Loading...
04-19-05 Special MeetingKALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION _ MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 19, 2005 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The special meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board CALL and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: George Taylor, Jean Johnson, Timothy Norton, Rick Hull, John Hinchey and Bryan Schutt. Kari Gabriel had an excused absence. Narda Wilson represented the Tri-City Planning Office. There were approximately 40 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None to approve. President Taylor noted that this will be the last meeting that Jean Johnson will attend whose appointment to this Board expires at the end of this month. Taylor expressed his appreciation to Mr. Johnson for his willingness to serve and said that he will be missed. HEAR THE PUBLIC Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead asked about the process for the Courthouse East hearing and whether there would be separate hearings and motions on the zone change and the PUD. Taylor responded there will be one public hearing on both issues and when the public hearing is closed there will be a separate vote to adopt separate findings for each item. No one else wished to speak. THREE MILE A request by Three Mile Professional, LLC for a change in PROFESSIONAL, LLC ZONE zoning from R-5 (Residential/Professional Office) to B-1 CHANGE (Neighborhood Buffer District) on approximately 3.479 acres located at the northwest corner of Three Mile Drive and Meridian Road. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a KZC-05-2 presentation of Staff Report KZC-05-2, a request by Three Mile Professional, LLC for a change in zoning from R-5 (Residential/Professional Office) to B-1 (Neighborhood Buffer District) on approximately 3.479 acres. Wilson stated that the request has been made primarily in the R-5 zone where you are limited to one principle structure per parcel. The applicants want to build more than one office building on this property which would create a small office complex. The most expedient way to handle that was through a zone change with a minor subdivision that would be reviewed by the city council at a Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 1 of 25 0- later date. The uses between the R-5 and B-1 are quite similar. The Growth Policy designates this area as an Urban Mixed Use area so when they look at the surrounding zoning it is a real hodge-podge, which Wilson reviewed for the Board. This request would bring the zoning into a more consistent designation on the corner. Staff is recommending that the planning board adopt staff report KZC-05-2 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the zone change from R-5 to B-1 be granted. QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD Hull asked and Wilson responded that B-1 does not allow outside display of merchandise. Schutt asked and Wilson responded that conditions are not attached to a zone change, unless it is a PUD, because when a use comes in it will comply with the B-1 standards. Wilson added that if the Architectural Design Standards get adopted then it would go through architectural review for landscaping, site design, lighting, etc. Norton asked and Wilson responded that there are a couple of office buildings already on site, one on Lot 1 of Three Mile Corner Subdivision which is a water testing lab and there is an office building on Lot 1-A, which is occupied by Thomas, Dean & Hoskins. A. house and garage were previously removed from the site. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Mike Fraser, Three Mile Professional and Thomas, Dean & Hoskins providing technical support stated that they look at this area as Ms. Wilson stated as a hodge-podge of uses which he described for the Board. The B-1 was more appropriate for this area in transition. In the future with the reconstruction of Meridian they may even see a demand or requests for some additional B-2. B-1 starts to bring together some cohesivenesswithin the area and he is in favor of the zone change. PUBLIC COMMENT Jon Cuthbertson, Montana Environmental Lab stated that he owns the company and land in the northeast corner the subdivision. He was in front of the city council 18 months ago asking for his piece to be split off and for a zone change to B-2 and he got the split but is still stuck with R-5. Cuthbertson said that it seems that the area is going from old houses being removed towards a more officeprofessional type use all the way up and down Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 2 of 25 Meridian Road. Cuthbertson stated that he is in favor of this zone change but want he wanted and will be wanting again is a rezoning of his property to B-2 especially due to the location and size limitations of his current signage. He noted that with the office complex being proposed they will want a sign that lists the individual tenants names and under B-1 they only get one sign and it cannot be a multiple tenant sign. Taylor noted that the Board tries to be consistent. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Hinchey moved and Schutt seconded to adopt staff report KZC-05-2 as finding of fact and, based on these findings recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the request for a zone change from R-5 to B-1 be approved. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull reminded the Board of the need to determine consistent zoning for the Meridian Road area to at least draw some lines in the sand so that the business area doesn't overlap too much into the residential area, instead of doing it in a piecemeal way. Taylor asked if another work session is scheduled for the Growth Policy update. Wilson said not yet. She added that if the Board wants to deal with zoning it would not be a Growth Policy issue it would be a work item issue. A neighborhood meeting should be held to talk to some of the property owners on what they would envision for the area instead of the Board taking big blocks of land and zoning them without community input. Schutt asked if the zone changing would be accomplished in conjunction with the road reconstruction or before and Wilson said a strategy on how to approach this item should be developed by the Board at a work session. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CITY OF KALISPELL A request by the City of Kalispell for an amendment to the ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to incorporate architectural STANDARDS TEXT design standards that would apply to all new development AMENDMENT REQUEST in the City of Kalispell except single family and two family residences. STAFF REPORT KZTA-05-4 Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a presentation of Staff Report KZTA-05-4, a request by the City of Kalispell for an amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to incorporate architectural design standards. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 3 of 25 Wilson noted that the Board has been working on the Architectural Design Standards for more than a year. They have a document, although far from perfect, that provides the spirit of what the Board is trying to accomplish in developing Architectural Design Standards for the City of Kalispell that basically cover commercial and multi -family development. The standards would be an addendum to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The Kalispell City Council has on a few occasions already discussed these standards in their current form. The planning board and Architectural Review Committee did a good job of putting together ideas of what the community hopefully sees as important elements without necessarily putting restrictions or requirements on the building design. The Architectural Review Committee has volunteered to expand their duties to include the review of new commercial and multi -family development which will require more meeting time. Wilson. noted that they could use some assistance and asked for volunteers from the Board or to be recruited by the Board. Staff is recommending that the Board adopt staff report KZTA-05-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the city council that the Architectural Design Standards attached to the report as Exhibit A be included in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Wilson added that these standards were posted on the City of Kalispell and' Tri-City Planning Office websites. It is. hoped that there was some, interest in access to those online documents on the part of the public. Some feedback was already received. QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD Taylor asked for comments by any members of the Architectural Review Committee. Bill Goodman, who served on the Committee and was part of the process, noted that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Architectural Review Committee worked hard on the standards and he hoped the Board would recommend that they be adopted. There was discussion on improving the quality of the document and Wilson noted that after a final draft has been adopted more professional touches can be added, with the help of Gini Ogle who served on the Committee, before the final document is printed. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 4 of 25 C Q� PUBLIC COMMENT Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead applauded the board for taking on this project because it has been talked about within the community for quite a while. It is a positive step forward and provides the kind of predictability that residents and developers need and welcome. Flowers added that she appreciates that these documents have been made available online and she encourages that kind of presentation for the public to be more actively involved. Flowers asked for clarification on how you define the boundaries for the entrance corridors and why they were not extended further. In addition on page 24 under Greater Kalispell Area Development Standards, clarification needs to be provided regarding redevelopment of properties to ensure quality and integrity. Taylor said that the board would rely on the Growth Policy which defines general areas and it would be the policy of the board to be as consistent as possible with the immediately surrounding area with regard to infill. They wouldn't put a 5-story building in the middle of a residential area. Flowers clarified and said the area was vague and thought there would be some simple wording that could be used to clarify it. Wilson said that they could look at this at the end of the public hearing as something to pass on to city council. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Hinchey moved and Taylor seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-05-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Architectural Design Standards be adopted as an addendum to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. BOARD DISCUSSION Wilson asked to clarify the areas that were brought up in the public hearing. Wilson noted that the boundaries were selected based on the location of the city limits to Meridian on the west - 7th Avenue on the east, Wyoming and 13th down to the city limits and suggested that there may be a better way to word this portion. Taylor suggested that when the Standards go to final print a map or diagram could be included. Wilson noted that the city limits will change and the corridors were intended to be from those points out to the city limits. Finding some better wording between now and city council would prevent the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 5 of 25 boundaries from being stuck to an exhibit and would be ever -changing as the city limits change along those corridor areas. Hinchey mentioned Ms. Flowers' comments regarding infill being consistent and cohesive which he thought was already covered in the standards. The intent was if you are going to redevelop a city block that has all brick structures you might want to put a brick structure in. Wilson said that the concern is when you talk about infill that you might end up with a couple of Quonset huts next door rather than a building that you would want to emulate. Wilson suggested adding a phrase such as "striving for high quality construction and architecture" may be better. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Wilson suggested that perhaps the planning board and city council should have one more work session for the handoff of the Architectural Design. Standards so that the standards do riot end up languishing due to lack of understanding. Taylor suggested that Wilson put something together. DEV PROPERTIES A request by DEV Properties for a change in zoning from R- (COURTHOUSE EAST) ZONE 3 (Urban Single Family Residential) to R-5 CHANGE REQUEST & PUD (Residential/Professional Office), and a request for a mixed use Planned Unit Development (PUD) which includes 28 apartments, approximately 20,000 square feet of office space, approximately 1,600 square feet of retail and a 2,000 square foot community room, on approximately 2.06 acres. The property is located at the east side of Fifth Street East between Seventh Street East and Eighth Street East also known as Courthouse East. STAFF REPORTS KZC-05-3 & Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a KPUD-05-3 presentation of Staff Reports KZC-05-3 and KPUD-05-3 for the Board. Wilson described the location and history of use of the property. The previous owner, Gelinas Development came before the Board with another proposal on the property which was tabled because of some changes that were made at the last minute and was never brought back to life. In the past couple of years the property has been fenced and the building has been allowed to deteriorate, has been vandalized, the parking lot torn up, and a maintenance building was taken down. The neighborhood and community has been wondering what is going to happen to Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 6 of 25 01 J the building and the property. In step DEV Properties, a partnership, has presented a proposal for the Courthouse East building which would include the preservation, rehabilitation, and reuse of the existing structure. This building has existed as a non-residential use since its inception. The R-3 zoning, that was applied to this property in the 40's, was residential which made this building non- conforming or grandfathered and it continued to operate that way. In 1976 the Kalispell City Board of Adjustment granted a use variance when the hospital moved out. You can no longer get a variance to a use but at that time the BOA allowed specific uses by the County provided some issues were addressed. Wilson reviewed the proposed use of the building and added that the phasing will be completed by December of 2007. Wilson said a request for a zone change, as proposed by the applicants, from a Residential use to R-5 Residential Office use, allows the use of this property with professional offices as a conforming use and would comply with the zoning. The continued use of a non-residential component on this property could or should have been anticipated by the residents in the area and to propose an alternate nonresidential/residential use for this building is not. unreasonable. A part of that will depend on what the, neighborhood wants. There is some value to preserving and rehabilitating this old building and some of the residents think that it is a great idea. On the other hand having worked in that building personally we know it is a huge, perhaps insurmountable task to go in and bring the building up to code, make it look good, function well and be an asset to the neighborhood. Wilson noted that parking was the challenge in preparing the staff report and will be a challenge for the board. The parking requirements were reviewed by Wilson and are outlined on page 10 of the staff report. The Board has some latitude here on whether to say that this project is in substantial compliance with zoning in regard to parking or it is not. The PUD and the zone change are so closely connected because the PUD cannot stand without the change in zoning and therefore there is only one staff report. If the Board approves the zoning the PUD is the conditions that are put on the zone change. Wilson suggested a sunset clause that would be that if x amount of work hasn't been Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 7 of 25 performed by such and such a date then the zoning reverts back to the original R-3 zoning and this proposal goes away. The staff asks the Board to consider approval of the zone change and PUD subject to the 17 conditions in staff report KZC-05-3 and KPUD-05-3 which include findings of fact and a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council that the zone change and PUD be approved subject to the conditions with an additional condition: # 17. No medical/dental offices or clinics will be located in the professional office space." Wilson said the reason for this condition is that the parking requirements for those uses are much higher. QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD None. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Eric Berry representing DEV Properties from Seattle, WA reviewed their vision for the building. Berry said that they were hoping that the neighborhood would be able to see the potential that they saw and noted that they felt they had an 85% approval for their plan from the neighborhood going forward with more emphasis on residential, which they put into account. Berry said that they have come up with roughly 124 parking spaces and he reviewed how they calculated those spaces. Berry continued with a description of the design plan for the building. Taylor asked what prior experience, if any, DEV has on a project of this magnitude. Berry said that this would be their first large scale project. He has worked with Vince Padilla on many projects together and for the last 13 years has worked on several commercial and residential projects all over the country. This project will take approximately 3 years and will be built in phases. Norton said that he did attend the public meeting at Hedges School, which was very informative and included a lot of information regarding Berry's prior experience. Norton said that the staff and Board are concerned with parking. Norton suggested that the parking lot building not be reconstructed which would lower the square footage and provide additional parking space. Another suggestion would be a two-story parking structure. Norton asked if Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 8 of 25 these were considered or do they feel that the parking is adequate. Berry said that there is a much more expensive option that was considered for some underground parking, although they would lose some mechanical area. It is not their first option. Hinchey noted that the professional office space is not included on the floor plan. Berry clarified that the floors were numbered differently when the County used the building and noted that they are referring to the floors as basement, main floor, second floor and top floor. The professional offices will be primarily located on the main floor. Hull asked about the asbestos problems that were discussed in the Gelinas proposal. Berry said that the asbestos is mainly in the north end, northwest corner (Chapel Room), with some asbestos pipe wrapping in other areas. The total abatement bids came in between $25,000 and $45,000. Their plan is to seal off the problem areas or abate those areas that can't be sealed off. Taylor asked if there were any asbestos problems with the original building built in 1913. Berry said just with the pipe wrapping. The main concentration of asbestos is in the newer building. Taylor said that in November 2003 they were told the asbestos bid was way over $1 million dollars. Berry has never seen any paperwork from that estimate. Taylor asked, if there is a plan to have an access on the east side as well as on the west. Berry said that the main access will be the lobby on the west side of the building. On the east side of the building there will still be the "loading" entrance but it will be modified. Taylor said since this block is surrounded by residential on 3 sides and Hedges School on the 4+h side, why do they feel that this proposal with its mixture of commercial and high intensity land use would be an asset to an urban residential community. Berry said one of the projects he was involved in was in a residential neighborhood in Seattle where an old 3 1/2 story 150'x 150' brick building was rehabilitated and has been used for live/work artists for almost 20 years. That building has such a low impact on the neighborhood and is an asset to the community. Those artists all work with the community in various ways. The Courthouse East proposal will also provide this type of atmosphere along with providing an opportunity for the senior population to remain in the neighborhood, and an opportunity for younger generations to move into the area - a good eclectic mix. Berry noted that he and his family plan to live in the building part of the year and also his partner plans to live there with his family so there will also Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 9 of 25 be children in the building. Schutt asked where the primary entrances would be for the artist live/work units. Berry described all of the building entrances and their use for the Board. Taylor asked if the partners would be flexible in dealing with the parking and density issues and had they considered the possibility of removing part of the building. Taylor said that this Board rejected a proposal in November 2003 that called for 24 units, 2 units on each lot primarily because of the density and overcrowding. Berry said he wants to preserve the older buildings, and the recycling of any materials that they can in the rehabilitation and he is hoping to create a good balance of making a little money and making an old building viable. Hinchey said parking and intensity of the development is what will be the concerns tonight and asked if their plan was flexible enough to change the balance between residential and professional office to bring down the parking requirements. Berry said that originally they had discussed 30 - 40 units, half residential homes for seniors. Berry said that that number was reduced to 28 mixed age residents but they still plan to pursue senior residents which would hopefully lessen the parking demand. Hinchey suggested that increasing the residential and taking out some of the office space could reduce the parking demand further. Vince Padilla, DEV Properties stated that initially they had applied for an RA-1 and requested 40 units which would bring down the parking requirement and they would be happy to go that way again. The surveys that have come back have noted that the professional space was the least desirable part of their proposal. Working with staff they came up with this current proposal. Taylor said then you are flexible in terms of other options. Padilla said yes but we are not in this for our health, we need to make sure the numbers match. Taylor reviewed the correspondence received by the Board to date: Letters were received from Jo Ann Nieman, Chris Cummings, Ellen Fries, Evan White & Don & Joanne White, Gordy & Virginia Rohlinger and Lonnie Hellickson in opposition of the project and from Fay & Wesley Wolf, Woodland Floral in favor of the project. PUBLIC COMMENT I Proponents: Robyn Balcom, 1002 5th Avenue East stated that the proposal last year gave her the most doubt because of their Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 10 of 25 0' unwillingness to do a PUD and provide a definite plan. She strongly opposed their proposal. She is impressed with DEV because of the effort they have put in to contact the neighbors and talk with Hedges School. A survey that was done came back mostly in favor of preserving the historic structure. A recent study was done to determine what was distinctive about Kalispell and the strong recommendation was to not tear down any more historic buildings in Kalispell because this is what sets Kalispell apart from the other communities in the valley. Balcom believes that this building would be a wonderful asset and she loves the idea of it being a gathering place for the neighborhood. She is in favor of the project. Bob Hatfield, 612 - 6th Street East stated that he worked at Courthouse East for 8-9 years with the Meals on Wheels program. He lives on the corner and said that when the County offices were open, Meals and Wheels, and with the school and Woodland Floral operating the traffic wasn't bad. He said that we don't have that many old buildings around, Central School, Hockaday and lets stop tearing them down. Hatfield said that he is for the project. Dr. Louise Swanberg, 610 - 7th Street, East stated that she has a non -conforming medical practice near Courthouse East that was built as a medical practice when the building was a hospital and they have enjoyed that location and have no intent to move. Swanberg is in favor of this development and in favor of in -building within city limits as opposed to this medestatic growth outside of city limits that drags people further away from city services. She is in favor of trying to preserve the heritage of our town by keeping the old buildings and has been involved with preservation of other historic structures in town. The old hospital is a historic structure and if there were a part of it to be destroyed it should be the north wing. She doesn't think it is rational to expect a developer to come in here and raise that building and create 12 city lots because the cost of eliminating that structure would far exceed what you would get for 12 city lots. The only reservation she would have would be the parking density but she and her patients have no problem with parking in the neighborhood. The parking was not bad when it was Courthouse East and to her knowledge not that bad when it was the hospital. She would vote yes. Trina Ambrose, 928 5th Avenue East, said that she has lived there for 26 years. Her son attended Hedges School and they were there when the building was occupied by the County. She has never seen a parking problem. The biggest problem she has seen is more kids and the school and the neighborhood is working very diligently to maintain a safe place for the kids. This group of developers has impressed Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 11 of 25 her and she thinks that it would be a crime to see a building like that go down. If that area was turned into a residential area the parking in her estimation would be worse. Her vote is yes. Alice Fortenberry, 605 - 7th Avenue, East stated that she is in favor of the reuse of the old hospital Courthouse East building. She is very impressed with the developers and their commitment to recycling and reuse of the materials in the building. Fortenberry said that she has only been in this community for 13 years but she thinks that it would be a great thing for her children to say to their children that we saved that building. Fortenberry said that she would like it in the neighborhood. Linda Paisley, 1024 Woodland Avenue said that she would like to voice her support for this project. The reasons are the historical value - preserving the old building, the possibility of a community center would be an asset to the neighborhood, and the potential asset for Hedges School. She has been a teacher at Hedges and now is a volunteer and she foresees workshops and interaction with seniors, artists, and the school which would be favorable. Susan Miller, 529 - 1st Avenue East stated that has lived in that neighborhood for 20 years, was born and raised in Kalispell and loves to see old buildings restored. She is an artist and thinks that this would be a real asset to the community. No one wanted to save Central School and the Conrad Mansion and now look at what we have. She would like to see this project done.. Opponents: Chuck Cummings, 1002 - 4th Avenue East said that he was born in the old hospital. He agrees it is a shame to tear down old buildings and he feels bad about the set of choices that they are left with on this proposal but although a lot of his neighbors think it is a good idea to encourage this project he hasn't been convinced. Cummings favors the single family residential use, R-3 that is already in the area and reviewed the information that was provided to the Board prior to the hearing. Cummings noted that he disagrees with the calculations for parking that was presented by staff and explained his findings for the Board. Cummings said that his understanding of a PUD is that it sets up common rules for everybody and would provide some flexibility. But, Cummings continued, the zone is R-3 and the Master Plan does not designate this one block as high intensity - which is to him spot zoning. The Master Plan designates this as a residential area and the non -conforming uses should be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 12 of 25 extinguished as soon as possible or the whole neighborhood should be changed. If there were a common set of regulations he doesn't understand how we can consider this when there are so many aspects of it that it does not meet. He is saddened that they can't find a good use for this building that would preserve the building and the residential character of the neighborhood. Keep the business, commercial and high intensity use out of that neighborhood and opt for the single family residence. Cummings added that if this proposal fails they would like to specifically request that an addition to the findings be to change the zoning back to the R-3 that is in place now. Jo Ann Neiman, 735 - 4th Avenue, East stated that she lives within 150 feet of this building that is presently a non -conforming use in the middle of a residential neighborhood. She noted that she is also involved in the lawsuit that Mr. Gelinas filed as an intervener so she has done a lot of studying as to what is a non -conforming use. It is a use that was in existence at the time that the zoning laws were passed but it didn't conform to what the zoning laws require. At some point in time it will cease and once it ceases it reverts to the original zoning. To say that because the rest of us moved into this neighborhood knowing that this building was there is irrelevant. We knew it was there but it was a non -conforming use that was going to cease. The fact that they didn't have any particular parking problems while the County owned it doesn't mean that this particular use won't cause a terrible problem with regard to parking and traffic. Neiman continued that the streets are narrow enough that if there were cars parked on both sides of the street and two cars are coming down the street they wouldn't be able to pass each other, and she noted the safety problems with having to walk in the streets because there are no sidewalks. Neiman disagreed with the parking calculations and reviewed her findings with the Board. Neiman noted that if you take a look at the PUD zoning for R-5 and R-3 it says that 28 residences is the maximum units for that building and all of that other stuff needs to be excluded. A mixed use requires 20 acres and this is a far cry from 20 acres. This is huge project being done by people who have never done this before which doesn't belong there. This particular development will do nothing to calm traffic, which is a goal of the Kalispell City Council. All the traffic will be on 7+h 8s 8th Streets heading for 3=d and 4th Avenues and be even worse than it already is. Nostalgia is a lovely thing but is not suitable in the discussion of whether or not this building should be handled the way it is being handled. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 13 of 25 Jennifer Matter, 745 - 4th Avenue East said that she lives 2 blocks from the Courthouse. They just moved here this last summer and love the neighborhood and love being able to walk everywhere. She has 2 young children and the thought of having this much density 2 blocks from her house makes her regret the choice to buy a house that close to something that would potentially make it unsafe for her children. Becky G. Jones, 630 - 5th Avenue, East noted that she is also named in the lawsuit filed by Gelinas, and added that she may be sued by DEV Properties because she was interjecting into the public more discussion on this topic. Initially when the R-5 came before the Board they all appreciated the Board's support and their acknowledgement that the intensity of an R-5 would be inappropriate in this historically important area. Jones reviewed various sections of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance in relation to this project that in her opinion supports her opposition, which included not being situated on arterial or minor arterial streets, is not architecturally harmonious with the neighborhood, and doesn't serve as a buffer between residential and commercial districts. The - R-5 request is simply an overlay of the PUD so the developers can maximize the amount of their economic success and Jones noted it is not the responsibility of the City of Kalispell, the planning board, or the neighborhood to assure the economic success of a developer. Jones continued that multi -family dwelling apartments are not permitted in this district because they are generally incompatible with single-family neighborhoods. Many of the R-5 districts abut residential neighborhoods but none are smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Specific design and location criteria for off-street parking in R-5 zones are outlined in the zoning regulations in order to mitigate the impacts on adjoining residential neighborhoods. Jones added that the proposal deviates significantly from those standards. Jones said that the thought of senior housing is very nice; however, there is no guarantee as admitted by the developers themselves. The live/work artist areas and community room will generate more traffic and there is no measure for how much traffic these type of uses will generate. Jones was a crossing guard at Hedges School and she has witnessed several times when children were nearly injured crossing the streets. It is unsafe and not just at 8:00 a.m. or 3:00 p.m. There were several teachers from Hedges who opposed the R-5 last year. Jones said that the only reason there is less opposition this time is that a flyer was not sent Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 14 of 25 C�� out but she reminded the Board that 221 signatures were collected opposing commerce or offices at this location when the County moved into this building. The R-3 is a covenant that the zoning board and council made with the people of Kalispell and the use of Courthouse East was non -conforming - which she thought would probably go away. Jones asked the Board not to take away the one chance to preserve the integrity of their historic east side. They do not need this extreme density or more professional office space, there is abundant office space in other locations and could be a perfect project for Linderman School. Jones encouraged the Board to deny this project and added it is highly inappropriate and she fears for the safety of her child. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION ON ZONE CHANGE Norton moved and Hinchey seconded that staff reports & PUD REQUEST KZC-05-3 & KPUD-05-3 be adopted as findings of fact and recommend to the city council that the zone change and PUD overlay be approved subject to the 17 conditions. Norton asked about Condition # 13 that states that "no sales of items which are not produced on site would be allowed from the artists studios..." and felt it was too broad a statement. Wilson said that what they don't want is a situation where there is a general retail component and it is an attempt to limit the retail component to things that are produced that would involve artistic creation. Norton added then this would cut down on traffic. Wilson said yes. Norton asked how this would be enforced. Wilson said that it would have to be enforced through the zoning ordinance and code enforcement process with periodic inspections or on a complaint basis. Schutt asked about a statement by the developer that RA-1 was considered v. the R-5 that they are considering now and how would the RA-1 zone be applied to this project. Wilson said that the applicant might have misspoken she believes it was RA-3 because the office component is not allowed in an RA-1 zone. Wilson described the RA-1 8s RA-3 zones. The R-5 was selected because it allows the office component of the permitted use and a residential component. Schutt noted that the office and professional uses really pumps up the parking requirements, and it seems that the RA-1 would be a more appropriate use. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 15 of 25 U Taylor said if the Board were to approve this project he didn't feel that there are enough conditions. Taylor suggested a condition be added that if the project was substantially completed or abandoned by December 2007 the city should have the option to remove the building and clear the site. In addition amend Condition # 15 so that bonding for the full cost of the proposed infrastructure and improvements be required to ensure that the improvements would be completed as proposed or the city would have the funds available to remove the building and clear the site. Taylor said that this project is surrounded on all sides by R-3 zoning. The hospital came first when there was nothing else around it. The Board continually makes adjustments in zoning to reflect changes in the surrounding land use. Because something was there already doesn't mean they have to just deal with it but it gives the Board the flexibility to decide if the density or traffic would negatively impact the neighborhood. Taylor continued that people don't move to Montana to live in a dense/congested area, that is not Big Sky County. Yet in the middle of an R-3 District they are being asked to plant on 2 acres 30 apartments, 20,000 square feet of office space, 1,600 square feet of retail space and 11,000 square feet of lobby, stairs, elevators, etc. Taylor believes history is a great thing, but with this building what is the heritage - there are 3 different buildings. He would like to see the heritage of the east side preserved because it has already been demeaned enough with the one way streets on 3rd and 4th Avenues. If this .were a smaller project with only one remaining building and developing the rest of the .property with sufficient green space, parking, sidewalks and amenities he might be able to support it. Taylor said that this project doesn't fit and he cannot support it. Hull said that he doesn't live on the east side but there is no real promise that it will be an artist community and zoning doesn't guarantee that. He said that he is not for or against the project. Johnson said that he doesn't have any comments other than having been licensed to work with asbestos problems they now encapsulate asbestos if they leave it in the building and if it is removed it becomes very expensive. It makes sense that maybe it is $35,000 to encapsulate and $1 million dollars to remove it. Hinchey said that they aren't really planting anything on the east side, it is already there. They are talking about a historic building that has been there for the better part of 100 years, it exists and we are talking about what is best for that building. Hinchey said that it is not up to the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 16 of 25 �1 Board to make a financial decision on whether it is better to tear it down, or build duplexes - it is not our business. Hinchey wants to commend these fellows for their vision and deciding that the building has some value. Hinchey said that he has some reservations about the density and the parking but in principle it is the right idea. Taylor said that his concerns are that this is being rushed through and not thought out enough. He heard comments regarding neighborhood meetings and people have voiced their concerns about preserving the building which is true but the Board has yet to have a forum where all of the detail has been presented. Taylor doesn't think it is there yet. Norton asked if zoning has any affect on governmental buildings. Wilson said that there is a provision in the statute that allows for an agency exemption from zoning and there is a process that the government agency would have to go through in order to use that exemption which would require a public hearing with the Board of Adjustment. Wilson said that the zoning was adopted around the mid 40's and at that time it was zoned residential and the building was made non -conforming. Norton said that at that time no one had the forethought to decide that the hospital should be zoned H-1 and therefore a general overlay went over the whole neighborhood. Wilson agreed. Norton said that even though the property has been "abandoned" as far as' its use it is still the grandfathered use. Gelinas purchased the property with the intention to do some business and townhomes, which is the same thing that they want to do here. Wilson noted that the issue is under litigation and has not been resolved as to the status of the non -conforming use. The city has formally recognized that the north wing would be viable for a non-residential use and because of the past efforts to use that as a non- residential use both in the maintenance and marketing of the property that the grandfathered status, or non- conforming use status with the 1964 north wing addition would be recognized by the city as to be allowed to continue as a non -conforming use and that is the issue that is under litigation right now. Norton continued in theory that could fall under the PUD statute that says that if a property is divided by 2 zoning districts that the least impacted zoning district would be the one that has the most relevance. Wilson said that one or the other should be picked and the use should be located in one or the other of those districts. Norton stated other properties that have a grandfathered use that are not in litigation can continue that use. Wilson said it is just Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 17 of 25 like Dr. Swanberg's offices. Norton said that historically the use has been grandfathered in and until the use changes it will continue to be that use. Wilson agreed. Norton said the President is concerned that this is a large project and is not well thought out. Perhaps it may be a bigger project than the developer realizes and if the President's recommendation that a different bond situation or the sunset clause could alleviate the concerns of the Board or neighborhood then by all means those amendments should be made. Norton said being a person who rehabilitates properties - time is money. As an appraiser for those who feel that this project will affect their property values potential buyers of property accept neighborhood conditions or stigmatism which current property owners may find as a detriment to value. Just because you think it is bad doesn't mean that you won't be able to sell your property or the next guy would think it is bad. Norton said that it is not a traditional use for the neighborhood - it is a neighborhood amenity. A lot of people feel that the traffic or the retail or artist studios would create a hazard he believes that it will actually be a drawing point. Norton asked why the traffic plan was not added as a condition. Wilson said that it would be appropriate to coordinate a traffic mitigation plan between the school district and the City of Kalispell. Even though there were some ideas provided it will be something that public works, city council, the. school district and the neighborhood in general would all have to agree was a better plan than what is in place now. Norton concluded by saying that he feels that they have put some thought into the impacts to the neighborhood and he is satisfied that they care about the integrity of their work and what they are going to do with this project. MOTION TO AMEND Taylor moved and Norton seconded to amend Condition CONDITION # 15 # 15 to read, "The phasing and timing of the development shall occur as proposed. Bonding, or insurance, for the full cost of the proposed infrastructure and improvements to ensure the improvements will be completed as proposed, shall be provided by the developer." BOARD DISCUSSION Norton said that he feels that it is an unusual clause to throw on a developer but in this situation he has total faith in the developer and he thinks they will pony up and do the task. Hull said that his only objection is that it doesn't meet the objective of enough money to tear the building down. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 18 of 25 0 O ROLL CALL The motion passed 5-1 on a roll call vote, with Hull voting in opposition. MOTION TO ADD CONDITON Taylor moved and Norton seconded to add Condition # 18 to # 18 read, "If the project is not substantially completed, or is abandoned, by December 2007 the city has the option to use the collateral to remove the building and clear the site." ROLL CALL The motion passed 5-1 on a roll call vote, with Hinchey voting in opposition. MOTION TO ADD CONDITION Norton moved and Taylor seconded to add Condition # 19 to # 19 read, "That a traffic plan be coordinated between the Public Works Department and the School District with regards to this project." ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION TO AMEND Hinchey moved and Taylor seconded that Condition # 18 be CONDITON #18 amended to read, "If the project is not substantially completed, or is abandoned, by December 2007 the city should have the option to use the posted collateral to remove the building, and clear the site and the property will revert back to the R-3 zoning." MOTION TO AMEND The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. CONDITION # 18 BOARD DISCUSSION Taylor noted that he and Mr. Norton are not that far a part but he is not here to second-guess and there is not enough here even for him to read between the lines. Despite the amendments he hasn't changed his position. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The motion failed 3-3 on a roll call vote, with Taylor, Schutt MOTION 8s Hull voting in opposition. AMENDED PRELIMINARY A request by Wayne E. Turner for an amendment to the PLAT - EMPIRE ESTATES preliminary plat for Empire Estates Phases 4 through 6 to PHASES 4 THROUGH 6 convert 21 single family lots to 34 townhouse lots on approximately 18.815 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Three Mile Drive and Stillwater Road. STAFF REPORT KPP-05-5 Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a presentation of Staff Reports KPP-05-5 for the Board. This amendment is to convert 21 single-family lots to 34 townhouse lots. Wilson reviewed the plat map for the Board. Primarily this amendment is driven by a market demand for 2-unit townhouses. The rest of the lots within this subdivision will remain single-family lots. The addition of these 13 lots is relatively insignificant. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 19 of 25 (7) With this amendment the layout of the subdivision, accesses and none of the infrastructure changes. Phases 1 & 2 have been final platted and Phase 3 has been submitted for final plat approval. Wilson said that she recently drove through the subdivision and once the construction and landscaping is completed and the park is developed she feels that it is going to be as nice a subdivision as there is in any other area in Kalispell. This is a good place for the type of density that is proposed, it is consistent with what has been anticipated in the area and provides a good mix of housing, and fills a need within the market. Staff is recommending that the planning board adopt staff report KPP-05-5 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Amended Preliminary Plat for Empire Estates Phases 4-6 be approved subject to the conditions that are listed in the staff report. Wilson recommended that the Board add Condition #20 to read, "Mitigation of traffic impacts be addressed by the developer in accordance with MDOT requirements." QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD Taylor asked if there were any other comments regarding the Site Review Committee's recommendation regarding improving the line of sight by interspersing one or two single-family homes. Wilson said that she would leave that up to the discretion of the Board. Schutt noted that there are .several rows upon rows of townhouses being developed around Kalispell and here we go again. Wilson said that it is too late for the phases that are on the east side but if the Board wants to require the interspersing of a couple of single-family lots in what is being proposed to break up that monotony that is well within the Board's purview. Hinchey asked what this amendment does to the overall density. Wilson responded that it increases the density by 13 units which is well within the Urban Residential designation of the Growth Policy. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Erica Wirtala, Sands Surveying stated that she is here to represent Mr. Turner and his project Empire Estates. Wirtala said that they are in agreement with the conditions as stated. She said that when you make significant changes to a preliminary plat, such as changing the designation from single-family to a townhouse lot the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 20 of 25 0 developer has to go back through this review process. They are adding only 13 additional lots. The original Empire Estates was submitted to the planning board and the city council with 347 both townhouse and single-family lots and adding 13 brings it to a total of 360 lots. Wirtala stated that Phases 1 8s 2 have been platted and there are some additional bonds outstanding to complete the landscaping berm. The bike and pedestrian walkway has been completed in Phases 1 8s 2 and will be completed within the next 2 weeks for Phase 3. The final plat of Phase 3 has been submitted to the Tri-City Planning Office for review. Within Phases 1 and 2 there were 46 townhouse lots and 64 single family lots. Everything - 100% - has been sold out in Phases 1 8v 2 and has also been spoken for in Phase 3. This just shows the tremendous market demand for homes or lots in this price range. Wirtala continued that they did a subdivision that was similar in scope to this last summer and the developer for that project did an extensive amount of research and his real estate findings were that if you were looking for a single -level townhouse, there were only 3 on the market last summer. Two-thirds of the townhouses that are being sold in Empire Estates are single level. Many of the market investors are looking for something that can accommodate them in their later years, they may be disabled, or they prefer the single level design. Taylor asked what the side elevations of the townhouses are. Wirtala said single -level,. one-story townhouses. Wirtala said that the second reason that they submitted this amendment is that it improves the configuration, the lot layout. In working with the zoning requirements and the setbacks some of the lots worked much better as townhouse lots. They took under consideration interspersing some single-family homes into the rows and they just don't work number -wise. They can't accommodate a single family structure with the setbacks and therefore they came up with this configuration. The look of the homes varies greatly. There area many different layouts and styles and they don't expect to get that cookie -cutter look. Taylor asked if that included the color. Wirtala said that there isn't anything in the CCR's that addresses color. Wirtala concluded by saying that this amendment will generate 130 additional vehicle trips a day but with the improvements made to Stillwater Road and to Three Mile Drive the roads can easily accommodate the additional traffic volume. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 21 of 25 Schutt asked Wirtala to follow-up on the comment that they couldn't fit in single-family lots with the setbacks. Wirtala explained that the zero lot line eliminates the additional setbacks on the sides and with driveway locations and the way the house would sit it wouldn't work. Schutt asked if they agreed with the comments of the Site Review Committee. Wirtala said that every site is different and she appreciates his comments that he doesn't care for the cookie -cutter approach but she doesn't think that this will be the case here. Wirtala added that she doesn't see the advantage to having one single-family house in a row of townhouses - the single-family house would stand out more. Schutt said that it appears that they are really packed in tight and it would seem visually that it would help. PUBLIC COMMENT The public hearing was opened to anyone wishing to speak. Jim Tellier, Phase I of Empire Estates, 161 Empire Loop stated. that Schutt's mentioning cookie -cutter look is correct. All the ones that Keystone built you might as well take a cookie -cutter and put them right down the line. Tellier said that he is totally against having more duplexes. When they originally purchased the property they were told that they were going to be townhomes and owner occupied. It is all rental property now. It was to be in the covenants and they found out at closing that the covenants changed. Tellier said that the single-family homes in the middle would mix it up a little but owner occupied homes would make the community better.. The rental properties are not all one story - some of them are two-story, some daylight basements and there is . variety that way but the duplexes are not all single story ranches. Linda Bowman, 161 Empire Loop stated that Jim Tellier is her husband and they moved in October. She said that everything being "banged up" around them is townhouses. They have gotten to know some of the neighbors who are very nice but they do rent. The people who own them are not the same - one half is owned by one and the other half is owned by someone else. Bowman said that they don't live in this state and the whole situation doesn't make her very happy. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Taylor moved and Schutt seconded to adopt staff report KPP-05-5 as findings of fact and recommend to the city council that the Amended Preliminary Plat of Empire Estates Phases 4-6 be approved subject to the 20 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 22 of 25 conditions in the staff report and recommended by staff. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said that he would do anything to break up the appearance of garage after garage which is particularly bad with single level. Hull added that if anyone has any suggestions he would like to go with interspersing but he is not sure that they can require it. Hinchey said it seems to him that they are a little too late for interspersing. The entire perimeter is the row after row and now we are talking about 2 small areas. Hinchey said he is troubled by this because it seems that as was stated during the public hearing that you come into a neighborhood with one set of ground rules and then after half is sold they come back and want to change the rules. Hinchey said it seems to him that when you settle on a PUD that you should stick with it. Wilson said just as a note this was not a PUD it came in under R-4 zoning with both townhouse and single-family lots. Hull thought there may be better, innovative ways to handle the design of townhouses and perhaps the problem is the lack of alleys. Schutt added that they have recently seen examples of getting around that. Hull said that the townhouses that were approved earlier were around the perimeter and in high traffic areas but these will be around single-family homes and may be :considered a little more obnoxious. Hull said that he realizes that there is a market for these units but asked why does it have to look so bad. Wilson said because this hasn't been platted the people who buy those single-family lots will know what is across the street from them. Wilson said that she would encourage the Board to go out and actually look at the development in Empire Estates rather than making some assumptions. Wilson said granted these are small lots but that is the trend that we are seeing nation-wide and certainly a trend that we are seeing here in Flathead Valley because of land prices. She agrees that there are probably some things that they can do better to avoid the monotony and the predominance of garages but added at Empire Estates there seems to be enough variety in the 2-unit townhouses, The people are making an effort to create some diversity, and she sees a neighborhood developing. Wilson encouraged the board to approve this subdivision because of the need in the community and it is consistent with the neighborhood that is already there. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 23 of 25 C Wilson suggested the addition of Condition #21 to read, "A note be placed on the face of the final plat that the lots not designated as townhouse be developed as single-family residential." Norton asked if this would only apply to Phase 4 and Wilson said that it was required on the other phases as well. Schutt said that it is not so much this developer coming back with an amendment but anyone else in the future who would want to change single-family lots into townhouses. Wilson said yes. Schutt asked if it would be applied to future subdivisions and Wilson said absolutely. MOTION TO ADD Norton moved and Taylor seconded to add Condition #20 to CONDITIONS #20 & #21 read, "Mitigation of traffic impacts must be addressed by the developer in accordance with MDOT requirements." And add Condition #21 to read, "A note be placed on the face of the final plat that the lots not designated as townhouse be developed as single-family residential." BOARD DISCUSSION Wilson reviewed the difference . between a duplex and townhouse for the board. P.J. Sorensen, City of Kalispell Zoning Administrator suggested that in dealing with the restriction to single-family residences in the long term if the Board runs into a subdivision where they don't want duplexes in a subdivision the clearer approach is to not give . it duplex zoning because it does create a lot of confusion when they see that it is zoned for duplexes. ROLL CALL ON AMENDMENT The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said that he has been through Empire Estates and he drives through South Meadows on a regular basis and he knows what they look like after they are built up. Wilson said that in defense of Empire Estates it is a subdivision that is built to city standards that has curbs, gutter, sidewalks, a landscaped boulevard, and a city park and it is not yet mature. South Meadows is a County subdivision that is almost 30 years old and boulevards, curbs, gutters, street trees, and sidewalks were not required at that time. ROLL CALL The original motion, as amended, passed on a roll call vote of 4-1, with Hinchey voting in opposition. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS The Board asked Wilson to set up a Work Session to discuss Meridian Road zoning and other issues. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 24 of 25 �i ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:20 p.m. The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, May 10, 2005. Michelle Anderson Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: / /0 /05 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 19, 2005 Page 25 of 25