed. MOTION - THE MEADOWS Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff PLANNED UNIT report KPUD-06-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the DEVELOPMENT Kalispell City Council that the Planned Unit Development for The Meadows be approved subject to the 23 conditions listed in the staff report. MOTION - ADD CONDITION Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to add #24 - SID Condition #24 to waive the right of protest for an SID. BOARD DISCUSSION General discussion was held regarding an SID. ROLL CALL - ADD The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and 1 CONDITION #24 - SID opposed. MOTION - ADD CONDITION Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to amend 25 - 16' MAXIMUM HEIGHT condition #5 to reduce the maximum height to 16 feet for buildings 8, 17, 18, 8s 19 to reduce the impact on the view shed. BOARD DISCUSSION Balcom asked if these were the units that were to be dug in with a ridge height limit of 21 feet. Gabriel asked if there was an engineering report that would indicate what height would obstruct the view. Her guess is it was covered by sinking the buildings. Lutz said that the situation in the back of the site is the ridge height proposed on two of the back units is 21 feet and they can achieve an 18 foot ridge height on the smaller unit. Lutz said to keep in mind that the slope continues to rise so there is some advantage there. Lutz said that 16 is better the 21 but they felt that 21 and 18 was a workable ridge height. Schutt asked if they could have 2 stories on a ridge height of 16 feet. Lutz said it would take some severe re -grading. Schutt suggested that it would be easier for the board if the developers provided finished floor elevations and road grades for their packets. Further discussion was held regarding the amendment. Conrad suggested the board consider amending condition #5 which speaks to the building heights instead of adding a new condition. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 22 of 24 ROLL CALL - AMD The motion failed on a roll call vote of 2 in favor and 4 CONDITION #5 opposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel asked if there was a way to rephrase the condition without putting a number on it. Schutt said by stating single story that was the direction that he wanted it to go. Knowing that you would get the view shed benefits and knowing that there would be a small reduction in density. MOTION - AMD CONDITION Gabriel moved and Balcom seconded a motion to amend #5 - 21' MAXIMUM HEIGHT Condition #5 to reduce the maximum height to 21 feet for buildings 8, 17, 18, 8s 19. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION There was discussion regarding the need for a left turn arrow at the intersection of Highway 93 and Four Mile Drive and what the board could do to either make this a condition of approval or persuade MDT to consider this improvement. MOTION - LETTER TO MDT Norton moved and Gabriel seconded a motion to prepare a letter to MDT, with the assistance of staff, requesting that this intersection be studied for the increase of traffic from this development and the other developments proposed along Four Mile Drive. ROLL CALL - LETTER TO The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and 1 MDT opposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Gabriel asked if the detention pond needs to be there. Jentz noted that it is the low part of the property and storm water is an issue that has to be dealt with and the pond is the solution proposed by the engineer for this project. Gabriel is anticipating discussion on the pond at the city council level and suggested that either. alternative methods be considered or additional support for the current solution be presented to the council. Norton said that he has seen projects where the detention pond is utilized as a water feature and is incorporated into the landscaping of the project. Jentz suggested that the board could condition the project to prevent an open surface pond in this location because of safety or aesthetics. Then the developer would have to come up with another design. Gabriel asked who handles the upkeep and Jentz said it would be the homeowner's association. Gabriel asked if they would be 100% rentals. Norton said that the R-4 only allows rentals on a month by month basis. Jentz said that it was presented to staff as a condominium project for sale and they could live there or rent it but rent it only by the month. There was further discussion regarding the traffic situation and the board felt that requiring the waiver of protest for an SID and sending the letter to MDT was the most that they Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 23 of 24 could do without making it a condition of approval which they didn't feel was fair to the developer. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and 1 MOTION opposed. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: The Board considered the request to move the September planning board meeting to Tuesday, September 19th in order for staff to attend the annual Montana Association of Planners meeting in Chico Hot Springs. MOTION Norton moved and Hull seconded a motion to move the September Kalispell City Planning Board meeting to Tuesday, September 19, 2006. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. NEW BUSINESS Norton suggested that the council minutes be included in the CONTINUED: packet so that they can track the projects as they go forward. Norton noted that he felt it was important for the board to be present at the council meetings that involve the growth policy amendments, impact fees, and other issues so that the council understands the board's position on these issues. Hull requested a copy of the Traffic Study that was required for Glacier High School. Staff will send copies to the board. Norton suggested that due to the late hour the work session on the amendments to the Subdivision Regulations be postponed. The board agreed. Jentz noted that the board may have to start meeting twice a month to discuss the amendments to the Subdivision Regulations and added that city council has also directed the planning board to begin researching Transfer Development Rights. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:10 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, September 19, 2006. Timo y Orton Michelle Anderson C� Presi nt Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitte corrected • /06 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2006 Page 24 of 24